The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
MONTH t y *;'LA BO R REVIEW
U.S Department of: Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
March 1987
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In this issue:
Expanding the white-collar pay survey
Comparing medical care expenditures
Quality of the Consumer Expenditure Survey
»Migration of black Americans, 1915-1940
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
William E. Brock, Secretary
Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner
Region I—Boston: Anthony J. Ferrara
Kennedy Federal Building, Suite 1603
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 565-2331
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, DC 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Region II—New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, NY 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Subscription price per year—$16 domestic; $20 foreign.
Single copy $4.75 domestic; $5.94 foreign.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-1818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Second-class postage
paid at Washington, DC, and at additional mailing addresses.
Region III—Philadelphia: Alvin I. Margulis
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, PA 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region IV—Atlanta: Donald M. Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30367
Phone: (404) 347-4418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V—Chicago: Lois L. Orr
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI—Dallas: Bryan Richey
Federal Building, Room 221
525 Griffin Street, Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
M arch cover:
The photograph on the front and back covers depicts
an Afro-American family in Florida packing up to head
North as part of the first large black migration from the
South. The photographs on the inside back cover depict
Afro-Americans at work in the North.
The photographs are part of the exhibition, “ Field to
Factory: Afro-American Migration, 1915-1940,“ which is
on display at the National Museum of American History,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. from February
5, 1987 through February 1988.
Cover design by Melvin B. Moxley
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Regions VII and VIII—Kansas City: Gunnar Engen
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, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
MARCH 1987
VOLUME 110, NUMBER 3
RESEARc i LIBRARY
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor
[Federai Hess ve Bank
°f St. Louis
M A ? Î0 l9 8 7
John D. Morton
3
BLS prepares to broaden scope of its white-collar pay survey
The Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay
is being expanded to cover more services industries and small establishments
Raymond Gieseman
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8
The Consumer Expenditure Survey: quality control
A vital component of the bls postsurvey evaluation is comparison with other data
on aggregate spending, most notably those obtained from the National Accounts
E. Raphael Branch
15
Comparing medical care expenditures
Data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey and administrative data
from the Health Care Financing Administration show similar spending on medical care
Barry Alan Mirkin
19
Early retirement: an international overview
Western governments and firms have increasingly turned to early-out schemes to absorb
excess labor supply, but the projected aging of populations threatens this alternative
Spencer R. Crew
34
The Great Migration of Afro-Americans, 1915-40
Between the World Wars, more than 1 million black Americans
left the South to seek opportunity and fuller citizenship in the North
REPORTS
Tiziano Treu
William Earle Klay
37
39
Italian labor relations: a system in transition
Japanese unions and microelectronics-based automation
DEPARTMENTS
3 Labor month in review
37 Foreign labor developments
41 Major agreements expiring next month
42 Developments in industrial relations
45 Book reviews
49 Current labor statistics
Labor M onth
In Review
KLEIN AWARD. The Lawrence R. Klein
Award trustees selected the authors of the
best articles published in the Monthly Labor
Review in 1986 as winners of the 18th an
nual Klein Award. The award will be
presented at the Bureau of Labor Statistics
awards ceremony on April 23. The award
for the best article by a b l s author is shared
by Ronald E. Kutscher, Associate Commis
sioner for Economic Growth and Employ
ment Projections, and Valerie A. Personick,
an economist on his staff, for “ Dein
dustrialization and the shift to services,” in
the June issue. Winners for the best article
by an author outside of the b l s are co
authors Sheldon Danziger and Peter
Gottschalk for “ Work, poverty, and the
working poor: a multifaceted problem,” in
the September issue. Danziger is a professor
of social work and director of the Institute
for Research on Poverty, University of
Wisconsin—Madison. Gottschalk is a pro
fessor of economics at Bowdoin College,
and a research affiliate with the Institute for
Research on Poverty.
Two authors cited for honorable mention
were BLS economist Philip L. Rones for “ An
analysis of regional employment growth,
1973-85,” in the July issue, and Henry P.
Guzda, an industrial relations specialist with
the U.S. Department of Labor, for “ Ellis
Island a welcome site? Only after years of
reform,” in the same issue.
more, sector output in real terms has bounced
back from the recession and by 1984 had
reached a new peak.
To assess micro-level developments, the
authors examined data for 150 detailed in
dustries over the period 1969-84. One-half of
the industries, including many high-tech
durable goods industries, showed consistent
gains in both employment and output over the
period. Another 37 industries—including tex
tiles, chemicals, and motor vehicles—had out
put gains but employment losses, still an in
dication of health if it arises from greater
efficiency. But the remaining 24 industries
had declines in both output and employment.
These industries, all in the manufacturing
sector, tend to have longstanding problems
related to plant obsolescence, import com
petition, and other factors.
The authors conclude, “ While some
manufacturing industries clearly have been
in a long-term decline...our data indicate
that the United States is not losing its in
dustrial base. Most manufacturing in
dustries, indeed many that would be con
sidered ‘heavy’ manufacturing, are at least
expanding production, if not employment.
Future expenditures for new capital equip
ment and a return to more balanced inter
national currency exchange rates are pro
jected to boost demand for U.S. goods for
many years.”
The Danziger-Gottschalk article probes the
The Kutscher-Personick article presents an
analysis designed to determine whether the
employment shift to services means that the
Nation is losing its industrial base. The
authors’ findings, based on employment and
production data for major sectors and detail
ed industries, indicate that it does not. In
fact, the shift to services has largely been
a relative one. In absolute terms, employ
ment in manufacturing has not declined ap
preciably over the last two decades, and the
most recent b l s projections show manufac
turing employment recovering most of its
current recession-related losses. Further
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
relationship of work effort and earnings
levels to poverty status. Their study shows
that most able-bodied heads of poor
households have strong labor force attach
ment, but that their employment tends to be
intermittent, low-paying, or both.
The 1984 poverty rate for all households
was somewhat below that for 1967 and about
the same as in 1971. However, large changes
in the labor market characteristics of the poor
occurred over the period. In 1984, the ma
jority of heads of poor households were not
expected to work because they were over age
65, disabled, students, or women with children
under age 6. About a fourth of all household
heads who were expected to work had low
weekly earnings (under $204). But about 60
percent of their households escaped poverty
because of such factors as small family size,
multiple earners in the household, or receipt
of public cash transfers or private income other
than earnings.
Of the remaining poor households with an
able-bodied head, most had substantial labor
market attachment. About half of all poor
able-bodied mothers with no child under age
6 worked at some time during 1984, compared
with about 80 percent of men who headed
poor households with children. But, “ Despite
this work effort, poor households remain in
poverty because of low annual earn
ings, which reflect both low weekly earn
ings and less than full-year work. And most
of these households would remain poor even
if their heads worked a full year at their cur
rent weekly earnings rate.”
About the award. Trustees of the Klein
Award Fund are Lawrence R. Klein;
Charles D. Stewart, president; Ben
Burdetsky, secretary-treasurer; Peter Henle;
Harold Goldstein; Howard Rosen; and
Henry Lowenstern. The award was
established in 1968 in honor of Lawrence
R. Klein, editor-in-chief of the Monthly
Labor Review for 22 years until his retire
ment in 1968. Instead of accepting a retire
ment gift, Klein donated it and matched the
amount collected to initiate the fund. Since
then, he has contributed regularly to the fund
as have others. The purpose of the award is
to encourage Review articles that (1) exhibit
originality of ideas or method of analysis, (2)
adhere to the principles of scientific inquiry,
and (3) are well written. Each winning arti
cle carries a cash prize of $200.
Tax-deductible contributions to the fund
may be sent to Ben Burdetsky, Secretary
Treasurer, Lawrence R. Klein Fund, c/o
School of Government and Business Ad
ministration, The George Washington
University, Washington DC 20052.
□
BLS prepares to broaden scope
of its white-collar pay survey
The Survey of Professional, Administrative,
Technical, and Clerical Pay is being expanded
to cover more services industries and small establishments;
in 1987 and 1988, test studies also will be conducted
to plan for an even broader based survey
of pay and benefits for white-collar workers
Jo h n D . M o r t o n
Over the last 25 years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ an
nual Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay ( p a t c survey) has become a key source of
information on salaries for a number of occupations. For
example, the 1985 survey reported on 25 occupations—
ranging from file clerk and drafter to attorney and engi
neer— by salary and employment. Because occupations typ
ically are divided by b l s into two or more work levels
(defined by specific duties and responsibilities), pay varia
tions related to level characteristics are readily identifiable.1
An expansion of survey coverage over the 1986-87 pe
riod will increase the usefulness of p a t c findings. Prior to
1986, the survey was limited to medium and large establish
ments. It covered most private sector industries but ex
cluded important portions of the services industries, such as
hotels, hospitals, and educational institutions. By mid1987, the survey will have expanded to smaller establish
ments and all private services industries. In addition, b l s is
planning test studies in 1987 and 1988 to assist in develop
ing a new, broad-based survey of white-collar pay and ben
efits in the private- and public sectors that will eventually
replace the p a t c survey.
The 1986-87 coverage enhances the occupational data
reported previously in the p a t c survey. The expansion also
John D. Morton is a labor economist in the Office of Wages and Industrial
Relations, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
permits additional occupations to be surveyed, especially in
the health-related field, and allows more intensive analysis
of findings.2
The 1987-88 test studies will address the following
issues: the feasibility of including, in a broad-based survey
of occupational pay levels and structures, such important
jobs as teachers and sales workers; ways to implement a
probability-based selection of jobs for such a survey; ap
proaches for measuring employee benefits as well as pay;
and the feasibility of accounting in an establishment-based
survey for the importance of employee characteristics, such
as education and experience, as explanations for pay varia
tion among employees in a given occupation.
Survey background
From its inception in 1959-60, the p a t c survey has been
closely related to the pay-setting process for white-collar
employees of the Federal Government. The Federal Salary
Reform Act of 1962 established the principle of making
salary rates for these employees comparable to those in
private industry for the same levels of work. The compara
bility principle was continued in the Federal Pay Compara
bility Act of 1970, which currently governs general pay
adjustments for Federal white-collar employees.
Under the 1970 Act, a Pay Agent designated by the Pres
ident (currently, the Secretary of Labor and the directors of
the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of
3
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Expansion o f p a t c Survey
Personnel Management) sets up comparability procedures
and reports annually to the President. The report compares
salaries of Federal employees with those paid in private
industry for the same levels of work, as determined by the
p a t c survey .
The Pay Agent calculates the Federal pay adjustment
needed to achieve comparability with private industry. If the
President decides on a comparability adjustment, it becomes
effective automatically the first pay period on or after Octo
ber 1; if a comparability adjustment is deemed inappropriate
because of “national emergency or economic conditions af
fecting the general welfare,” the President must submit an
alternative plan to the Congress before September 1. The
alternative plan becomes effective unless rejected within 30
days of submission by a majority vote in either the House of
Representatives or the Senate. If the Congress rejects an
alternative plan, the comparability increase calculated by
the Pay Agent becomes effective in October.3
The legislation governing the comparability process calls
for a comparison of Federal salaries with those in “private
enterprise,” but does not define the scope of the comparison.
It requires a survey of private industry by the b l s — the p a t c
Exhibit 1.
Changes to the
patc
survey— the design of which is determined by the Presi
dent’s Pay Agent. Therefore, the Pay Agent determines the
industries and occupations to be studied and the minimum
size of surveyed establishments.
In response to decisions of the Pay Agent, the scope of the
p a t c survey has changed over the years. In the early 1960’s,
for example, the survey was limited to establishments in
specified industries employing at least 250 workers and
located in metropolitan areas.4 Since then, the survey has
expanded to nonmetropolitan areas, more nonmanu
facturing industries, and to smaller establishments. (See
exhibit 1.)
The occupations included in the p a t c survey have also
changed. (See exhibit 2.) Of the 19 occupations surveyed
in 1960-61, 15 remained in the 1985 survey, although their
definitions and work levels have been modified.5 Because of
modifications in occupational structure and the needs of the
comparability process, 10 more jobs were added by 1985.6
The 1985 survey provided data for 107 work levels that
span the 25 occupations studied.7 Industrial coverage and
minimum establishment size were as follows: mining and
construction, 250 workers; manufacturing, 100 or 250
survey, 1959-86
Number of
occupational work
levels studied
Year
Scope
1959-60
An initial experimental survey covered establishments in metropolitan areas employing 100
workers or more in manufacturing; transportation (part), communications, electric, gas and
sanitary services; wholesale trade; retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; engi
neering and architectural services; and research, development, and testing laboratories.
77
1961
Minimum establishment size raised from 100 to 250 workers.
68
1965
Nonmetropolitan areas added.
74
1966
Minimum establishment size lowered from 250 to 100 workers in transportation, commu
nications, electric, gas, and sanitary services; wholesale trade; engineering and architec
tural services; and research, development, and testing laboratories; and to 50 workers in
finance, insurance, and real estate. (No change in manufacturing or retail trade.)
82
1972
Minimum establishment size raised from 50 to 100 workers in finance, insurance, and real
estate.
77
1977
Added mining, construction, and transportation industries not previously included (250
minimum employment); consumer credit and mercantile reporting and adjustment and col
lection agencies; computer and data processing services; management, consulting, and
public relations services; and noncommercial education, scientific, and research organiza
tions (100 minimum employment). Minimum establishment size lowered from 250 to 100
workers in the chemicals, petroleum refining, machinery, transportation equipment, and
measuring, analyzing, and controlling instruments industries.
78
1979
Added accounting, auditing, and bookkeeping services (50 workers minimum).
89
1980-85
No change.
107
1986
Minimum establishment size lowered to 50 workers in all covered industries.
112
4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
workers; transportation, communications, electric, gas, and
sanitary services, 100 or 250 workers; wholesale trade, 100
workers; retail trade, 250 workers; finance, insurance, and
real estate, 100 workers; and selected services, 50 or 100
workers. Approximately 43,000 establishments were within
scope of the survey. They employed a total of 22.7 million
workers, 2.1 million of whom were in the surveyed occupa
tions.
Expansion proposals
The adequacy of the scope of the p a t c survey has long
been a matter of controversy. In 1973, the U.S. General
Accounting Office recommended legislative changes that
would allow inclusion of State and local governments in the
pay comparisons.8 The President’s Panel on Federal Com
pensation echoed this suggestion in 1975, as did President
Carter’s Reorganization Project in 1978, the President’s Pri
vate Sector Survey on Cost Control in 1984, and the Pay
Agent in its report to the President in 1985.9 Some of these
groups also recommended inclusion of private services in
dustries not covered, while others suggested lowering the
minimum employment size of surveyed establishments.
While some changes occurred in 1977 and 1979, several
longstanding recommendations were not acted upon until
1985, when the President’s Cabinet Council on Manage
ment and Administration reviewed Federal pay policy and
issued a formal proposal for expanding the p a t c survey. The
proposal called for bringing within the p a t c survey scope:
small private sector establishments, that is, units employing
as few as 20 workers; services industries, such as hotels,
hospitals, and educational institutions; and State and local
governments. As indicated in the 1985 Pay Agent’s report,
information from State and local governments cannot be
used in the comparability process without enabling legisla
tion, but can provide a basis for discussing the technical
merits of such inclusion.
To conserve resources, the Cabinet Council’s proposal
called for splitting the p a t c survey universe into two parts—
(1) the existing (1985) survey scope and (2) all services
industries plus State and local governments.10 These seg
ments were to be surveyed on alternating biennial cycles,
with data for the segment not surveyed in a given year
estimated by adjusting the previous year’s findings by the
percentage change in an appropriate component of the b l s
Employment Cost Index. This plan was subsequently re
vised by the Congress, as discussed later.
1986 coverage
In March 1986, b l s began the expansion of the p a t c
survey proposed by the Cabinet Council. The same indus
tries were surveyed in 1986 as in 1985, but the minimum
employment size of establishments covered by the survey
was reduced to 50 workers.
Coverage of smaller establishments enhances the useful
ness of findings for individual occupations and allows more
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Exhibit 2. The changing occupational profile of the
survey, 1961 to 1985
Occupation
patc
W ork levels studied
in 1985
Occupations in the 1961 and
1985 surveys:
Accountants..................................
A uditors........................................
Chief accountants .......................
A ttorneys......................................
Chemists ......................................
Engineers......................................
Job an aly sts..................................
Directors of personnel ...............
6
4
5
6
8
8
4
5
Drafters ........................................
Accounting c le rk s .......................
File clerks ....................................
Key entry operators ...................
Messengers ..................................
Stenographers ..............................
T y p ists..........................................
5
4
3
2
1
2
2
Occupations in the 1961 survey
but not in the 1985:
Managers, office services...........
Bookkeeping machine operators
Switchboard operators ...............
Tabulating machine operators ..
4
2
2
2
Occupations in the 1985 survey
but not in the 1961:
Public accountants .....................
B u y e rs..........................................
Computer programmers .............
Computer systems analysts ___
Engineering technicians .............
Computer operators ...................
Photographers ..............................
S ecretaries....................................
Personnel clerks/assistants ........
Purchasing clerks/assistants . . . .
4
4
5
6
5
6
5
5
5
3
detailed analysis of the effect of employment size on estab
lishment pay levels. To permit comparisons with the 1985
survey findings, the 1986 report includes separate data for
medium and large firms.11
The 1986 data show that larger establishments (those with
2,500 workers or more) generally pay higher salaries to
white-collar employees than do small firms (50 to 999 work
ers), although the pay advantage varies by occupation and
skill level.12 In roughly three-fourths of the clerical occupa
tional work levels analyzed, average salary levels in large
establishments were 10 to 20 percent above those in small
establishments. Among professional, administrative, and
technical occupations, the large establishment pay advan
tage was generally less than 10 percent; differentials greater
than 10 percent were usually in the lower levels of these
occupations. Pay levels for workers in establishments with
1,000 to 2,499 workers generally fell between those of their
counterparts in larger and smaller firms.
5
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Expansion o f p a t c Survey
Expansion of survey scope also permitted study of addi
tional occupations which, in terms of employment, are im
portant in both the Federal Government and private indus
tries. Additions to the 1986 survey included a general clerk
occupation (with 4 work levels) and a new bottom level for
the already surveyed purchasing clerk/assistant job.
1987 coverage
As mentioned earlier, plans for a 1987 survey covering all
services industries plus State and local governments were
revised as a result of congressional action. The Congress
directed that the b l s develop a broad-based national whitecollar salary and benefits survey “ . . .that meets not only the
needs of the Federal pay agent but also provides general
information about the levels of compensation of all seg
ments of the white-collar workforce.”13 Furthermore, the
b l s was requested to submit to the Congress, by August
1987, plans for implementing this new, broad-based whitecollar survey.
As a result, the March 1987 p a t c survey will be con
ducted in the private services industries only, but will cover
all establishments with at least 20 workers. Additionally, a
series of research and test studies will be conducted that
address a wide range of issues and concerns pertinent to the
development of a broad-based white-collar salary and bene
fits survey.
The 1987 p a t c survey will permit, for the first time,
separate analysis of occupational pay and staffing patterns in
all private services industries. Where possible, data by size
of establishment and for all metropolitan areas combined
will be published. Also, data for two key service sectors—
business services and health services— will be published.
The 1987 survey will add the following occupations: regis
tered nurse (4 levels), licensed practical nurse (3 levels),
nursing assistant (4 levels), and civil engineering technician
(5 levels).
There will be a dramatic increase in employment cover
age stemming from p a t c survey expansions. Consequently,
1 The surveys have usually found larger pay differences between the
various skill levels of the same occupation than across occupations at the
same skill level. For example, in March 1986, average annual salaries in
the following occupational work levels (all evaluated as equivalent to level
13 occupations in the Federal Government’s General Schedule) fell within
a 9-percent range: Engineer vi ($58,883), Chemist vi ($60,796), Accoun
tant vi ($ 6 1 ,5 4 6 ), Attorney iv ($63,933), and Chief Accountant in
($62,880). Meanwhile, pay averages within these occupations commonly
differed by 15 to 25 percent between adjacent skill levels.
2 For analyses based on pa tc survey data, see Martin E. Personick and
Carl B. Barsky, “White-collar pay levels linked to corporate work force
size," Monthly Labor Review, May 1982, pp. 23-28; Martin E. Personick,
“White-collar pay determination under range-of-rate systems,” Monthly
Labor Review, December 1984, pp. 25-30; and Mark S. Sieling, “Staffing
patterns prominent in female-male earnings gap,” Monthly Labor Review,
June 1984, pp. 2 9 -3 3 .
6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
data available to the Pay Agent will represent salaries in
about 300,000 establishments (1986 plus 1987 survey cov
erage) that employ a total of 47 million workers, compared
with 43,000 establishments and 23 million workers in 1985
(of which 2 million workers were classified in p a t c survey
occupations). At the time of the 1985 survey, 51 percent of
the 23 million workers within the scope of the survey were
employed in manufacturing industries and 49 percent in
nonmanufacturing. After the 1987 survey expansion, the
proportions will be 68 percent in nonmanufacturing and
32 percent in manufacturing, more closely paralleling
the industrial composition of the U.S. private, nonfarm
economy.
Test studies. The 1987 test studies will be coordinated
with portions of ongoing Bureau surveys, such as the Em
ployee Benefits Survey in State and local governments and,
in the private sector, Area Wage Surveys which provide
occupational pay data on a locality basis. These studies will
examine such issues as: (1) pay, benefits, and work arrange
ments for white-collar jobs not currently surveyed; (2) test
ing methods to identify work levels (for example, trainee,
fully qualified, supervisory) within a broad spectrum of
professional/managerial occupations; (3) handling classifi
cation and pay practices (for example, commissions) for a
wide variety of sales occupations; (4) determining whether
employee characteristics, such as education and experience,
can be readily identified in an establishment-based survey;
and (5) evaluating which statistical methods and survey
designs (for example, probability selection of occupations)
are appropriate for the broad-based survey of occupational
pay levels and structures.
P l a n s f o r t h e p a t c s u r v e y are indefinite beyond 1987, as
the new broad-based white-collar survey develops to take its
place. The scope of the p a t c survey during the transition
period will probably alternate between the 1986 and 1987
coverage; some adjustments will be made to the minimum
requirements on establishment employments.
□
3 The provision for legislative veto of the alternative plan by a single
House of the Congress is currently being litigated. For a more detailed
description of the pay comparability process, including the role of the bls
survey, see George L. Stelluto, “Federal pay comparability: facts to temper
the debate,” Monthly Labor Review, June 1979, pp. 18-28.
4 The scope, occupational definitions, and data for the 1960-61 survey
are presented in National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Techni
cal, and Clerical Pay, Winter 1960-61, Bulletin 1310 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1961). The initial p a t c survey, for the winter of 1959-60, was
experimental and applied to establishments with 100 or more workers.
Industrial coverage, however, was the same as in 1960-61.
5 All but one of the occupations surveyed in 1985— messenger— were
divided into two or more work levels. Definitions of these work levels, as
well as occupational descriptions, are developed by the Pay Agent, with
technical assistance from b l s , to permit salary comparisons between the
private and Federal sectors at narrowly defined levels of work. Each occu
pational work level in the p a t c survey can be equated to a specific grade
level in the Federal Government’s General Schedule pay system.
6 Although p a t c sample establishments are selected on a probability
basis, survey occupations are picked judgmentally by the Pay Agent. The
occupations appropriàtely span a broad range o f Federal white-collar occu
pations and work levels; they are not chosen, however, to be a representa
tive sample o f all these occupations. The b ls Employment Cost Index, also
occupationally based, uses probability techniques to select jobs for a study
o f pay and compensation trends outside the Federal Government.
7 See National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay, March 1985, Bulletin 2243 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
8 See Improvements Needed In the Survey of Non-Federal Salaries Used
A i Basis for Adjusting Federal White-Collar Salaries, B-167266 (U.S.
General Accounting O ffice, May 11, 1973).
9 See Report to The President of the President’s Panel on Federal Com
pensation (December 1975); The President’s Reorganization Project, Per
sonnel Management Project, Final Staff Report , Vol. I (December 1977);
President’s Private Sector Survey on Cost Control, A Report to The Pres
ident (January 1984); and Comparability of the Federal Statutory Pay
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Systems With Private Enterprise Pay Rates , Annual Report o f The Presi
dent’s Pay Agent (Aug. 20, 1985).
10 Prior to the expansion, surveyed services industries were limited to
engineering, architectural, and surveying services; commercially operated
research, development, and testing laboratories; credit reporting and col
lection agencies; computer and data processing services; management,
consulting and public relations services; noncommercial educational, sci
entific, and research organizations; and accounting, auditing, and book
keeping services. These industries would be included in the all services
portion of future surveys.
11 See National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay, March 1986, Bulletin 2271 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1986).
12 The p a t c survey data relate to straight-time salaries, excluding pre
mium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts.
Also excluded are performance bonuses and lump-sum payments o f the
type negotiated in the auto and aerospace industries, as well as profitsharing payments, attendance bonuses, Christmas or year end bonuses, and
other nonproduction bonuses. Pay increases— but not bonuses— under
cost-of-living allowance clauses, and incentive payments are included.
13 See Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Educa
tion and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill, 1987, Report 99-711 (U.S.
House of Representatives, 99th Cong. 2d S ess., July 27, 1986), p. 18.
Setting wage rates
One result of having an internal labor market is that occupational wage
rates are not set by the free market as in the basic supply/demand model.
In this case, a method has to be devised to set wage rates for the hierarchy
of occupations employed. This method has to provide rates that are per
ceived as fair and will motivate workers to acquire skills and work hard for
promotions. One such method is “job evaluation” in which the various
factors that people consider important in determining a fair wage structure
are scored for each occupation and the relative wage rates are determined
by each occupation’s total score. Among the factors considered are the
level of skill required by the occupation, the level of responsibility, use of
expensive equipment, and hazards or discomfort in working conditions. In
this way, a wage rate structure is developed for all the occupations in the
internal labor market.
— Using Labor Market Information in Career Exploration
and Decision Making: A Resource Guide
(Garrett Park, m d , Garrett Park Press, 1986), p. 64.
7
The Consumer Expenditure Survey:
quality control by comparative analysis
As with any statistical program, assessment
of results is an important part
of the expenditure survey; a vital component
of b l s postsurvey evaluation is comparison
with other data on aggregate spending,
most notably those from the National Accounts
R a y m o n d G ie s e m a n
Postsurvey evaluation is an integral part of a program of
quality assurance for the ongoing Consumer Expenditure
Survey ( c e ) . Comparisons with data from independent
sources serve to monitor consistency of results from the
survey and help identify areas where survey performance
can be improved. This article highlights some of the find
ings obtained by comparing aggregate consumer expendi
tures from the c e with data from alternative sources.
The expenditure survey described
The Consumer Expenditure Survey provides a continuous
and comprehensive flow of data on the expenditures, in
come, and other selected characteristics of American con
sumers. The survey, which is conducted by the Bureau of
the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics, consists of
two components: (1) A Diary, or recordkeeping, survey
completed by participating consumer units1 for two consec
utive 1-week periods; and (2) an Interview survey in which
the expenditures of consumer units are obtained in five
consecutive quarterly interviews.
Raymond Gieseman is an economist in the Division of Consumer Expendi
ture Surveys, Bureau o f Labor Statistics. This article is derived from a
paper presented by the author at the annual meeting of the American
Statistical Association, Aug. 18, 1986, in Chicago.
8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Each component of the survey addresses an independent
sample of consumer units which is representative of the
U.S. population. Over 52 weeks of the year, 5,000 con
sumer units are sampled for the Diary survey. Because each
unit keeps a diary for two 1-week periods, approximately
10,000 diaries are obtained each year. The interview sample
is selected on a rotating panel basis, targeted at 5,000 con
sumer units each quarter. The data are collected on an ongo
ing basis in 101 areas of the country.
The Interview survey is designed to capture expenditures
which respondents can recall for a period of 3 months or
longer. In general, these include relatively large expendi
tures, such as those for real property, automobiles, and
major appliances, or expenditures which occur on a fairly
regular basis, such as rent, utility payments, or insurance
premiums. The Interview survey also provides data on ex
penditures incurred while on overnight trips and vacations.
Including “global estimates” of spending for food, about 95
percent of all expenditures are covered in the Interview
phase. Excluded are nonprescription drugs, household sup
plies, and personal care items.
The Diary survey is designed to obtain detailed expendi
tures on small, frequently purchased items which are nor
mally difficult for respondents to recall. Records of ex
penses are kept for food and beverages, both at home and in
eating places, tobacco, housekeeping supplies, nonprescrip-
tion drugs, and personal care products and services. This
kind of detail is needed for the periodic rebasing of the
Consumer Price Index. Expenditures incurred by members
of the consumer unit while away from home overnight or
longer are not collected in the Diary survey, c e estimates of
food expenditures are particularly affected by this feature.
Expenditure estimates from the c e are transaction costs,
including excise and sales taxes, for goods and services
acquired during the survey reference period. The full cost of
each purchase is recorded, even though full payment may
not have been made at the time of purchase. Businessrelated expenditures and reimbursed expenses are excluded.
Even from this limited description, one can discern a
number of possible sources of error in the expenditure sur
vey. As in all sample surveys, the results are subject not
only to sampling error, but also to many of the same limita
tions that would apply to a complete census. The time and
effort required to keep a diary of purchases, or to complete
an interview, are quite likely to have an impact on the
completeness with which expenditures are reported by re
spondents. Aspects of the collection methodology, inter
viewer quality, environmental conditioning, processing
error, and other factors influence the findings.
There can be overreporting or underreporting of the ex
penditures. For example, in reporting food expenditures,
participants in the Diary survey may record purchases from
grocery stores, but overlook food items purchased from a
convenience store. In the quarterly Interview survey, partic
ipants might not recall some items of clothing purchased 2
or 3 months ago, or might report an incorrect transaction
amount. The constraints on respondents’ time or the lack of
participation in the survey by all consumer unit members
might cause several purchases to be overlooked.
As we shall see, available evidence suggests possible
underreporting for many items in the expenditure survey;
overreporting does not appear to be a problem. This article
focuses on comparisons of c e data with other, related data,
but some of the expenditure survey data themselves also
point to sources of underreporting. For example, in the
Interview survey, it has been found that expenditures for
many items are reported more frequently for the month
immediately preceding the interview than for earlier
months.2 In the Diary survey, it has been found that average
reported food expenditures tend to decline across days of
participation.3
Overview of postsurvey evaluation
The primary role of postsurvey evaluation is to access the
cumulative effects of nonsampling errors on the quality of
the data obtained from the survey. Comparisons with data
from external sources are important in shedding light on the
strengths and weaknesses of survey findings. Since the start
of the ongoing Consumer Expenditure Survey in 1980, such
comparisons have become a regular part of the c e program.
What was expected from these comparisons was a sense of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
degree and direction of possible survey errors, rather than an
exact measure of bias, because the specific estimates from
other sources are not necessarily the “true” values.
A principal source of independent data, but not the only
source for this purpose, is estimates of expenditures for
goods and services from the personal sector of the National
Income and Product Accounts. In these accounts, estimates
of expenditures are based largely on records of sales by
business and government enterprises. While these data are
not subject to the same errors inherent in household surveys,
they are subject to their own measurement errors and to
judgment errors in the estimation and allocation of sales to
the personal sector and other sectors of the accounts. Such
errors cannot be quantified easily.
Personal Consumption Expenditures. The Personal Con
sumption Expenditures ( p c e ) component of the National In
come and Product Accounts ( n i p a ) , prepared by the Bureau
of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Com
merce, provides estimates for many types of spending that
can be compared with c e expenditure components. The
series is derived by complex methods which trace the flow
of goods and services through the economy.4 The procedure
requires estimating total production, then allocating produc
tion to intermediate users and to final demand. Cost and
profit margins are estimated to arrive at final market values.
Primary sources of the data are the Census of Manufactures,
available once every 5 years, and other economic censuses.
The estimates for a particular year are updated the follow
ing year as more current source data are incorporated. They
also are subject to periodic revision if additional sources of
information become available. Finally, “benchmark esti
mates” of consumer spending are derived every 5 years as
the results of economic censuses become available.
The latest benchmark estimates of consumer spending,
released in December 1985, were based on findings from the
1977 economic censuses. One result of the most recent
benchmarking was to increase the amount for food in “pur
chased meals and beverages” in 1984 by 9.2 percent. The
estimate of expenditures for kitchen and household appli
ances for the same year was lowered 10.6 percent. The fact
that substantial revisions to p c e take place as much as
5 years after publication reinforces the point that there is no
“true” value for consumer expenditure estimates.
Personal Consumption Expenditures represent the market
value of goods and services purchased by the entire personal
sector of the U.S. economy, including net purchases of used
goods. Also included are operating expenses of nonprofit
institutions serving individuals, and the value of food, fuel,
clothing, rent of dwellings, and financial services received
in kind by individuals. The p c e purchasing universe is
slightly larger than that covered in the Consumer Expendi
ture Survey. Included in p c e estimates are purchases by the
military and the institutional population not accounted for
elsewhere in the government sector of the National Ac9
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Quality Control in the Consumer Expenditure Survey
counts, and purchases of goods and services provided by
nonprofit organizations, p c e categories also include expend
itures in the United States by foreigners.
In an earlier work, H.S. Houthakker and Lester D. Taylor
compared “private consumption expenditures” from the Na
tional Accounts with aggregate spending by consumer units
from the 1960-61 Survey of Consumer Expenditures, and
pointed out some of the differences in the measurement and
classification of expenditures that must be addressed when
comparing data from the two sources.5 In an extensive com
parison of c e expenditures with data from independent
sources, Robert B. Pearl relied heavily upon the National
Accounts to assess findings from the 1972-73 survey.6 Both
of these studies provided evidence that, for several cate
gories of goods and services, expenditures were underre
ported in the Consumer Expenditure Survey.
Unfortunately, a straightforward comparison between c e
and p c e components of spending is not possible. For some
components of expenditure, differences in concepts are so
great as to render the comparison meaningless. For other
spending components, there are differences in coverage that
must be accounted for before a comparison can be made. A
couple of examples illustrate this process.
CE aggregate expenditures for health care cannot be com
pared with medical care expenditures in p c e . The expendi
ture survey in general is concerned with direct payments by
households for goods or services. Therefore, costs for health
care are out-of-pocket expenditures by households for in
surance, medical commodities, professional services, and
hospital care. Payments for insurance by employers or reim
bursements by insurance companies are not included. The
p c e on the other hand, is concerned with the total value of
private health care, regardless of who is actually incurring
the expenditure.
c e and p c e expenditures for owned dwellings also are not
comparable, c e expenditures for owned dwellings, as pub
lished, are actual outlays reported by all homeowners for
mortgage interest, property taxes, and insurance, mainte
nance, and repairs, p c e published estimates are the space
rental value of owned shelter.7 Other components not com
pared because of intractable conceptual differences are edu
cational expenses; contributions to religious, political, and
charitable organizations; and all insurance.
However, c e and p c e expenditures for rented shelter can
be compared after adjustment. In the expenditure survey,
rent is based on “contract rent,” which includes the implicit
cost of utilities paid for by landlords, while p c e rent for
tenant-occupied dwellings is space rent excluding any utili
ties. By adding the two components for both series, an
estimate for “rented shelter, fuel, and utilities” can be com
pared. For the comparative analysis of c e and p c e estimates,
almost every expenditure component requires some adjust
ment.8
Other data sources.
10
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
It is possible to compare aggregate
expenditure findings from the survey with national industry
and trade statistics, where the transactions refer directly to
consumer units. Several independent sources that provide
data suitable for this purpose have been identified and are
used to evaluate expenditure findings for some of the cate
gories of goods and services included in the c e .
Method o f analysis. Assessments of findings have been
made for both the Interview and the Diary portions of the
Consumer Expenditure Survey. Personal Consumption Ex
penditure estimates were compared to Interview survey re
sults for many categories of household spending, and to
food expenditures from the Diary survey. Data on direct
costs to consumers for medical care from the National
Health Accounts, prepared by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, were matched against out-ofpocket medical care costs reported in the Interview Survey.9
Data on grocery store sales from trade publications also
were examined relative to detailed food expenditure esti
mates from the Diary survey.
To compare the data, c e aggregate expenditure estimates
were first developed, based on consumer unit counts and
average expenditures per unit for specified groups of goods
and services.10 These estimates were compared with esti
mates of aggregate spending from independent sources for
similar goods and services, and ratios were calculated.
Throughout the discussion that follows, it should be kept in
mind that because the various data series are used for differ
ent purposes, there usually are significant differences in
concept, coverage, and classification of expenditures.
Interview survey versus
pce
Results of comparing c e Interview survey data with se
lected components of p c e for the period 1980-84 are shown
in table 1. Although c e aggregate expenditures were lower
than those for p c e for all components of spending except
personal care services, the relationship over the 5 years was
consistent. The components of expenditure for which the
two aggregate estimates were closest included rent, fuel and
utilities, telephone service charges, furniture, and trans
portation. These components typically either have regular
periodic billing and payment or involve major outlays that
may readily be recalled by respondents and substantiated
with records.
Except for furniture, Interview survey expenditures for
household durables were low relative to p c e . Spending for
household appliances was one-third to one-fourth lower than
p c e estimates, and that for radio, t v , and musical instru
ments was also about one-third lower. The inclusion of
minor appliances, for which purchases may be more diffi
cult to recall, could partially explain the lower relative c e
findings for household appliances. Also, the allocation of
major appliance production in the National Accounts be
tween p c e and intermediate purchases by contractors and
landlords is particularly uncertain. Among radio, t v , and
improved survey methodology.
Year-to-year changes in the ratios of c e aggregate expen
ditures to Personal Consumption Expenditures provide use
ful monitors of survey performance. For example, the ratios
of c e to p c e for alcoholic beverages and housewares in the
1980-84 data are higher than they were for the 1972-73
data. More recently, components of spending for which the
ratios increased over the 5-year period include household
operations, telephone service, miscellaneous household
equipment, and public transportation. Household opera
tions, as defined for these comparisons, are limited to do
mestic and other household services, excluding expendi
tures for day care centers, babysitting, and care for invalid
and elderly persons. In this area, there may be circularity
between the two statistical programs because p c e uses ex
penditure survey estimates to establish values for some do
mestic services. A higher ratio of estimates for miscella
neous household equipment beginning in 1983 may be
attributed, at least in part, to the addition of Interview sur
vey questions pertaining to home computers and telephone
equipment.
On the negative side, the ratio for food expenditures
dropped 8 percentage points between 1981 and 1982, and
that for food at home dropped even more, by 11 percentage
points. The direction and magnitude of these changes were
associated with the rewording of Interview survey questions
musical instruments are a number of small items such as
video cassettes and recorders, t v games, records, and tapes,
Outlays for these products could have been forgotten by
survey participants.
Interview survey expenditures for private transportation
were comparable with p c e estimates. However, c e expendi
tures for public transportation were low, ranging between 56
percent and 63 percent of p c e figures. Public transportation
expenditures include airline fares, local and interarea mass
transit charges, and taxicab fares. These same components
are especially difficult to estimate in p c e because expendi
tures must be allocated between businesses and households.
The results of the comparisons point to several areas
where underreporting of expenditures appears to be a prob
lem in the Interview survey. Among these are alcoholic
beverages, some housefumishings and equipment, apparel,
entertainment, reading materials, tobacco, and miscella
neous expenditures. Spending on alcoholic beverages and
tobacco traditionally has been underreported in household
surveys. Houthakker and Taylor noted a large discrepancy
when analyzing 1960-61 expenditures for alcoholic bever
ages, which they said “ ...points to a substantial ‘Puritan’
element in the household data.”11 A similar element proba
bly explains a tendency to underreport tobacco expend
itures. However, a number of areas where underreporting
exists in the Interview survey may be more responsive to
Table 1. Estimated aggregate expenditures for selected categories of consumption from the
to Personal Consumption Expenditures (pce), 1980-84
ce
Interview survey aggregate expenditure
(in billions)
Expenditure category
Interview survey compared
Ratio of Interviewsurvey aggregate
to PCE
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
Food ...........................................................................................................
Food at hom e..........................................................................................
Food away from home ...........................................................................
Alcoholic beverages...................................................................................
Rent, fuel, and utilities1 .............................................................................
Telephone..................................................................................................
Household operations2 ...............................................................................
$253.7
194.9
58.8
21.5
141.1
25.9
10.7
$266.2
202.2
64.0
22.3
162.5
29.3
10.7
$256.9
186.3
70.6
23.0
180.4
31.2
12.1
$274.1
194.9
79.3
24.0
193.2
35.5
13.2
$293.2
207.8
85.5
25.6
218.1
39.3
16.2
0.85
.91
.70
.47
.89
.93
.68
0.83
.87
.72
.46
.91
.94
.63
0.75
.76
.74
.46
.92
.88
.71
0.76
.76
.76
.46
.91
.94
.74
0.75
.75
.75
.48
.96
.99
.79
Housefumishings and equipment..............................................................
Household textiles .................................................................................
Furniture ................................................................................................
Floor coverings.......................................................................................
Major and minor appliances ..................................................................
Housewares............................................................................................
Miscellaneous household equipment.....................................................
Apparel ......................................................................................................
55.1
5.1
19.8
4.3
12.6
2.4
10.8
69.9
55.5
5.4
19.0
4.1
13.3
2.7
11.0
77.4
56.9
6.0
18.3
4.4
13.0
2.7
12.4
79.4
65.3
6.7
22.1
4.6
13.2
3.0
15.8
90.8
74.3
7.3
24.8
5.8
15.4
3.1
17.9
100.5
.68
.51
.95
.63
.77
.26
.60
.53
.64
.50
.86
.58
.76
.27
.56
.53
.64
.53
.85
.62
.73
.26
.61
.53
.67
.54
.93
.55
.67
.27
.72
.55
.69
.55
.93
.61
.71
.25
.75
.56
Transportation............................................................................................
Private transportation3 ...........................................................................
Public transportation...............................................................................
Entertainment ............................................................................................
Fees and admissions .............................................................................
Radio, TV, and sound equipment ..........................................................
Other entertainment...............................................................................
222.0
207.5
14.6
58.0
17.9
16.3
23.9
232.9
215.8
17.0
65.9
20.3
19.2
26.3
235.8
219.6
16.2
68.6
20.8
22.5
25.3
274.3
256.8
17.5
77.2
24.8
24.6
27.8
300.1
278.2
21.9
86.1
28.3
28.0
29.7
.97
1.00
.70
.65
.65
.65
.64
.93
.94
.76
.65
.63
.68
.65
.92
.94
.71
.63
.60
.70
.60
.97
.99
.75
.64
.66
.66
.62
.95
.96
.84
.65
.71
.66
.59
Personal care services...............................................................................
Reading.......................................................................................................
Tobacco ....................................................................................................
Miscellaneous4 ..........................................................................................
11.4
10.7
14.4
10.2
12.4
11.5
15.0
12.2
13.2
12.1
16.9
13.1
14.8
13.6
19.3
15.4
16.9
15.1
20.5
16.2
1.06
.67
.69
.42
1.09
.67
.66
.42
1.12
.67
.69
.39
1.06
.71
.69
.40
1.18
.73
.68
.38
1 1ncludes rent for tenant-occupied dwelling units, lodging away from home and at school, and
utility costs of homeowners and renters.
2 ce amounts for babysitting, day care centers, care of invalid or elderly, and for household
laundry and cleaning were deleted from comparison.
2 pce concept of dealer margin as the value of used vehicles was approximated in the ce.
Excluded were amounts for vehicle insurance, finance charges, and license, registration, and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
inspection fees.
4 Includes bank service charges and box rental, legal and accounting fees, and funeral and
burial expenses.
Note: ce survey aggregate expenditure for the total population for 1981 through 1983 are
special constructions for this comparison, ce data were collected only for the urban population in
those years.
11
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Quality Control in the Consumer Expenditure Survey
allocated among the various food categories. The pce foodat-home aggregate is allocated among detailed components
based in part on data from the U.S. Department of Agricul
ture’s marketing bill for domestically produced farm food
products, to which are added amounts for imported foods
and for fish and seafood. Compared to pce estimates, Diary
expenditures were particularly low for fish and seafood and
for fruits and vegetables. However, they were higher than
pce for miscellaneous prepared food and much higher for
nonalcoholic beverages.
To examine further the detailed food expenditures from
the Diary survey, comparisons were made with data from
studies conducted by trade publications, particularly the de
tailed reports prepared annually by Supermarket Business14
and Progressive Grocer. 15
Supermarket Business conducts a comprehensive annual
survey of food manufacturers, packers, wholesalers, and
retailers to construct a detailed picture of grocery store sales
by product line. Total grocery store sales for the study are
based on U.S. Bureau of the Census estimates, and include
sales of specialty food stores.16 Results of a similar study by
Progressive Grocer, also available annually, but the uni
verse, limited to stores with annual food sales of $2 million
or more, accounts for only 75 to 80 percent of grocery store
food sales. The sales estimates by product line from Super
market Business and from Progressive Grocer were
matched to Diary food components as closely as possible for
the comparisons presented in table 3.
Diary food expenditures more closely matched grocery
store sales than did pce estimates, both in weekly totals and
in distribution of expenditures among several food-at-home
categories. Total food sales of grocery stores as described in
the Supermarket Business “Consumer Expenditure Study”
were very close to total food-at-home expenditures from the
Diary survey. Diary aggregate expenditures were substan
tially higher than the Supermarket Business sales estimates
on shopping and purchase patterns at grocery stores, conve
nience stores, and food specialty stores. (Detailed food ex
penditures are not collected in the Interview survey.)
Diary survey food expenditures
The Diary survey is the primary source of detailed food
expenditure estimates from the Consumer Expenditure Sur
vey. For this analysis, the Diary estimates were compared
with food expenditures from the National Accounts. Be
cause the Dairy survey excludes expenditures while out of
town overnight or longer, trip food expenditures from the
Interview survey have been added to Diary food-awayfrom-home amounts for the comparison.
Total food expenditures tabulated from the Diary survey
(and supplemented with Interview data for food on trips)
were about 75 percent of pce food expenditures. (See
table 2.) Food-at-home expenditures in the Diary survey
were low relative to pce, and declined from 69 percent of
pce levels in 1980 to 63 percent in 1984. Diary survey and
pce expenditures for food away from home (including food
on trips) were very close over the comparison period.
There appears to be substantial underreporting of food-athome expenditures in the Diary survey. However, at least
one source has suggested that pce estimates for the same
category are too high. Alexander C. Manchester and
Richard A. King, who developed a new series of U.S. food
expenditure estimates for the U.S. Department of Agricul
ture in the late 1970’s, felt that census figures used as a basis
for allocating food expenditures in pce were questionable.12
The Department of Agriculture estimates of food consump
tion at home for the years 1980-84 are about 20 percent
lower than pce estimates. The ce Diary survey figures are 82
percent of the Department of Agriculture estimates (exclud
ing home production and donations).13
A comparison of ce and pce detailed food expenditures
also reveals wide disparities in the way expenditures are
Table 2.
Estimates of aggregate expenditures for food-at-home categories,
ce
Diary survey compared to
Food category
pce,
1980-84
Ratio of Diary survey aggregate
to PCE
Diary survey aggregate expenditures
(In billions)
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
Total food ..................................................................................................
$222.74
$242.52
$263.90
$268.39
$280.93
0.75
0.76
0.77
0.74
0.72
Food at hom e..........................................................................................
Cereals and cereal products..............................................................
Bakery products .................................................................................
M eat....................................................................................................
Fish and seafood ...............................................................................
Eggs.....................................................................................................
Fresh milk and cream .........................................................................
146.10
6.05
12.63
43.51
4.17
2.76
10.31
158.40
6.87
13.48
44.87
4.63
3.15
11.35
166.56
7.57
15.07
45.13
4.78
3.23
11.98
166.57
7.14
14.60
43.67
5.27
3.03
11.18
173.06
7.49
15.94
42.93
5.85
3.17
11.35
.69
.85
.74
.69
.48
.64
.70
.68
.87
.73
.66
.49
.69
.74
.68
.98
.74
.63
.50
.65
.70
.64
.93
.73
.57
.51
.59
.63
.63
.92
.76
.51
.52
.57
.61
Other dairy p roducts...........................................................................
Fresh fruits and vegetables................................................................
Processed fruits and vegetables ........................................................
Sugar and other sweets ....................................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages ....................................................................
Miscellaneous prepared foods........................................... .............
9.21
12.46
9.04
5.57
4.25
13.42
12.72
10.12
14.77
10.03
5.72
4.73
13.93
14.75
11.13
15.88
10.65
5.81
4.74
14.23
16.36
11.15
15.82
10.68
6.16
4.50
14.90
16.93
11.26
16.56
11.48
6.61
4.95
15.92
19.55
.74
.47
.32
.64
.68
2.15
1.28
.78
.51
.33
.56
.66
1.92
1.27
.77
.52
.33
.55
.63
1.89
1.35
.75
.50
.32
.57
.58
1.92
1.36
.71
.48
.31
.59
.60
1.98
1.52
Food away from home1 .........................................................................
76.64
84.12
97.34
103.36
107.87
.92
.94
1.02
.99
.95
1 1ncludes expenditures for food away from home on trips collected in the Interview survey.
Note : See note, table 1.
12
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 3. Ratios of aggregate expenditures to store sales for food-at-home categories, Diary survey compared to alternative
sources, 1980-84
Diary survey compared with
Diary survey compared with
P r o g r e s s iv e G r o c e r 1
S u p e r m a r k e t B u s in e s s
Food category
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
Total food at hom e..........................................................................................
1.01
Cereals and cereal products ..................................................................
Bakery products ......................................................................................
M eat.........................................................................................................
Fish and seafood ...................................................................................
Eggs.........................................................................................................
Fresh milk and cream .............................................................................
1.08
1.13
.98
1.07
2.53
1.85
0.96
1.03
0.99
1.10
1.12
.92
1.05
2.67
1.81
1.14
1.05
.99
1.05
2.82
1.93
.99
.95
.92
1.10
2.58
1.82
Other diary products...............................................................................
Fresh fruits and vegetables....................................................................
Processed fruits and vegetables ............................................................
Sugar and other sweets .........................................................................
Fats and o ils ............................................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages ........................................................................
Miscellaneous prepared fo o d s................................................................
1.21
.60
1.05
.97
1.01
1.06
.99
1.16
.64
.99
1.04
1.03
1.09
1.02
1.41
.74
.96
1.02
.88
1.02
.96
1.37
.72
.93
1.04
.89
1.01
.93
1 Universe represented in stores with food sales of $2 million or more annually. Progressive
Grocer assumed rights to data from Chain Store Age in 1982. See source note for further information.
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
0.99
1.04
1.19
1.15
1.19
1.17
.98
.99
.89
1.17
2.08
1.83
1.25
1.07
1.16
1.54
.96
1.85
1.39
1.25
1.27
1.74
1.28
2.05
1.41
1.23
1.15
1.72
1.16
1.92
1.23
1.21
1.17
2.08
1.53
2.01
1.25
1.21
1.11
2.30
1.55
1,96
1.34
.85
.97
1.08
.86
1.05
.98
.95
1.02
.80
1.38
1.09
1.12
.64
.96
1.06
.94
1.53
1.34
1.28
.80
1.03
1.92
1.07
1.56
1.29
1.12
.80
1.25
1.02
1.12
1.74
1.21
1.18
.85
1.19
1.00
1.14
1.75
1.24
1.15
.89
Source : bls Consumer Expenditure Survey; Supermarket Business (September issue annually); Chain Store Age (July issue annually through 1982); and Progressive Grocer (July issue,
1983 and 1984).
Note : See note, table 1.
for eggs and for dairy products, but were lower for fresh
fruits and vegetables. As expected, Diary expenditures for
food at home were higher— by as much as 19 percent— than
total food sales in the Progressive Grocer study. Expendi
tures from the Diary survey for fish and seafood, fresh milk
and cream, and sugar and other sweets were especially high
relative to the Progressive Grocer sales estimates, but were
low relative to sales for miscellaneous prepared foods.
The very different results from the comparisons of ce
food-at-home estimates with data from the three alternative
sources illustrate the difficulties associated with assessing
any biases. For example, while the fish and seafood cate
gory produced one of the smallest comparison ratios be
tween the ce and pce, it had a larger than average ratio for
the Supermarket Business comparision and by far the largest
ratio when data from Progressive Grocer were used. Con
versely, miscellaneous prepared foods was one of two cate
gories in which ce expenditures exceeded those for pce, but
it was the only category for which ce expenditures were
consistently lower than the Progressive Grocer estimates.
Summary
Interview survey expenditures for rent, fuel, and utilities,
telephone service, furniture, transportation, and personal
care services were comparable in level with Personal Con
sumption Expenditure estimates. However, for all other ex
penditure components studied, Interview survey estimates
were lower. These findings were generally consistent over
the 5 years for which the data were compared. Food expen
ditures as reported in the Diary survey were low relative to
pce , primarily due to lower food-at-home expenditures in
the Diary survey. Substantial differences were also noted
between the Diary survey and pce in the allocation of foodat-home expenditures by food type. However, expenditure
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
totals and allocations by food type reported in the Diary
survey were much more consistent with sales by food line
reported in food industry publications.
Results obtained from these comparisons have been used
to monitor the performance of the current Consumer Ex
penditure Survey since it was begun in 1980. The compari
sons have helped to establish food at home and apparel as
two categories that require fuller investigation. Two
methodological studies have been conducted to examine the
processes that might lead to response error in the Diary
survey. The first of these used data from a supplemental
survey administered to Diary Survey respondents and inter
viewers in the second quarter of 1984, at the conclusion of
the second diary week. The supplement questionnaire was
specifically designed to measure the attitudes and behaviors
associated with keeping the diary.17
The other study, the Diary Operational Test, attempted to
evaluate the influence which survey procedures have on
response error. Field tests were conducted in 1985 to evalu
ate the effects of different Diary Formats. One format pro
vided more explicit instructions concerning the commodities
to be reported, and the other was a preprinted, productspecific diary. The study also provided a basis for testing for
differences between the results obtained from the current
practice of having the Diary and quarterly Interview surveys
conducted by the same interviewer and results obtained
when interviewers work only on the Diary survey. The
results of this experiment have not yet been analyzed, but
the findings could suggest redesign possibilities that would
lead to better reporting of food-at-home expenditures.
For the Interview survey, plans are now underway to test
the effect on the incidence of reporting of varying the length
of the survey reference period, length of interview, style of
survey instrument, and sequence or positioning of question
naire parts.
□
13
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Quality Control in the Consumer Expenditure Survey
--------- FOOTNOTES----------
1 A consumer unit comprises either: (1) all members of a particular
household who are related by blood, marriage, adoption, or other legal
arrangements; (2) a person living alone or sharing a household with others
or living as a roomer in a private home or lodging house or in permanent
living quarters in a hotel or motel, but who is financially independent; or
(3) two or more persons living together who pool their income to make joint
expenditure decisions. Financial independence is determined by the three
major expense categories: housing, food, and other living expenses. To be
considered financially independent, the respondent must provide at least
two o f the three major expense categories.
2 Adriana R. Silberstein and Curtis A. Jacobs, “Symptoms of Repeated
Interview Effects in the Consumer Expenditure Interview Survey,” paper
presented at the Symposium on Panel Surveys, American Statistical Asso
ciation on Survey Research Methods, Nov. 19-22, 1986, Washington, DC.
3 U .S. Department o f Labor, Consumer Expenditure Survey: Diary Sur
vey, 1980-81, Bulletin2173 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, September 1983).
4 A detailed description of the derivation o f Personal Consumption Ex
penditures, as well as the other components of the National Income and
Product Accounts, is found in National Income: 1954 Edition, A Supple
ment to the Survey of Current Business (Bureau of Economic Analysis,
1954).
5 H .S. Houthakker and Lester D. Taylor, Consumer Demand in the
United States: Analysis and Projections , 2d. ed. (Cambridge, m a , Harvard
University Press, 1971).
6 Robert B. Pearl, Réévaluation of the 1972-73 U.S. Consumer Expend
iture Survey: A Further Examination Based on Revised Estimates of Per
sonal Consumption Expenditures, (Bureau o f the Census, July 1979)
(Technical Paper, 46).
7 The concept o f homeowner costs in the Consumer Price Index is also
based on rental equivalence. See R. Gillingham and W. Lane, “Changing
the treatment o f shelter costs for homeowners in the c p i ,” Monthly Labor
Review, June 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 . Other CE components may also differ from
c p i definitions.
14
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8 Complete documentation of the adjustments made for this article is
available from b l s .
9 Raphael Branch, “Comparing medical care expenditures of two diverse
data sources,” Monthly Labor Review, March 1987, pp. 15-18.
10 The eligible population covered by the Consumer Expenditure Survey
is the total civilian noninstitutional population of the United States. How
ever, due to budget constraints in the fourth quarter o f 1981, rural portions
of the survey coverage were temporarily discontinued until 1984, when full
coverage was again restored. For the fourth quarter of 1981 through 1983,
it was necessary to translate expenditure results for the urban population
into aggregate expenditures for the total population to compare results with
data from other sources. The adjustment was made by assuming the same
relationships o f total to urban population and of total to urban mean expend
itures as were found to prevail during the seven quarters of 1980-81, when
the total population was covered in the survey. The rural population as
defined for this exercise was about 17 percent of the total.
11 Houthakker and Taylor, Consumer Demand, p. 252.
12 Alden C. Manchester and Richard A. King, U.S. Food Expenditures,
1954-78, Agricultural Economic Report, 431 (U .S. Department of Agri
culture, August 1979).
13 Food Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1964-84, Statistical
Bulletin, 736 (U .S. Department of Agriculture, December 1985), table
93b.
14 See, for example, Fieldmark Media, Inc., “38th Annual Consumer
Expenditure Survey,” Supermarket Business, September 1985.
15 See, for example, Maclean Hunter Media, Inc., “ 1985 Supermarket
Sales Manual,” Progressive Grocer, July 1985.
16 Includes meat, seafood, fruit, and vegetable markets, and confec
tionery, bakery, diary, and other food stores.
17 See, for example, Clyde Tucker, “An Analysis of the Dynamics in the
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1986
Proceedings issue (forthcoming).
CE Diary Survey,”
Comparing medical care expenditures
of two diverse U.S. data sources
Consumer Expenditure Survey
and administrative data from
the Health Care Financing Administration
show similar expenditures
for medical commodities and services
bls
E. R aph ael B ranch
Most families in the United States spend some of their
disposable income for medical care. The amount depends on
the medical commodities and services obtained and also on
the financing of these expenses. This article looks at the cost
of health care to consumers, exclusive of financing by other
parties— referred to here as direct payments for personal
health care or out-of-pocket expenditures for medical care.
The share of family expenditures spent on medical care
actually declined over the 1960-61 to 1982-83 period, de
spite rising prices and greater utilization of physicians and
ambulatory services. However, during the period, there was
an expansion in the availability of health insurance and an
equal or greater increase in employer-provided health bene
fits. Also, Federal programs for health care provision and
financing were introduced which affected medical care costs
to households. The introduction of medicare and medicaid
payments in 1966 and their expansion in 1972 and 1978 are
examples of this kind of legislative initiative.1Such changes
in the structure of health insurance coverage have affected
the proportion of health care costs paid by consumers.
Consumer spending for medical care rose rapidly between
the 1960’s and the 1980’s. However, the consumer share of
total personal health care costs, which include payments by
third parties, declined. In 1960, these consumer costs ac
counted for 55 percent of total personal health care costs; in
E. Raphael Branch is an economist in the Office of Prices and Living
Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1984, they accounted for only 28 percent.2 Third parties are
private health insurers, Federal, State, and local govern
ments, and philanthropic organizations. The items covered
by the costs include all health commodities and professional
services.
Data from the b l s Consumer Expenditure Survey show
the effect of the structural changes in health care financing
on the family budget. Medical care expenditures have been
rising, but medical care has been accounting for a declining
share of the total family budget. From 1960-61 to 1982-83,
consumers’ annual average expenditures for medical care
rose almost 200 percent, but the rise in other living expenses
was somewhat greater. As a proportion of total family ex
penditures, medical care expenditures declined from 6.1
percent to 4.6 percent. (See table 1.)
Data sources
As part of the evaluation process, the b l s compares Con
sumer Expenditure Survey results with other relevant data.
This article compares health care expenditures data from the
Consumer Expenditure Survey ( c e ) with those from the
National Health Accounts ( n h a ).
The c e and the n h a are constructed for different purposes
and, hence, use different estimation methods. The c e fo
cuses on family spending and is the major source for out-ofpocket data by demographic groups. The n h a focuses on
national aggregate expenditures for all health care by cate
gories and sources of financing. The estimates from both
15
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Medical Care Expenditures From Two Diverse Sources
Table 1. Average expenditures of all U.S. consumer units
for medical care and percent change and distribution,
Consumer Expenditure Survey, 1960-61 and 1982-83
Expenditure category
Average
expenditures
1960-61
1982-83
Percent
change
Percent
distribution
1960-61
1982-83
$5,626
$18,944
236.7
100.0
100.0
Medical care, total .................
Medical care less insurance
Medical insurance payments
340
251
89
874
641
233
157.1
155.4
161.8
6.1
4.5
1.6
4.6
3.4
1.2
All other expenditures.............
5,286
18,070
241.9
93.9
95.4
Total expenditures —
sources are subject to sampling and estimation errors.3 Be
cause of the differences in methodology between c e and
n h a , we expect some differences in the resulting aggre
gates. The purpose of this analysis is to look at the extent
and direction of the differences.
The b l s Consumer Expenditure Survey has been con
ducted annually since 1980 and at approximately 10-year
intervals before then. It provides data that allow analysis of
the changes in out-of-pocket costs over time. The principal
objective of the survey is to collect data which provide a
continuous flow of information on the buying habits of
different types of consumer units.4 The data are used in a
wide variety of research by government, business, labor,
and academic analysts, including the periodic revisions of
the Consumer Price Index.
The c e is conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the
b l s . It consists of two components: a quarterly Interview
survey in which the expenditures of consumer units are
obtained in five interviews conducted every 3 months; and
a Diary, or recordkeeping, survey, completed by participat
ing consumer units for two consecutive 1-week periods.
Both components query an independent sample of 5,000
consumer units per reference period in areas which are rep
resentative of the total U.S. civilian population.5 The Inter
view survey is a rotating panel survey designed to obtain
data on the types of expenditures which respondents can
recall for a period of 3 months or longer, including expendi
tures made on overnight trips. In general, these include
relatively large expenditures, such as those for real prop
erty, automobiles, and major appliances, or expenditures
which occur on a fairly regular basis, such as for rent,
utilities, or medical care. The Diary survey is designed to
obtain expenditures on small, frequently purchased items
which are normally difficult for respondents to remember. It
excludes expenditures incurred by members of the consumer
unit while away from home overnight or longer.
Medical care expenditures and reimbursed amounts6 are
collected in the Interview survey. Out-of-pocket expendi
tures are computed by subtracting reimbursements by third
parties from the total payments for an expenditure by the
household.7 Purchases of over-the-counter drugs, medical
supplies, and miscellaneous items are collected in the Diary
survey.
16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The National Health Accounts measure total aggregate
health costs of the Nation. The n h a covers the Social Secu
rity population which includes inhabitants of U.S. territo
ries, military personnel, and U.S. citizens outside the
United States— populations not covered in the c e . They are
developed by the Health Care Financing Administration,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, to be
consistent in concept with the gross national product ( g n p ) .
Total personal health care costs are measured primarily from
administrative data. The sources of data include Personal
Consumption Expenditures ( p c e ) from the National Income
and Product Accounts of the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
U.S. Department of Commerce, a sample of business re
ceipts from the Statistics o f Income published by the Internal
Revenue Service, and data from the Annual Survey of Hos
pitals and the monthly National Hospital Panel Survey, both
from the American Hospital Association. Patient payments
are calculated as the residual of total health care costs less
estimated total third-party payments, and conform, in con
cept, to the c e out-of-pocket costs.
Comparing the data
Expenditures for selected medical care categories8 from
the two series are compared for the 1980-84 period. Be
cause of lower population coverage in the c e , we expect its
reported expenditures to be somewhat less than those of the
n h a . However, we expect similarity in the direction of an
nual changes and in the proportion of money spent on health
categories, c e medical care expenditure levels are generally
below those of n h a , but the aggregate c e /n h a ratios for the
selected items are fairly constant. Also, there is a similarity
in the proportion of amounts spent for commodities and
services.
Over the 5-year period, the c e / n h a relationship has been
relatively constant for aggregate selected medical expendi
tures, improving for medical commodities, but declining for
medical services. (See table 2.) However, a decline is noted
for commodities in 1984 and this, along with the decline in
services, results in some overall decline in the relationship
between the sources in that year. However, it is difficult to
judge the significance of such changes. Any conclusions as
to trends will have to be based on data for longer periods.
Annual percent changes reflect differences in the levels of
aggregate expenditures from the two sources. (See table 3.)
However, while the changes differ more for component
estimates, the difference in annual movement is similar over
most of the period for the selected medical care total.
Between 1983 and 1984, expenditures for health rose
5 percent in the c e , and 10 percent in the n h a . Although the
1984 c e results are preliminary, a slowing of the increases
is consistent with the drop in inpatient hospital care. It is
also consistent with the rapid growth in the use of less costly
medical service alternatives such as health maintenance or
ganizations ( h m o ’ s ) and ambulatory services.9 Because of
the volatility in the economics of the health industry, there
Table 2. Aggregate and per capita expenditures of all U.S. consumer units for medical care from Consumer Expenditure
Survey and National Health Accounts and ce/nha ratios, 1980-84
_________________________ __________________
1980
1981
1982
1983
CE/NHAratios2
National Health Accounts1
Consumer Expenditure Survey
Expenditure category
1984
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984
Aggregate expenditures (billions)
Selected medical care, total3 ................................................................
Medical commodities .........................................................................
Drugs and medical supplies............................................................
Medical equipment and supplies ...................................................
$44.5
12.9
10.6
2.3
$48.1
15.2
12.7
2.5
$51.9
16.2
13.7
2.6
$56.9
18.2
15.2
3.0
$59.9
19.3
16.1
3.2
$52.2
19.0
14.8
4.2
$58.0
20.7
16.2
4.5
$62.2
21.1
16.9
4.2
$68.0
23.0
18.2
4.8
$75.1
25.2
19.7
5.5
.85
.68
.71
.56
.83
.73
.78
.56
.83
.77
.81
.61
.84
.79
.84
.62
.80
.77
.82
.59
Medical services.................................................................................
Professional services.......................................................................
Hospital care4 .................................................................................
31.6
26.9
4.7
32.9
27.4
5.5
35.6
28.8
6.8
38.7
32.3
6.4
40.6
34.0
6.6
33.2
27.2
6.0
37.3
30.3
7.0
41.1
33.4
7.7
45.0
36.4
8.6
49.9
40.8
9.1
.95
.99
.78
.88
.91
.79
.87
.86
.89
.86
.89
.74
.81
.83
.73
Per capiti expemJitures
Selected medical care, total3 ................................................................
Medical commodities .........................................................................
Drugs and medical supplies............................................................
Medical equipment and supplies ...................................................
$199
58
48
10
$215
67
56
11
$226
70
59
11
$242
77
64
13
$253
82
68
14
$221
81
63
18
$243
87
68
19
$258
87
70
17
$280
95
75
20
$305
102
80
22
.90
.72
.76
.59
.88
.78
.83
.59
.88
.80
.84
.65
.87
.82
.86
.65
.83
.79
.85
.61
Professional services.......................................................................
Hospital care4 .................................................................................
141
120
21
148
123
25
156
126
30
165
138
27
171
143
28
140
115
25
156
127
29
171
139
32
185
150
35
203
166
37
1.00
1.04
.82
.94
.96
.84
.92
.91
.93
.89
.92
.77
.84
.86
.75
1 Data
are from the Health Care Financing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
2 Ratios are based on unrounded data.
are factors leading to higher costs which may be balanced by
others tending to lower costs. It will take several years to
evaluate the impact of these changes.
The proportion of expenditures for medical categories has
been fairly constant since 1980. (See table 4.) c e data show
slightly more being spent on medical services, compared
with n h a data, and slightly less on commodities. The esti
mates for 1984 are typical of the proportions spent over the
5-year period. In 1984, c e reported $60 billion in out-ofpocket medical expenditures. Of this amount, 32 percent
was spent on medical commodities and 68 percent on serv
ices. n h a data show similar percentages spent for medical
commodities and services, but the out-of-pocket medical
expenditures were higher, $75 billion in 1984.
Per capita spending. The population coverage of the CE
and n h a differs and affects the level of the estimates. The
effect is removed when the data are compared on a per
capita basis. (See table 2.) Although the pattern of differ
ences is essentially the same as when measured with aggre
gates, these ratios, adjusted for population coverage, show
that the estimates from the two sources are fairly close for
the selected items total. The c e medical services estimates
were approximately the same as those from the n h a in 1980,
and have declined somewhat since.
Data limitations
In addition to the basic difference in the sources (house
hold survey versus a combination of survey data and admin
istrative records), there are conceptual differences between
c e and n h a that cannot be completely reconciled. However,
adjustments can and have been made to make the compari
son feasible.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Excludes nursing home care, medical equipment repairs, and health insurance.
4 Excludes nonpatient revenues of community hospitals. The 1980 estimates are derived from both
f980 ar|d 1981 data.
Differences in the estimates are partly the result of differ
ences in estimation methods. The c e is a household inter
view survey designed to provide comprehensive information
about household expenditures and data for weighting the
Consumer Price Index. Survey interviewers ask consumer
units about expenditures for detailed medical care items.
The responses are edited, tabulated, weighted by population
estimates, and summed over consumer units, by item.10
In comparison, the n h a measures total health costs using
administrative data adjusted for differences in concept, cov
erage, timing, and nonresponse. For example, its estimates
for medical commodities are based on the p c e . T o obtain
patient payments for drugs and sundries, p c e estimates are
adjusted by subtracting workers’ compensation, medicare,
and temporary disability program payments.11 In addition,
p c e estimates are subject to annual revision, and 5-year
benchmark revisions are also made. Internal Revenue Serv
ice business income estimates, one of the sources on which
Table 3. Annual percent change in medical care
expenditures in the Consumer Expenditure Survey and
National Health Accounts, 1981-84
Expenditure category
National Health
Accounts1
Consumer Expenditure
Survey
1981 1982 1983 1984 1981 1982 1983 1984
10.4
Selected medical care, total2 .
8.1
7.8
9.7
5.3
11.1
7.2
9.3
Medical commodities .........
17.5
6.9
12.2
6.0
9.0
1.9
9.0
9.6
Medical services.................
4.3
8.2
8.5
5.0
12.4
10.2
9.5
10.9
1 Excludes nonpatient revenues of community hospitals. Data are from the Health Care Fi
nancing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
2 Excludes nursing home care, medical equipment repairs, and health insurance.
Note: Percent changes are derived from unrounded data.
17
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Medical Care Expenditures From Two Diverse Sources
Table 4. Percent distribution of annual aggregate expenditures for medical care from Consumer Expenditure Survey and
National Health Accounts, 1980-84
Consumer Expenditure Survey
Expenditure category
Selected medical care, total2 ....................................................................
National Health Accounts1
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Medical commodities .............................................................................
Drugs and medical supplies.........................................................................
Medical equipment and supplies ................................................................
29
24
5
31
26
5
31
26
5
32
27
5
32
27
5
36
28
8
36
28
8
34
27
7
34
27
7
33
26
7
Medical services...............................................................................
Professional services...............................................................................
Hospital care3 ..........................................................................................
71
61
10
69
57
12
69
56
13
68
57
11
68
57
11
64
52
12
64
52
12
66
54
12
66
53
13
66
54
12
1 Data are from the Health Care Financing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
3 Excludes nonpatient revenues of community hospitals. The 1980 estimates are derived from both
1980 and 1981 data.
2 Excludes nursing home care, medical equipment repairs, and health insurance.
professional service estimates are based, are adjusted to
include direct payments by consumers to health care deliver
ers which are not covered in the Internal Revenue Service
data. Also, annual hospital survey data are adjusted by
monthly survey data to estimate calendar-year amounts.12
Not only are the estimation methodologies of ce and nha
different, but as part of the procedures, the items are classi
fied differently. In general, for this study, classification
differences are reconciled (although not completely) by
nha
grouping subcategories in
egories in NHA.
ce
to match more aggregated cat
T his review shows general consistency and similarity be
tween the ce and nha data, giving us confidence in the ce
estimates. As data from the continuing Consumer Expendi
ture Survey becomes available, we will evaluate the results;
however, emphasis will be on analyzing expenditures by
characteristics.
□
-FOOTNOTES
1 Medicare and medicaid are Federal health insurance programs. Medi
care, initially established in 1966 for the aged, was expanded in 1973 to
include disabled beneficiaries under the Social Security and railroad retire
ment programs. It was again expanded in 1978 to include persons under 65
years o f age who require dialysis or a kidney transplant for end-stage renal
disease. Medicaid was established in 1966 to provide health insurance for
certain low-income families.
2 Katherine R. Levit, Helen Lazenby, Daniel R. Waldo, and Lawrence
M. Davidoff, “National Health Expenditures, 1984,” Health Care Financ
ing Review, Fall 1985, p. 16.
3 The Consumer Expenditure Survey, a sample survey, is subject to two
types o f errors. Sampling errors occur because the data are collected from
a sample rather than the entire population. Nonsampling errors result from
an inability or unwillingness o f the respondents to provide correct informa
tion, differences in interviewer ability, mistakes in recording or coding, or
other processing errors. Standard error tables are available from the Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, n h a estimates are subject to estimation, and sampling
errors. While there are no statistical measures o f error for the residual
estimates, there is estimation error, and a residual is subject to error from
both component estimates from which it is derived. For further discussion
o f NHA concepts and estimation, see Levit and others, “National Health,”
pp. 2 7 -3 0 . The n h a estimates are also subject to revision as new estimates
become available from the source data and new methodologies are em
ployed.
4 A consumer unit consists o f all members of a particular housing unit or
other type o f living quarters who are related by blood, marriage, or adop
tion, or some other legal arrangement, such as foster children. Consumer
unit determination for unrelated persons is based on financial independ
ence.
18
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5 The Consumer Expenditure Survey population includes the civilian
noninstitutional population of the United States, as well as that portion of
the institutional population living in the following group quarters: boarding
house facilities for students and workers; staff units in hospitals and homes
for the aged, infirmed, or needy; permanent living quarters in hotels and
motels; and mobile home parks. Armed Forces personnel living outside
military installations were included in the coverage while Armed Forces
personnel living on post were excluded. Rural data are not available in the
c e survey from 1981 through 1983 because the rural sample was discontin
ued during that period.
6 Reimbursements are credited when received and do not necessarily
refer to the period of the expenditure. However, on an annual basis, this
time discrepancy is not considered to have much effect.
7 Annual aggregate expenditures for ce medical care were derived for the
total population. For years in which rural data were not collected, urban
expenditures were adjusted by ratios of total U .S. and urban U .S. aggre
gates from the most recent period available.
8 Health insurance is excluded from the comparisons because the out-ofpocket payments are not available from the National Health Accounts.
Nursing home care is also excluded from the comparisons because the
coverage in the two sources is not comparable.
9 For further details, see Levit and others, “National Health,” p. 4.
10 “Consumer Expenditures and Income,” bls Handbook of Methods,
Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982).
11 Levit and others, “National Health,” p. 30.
12 Levit and others, “National Health,” p. 27.
Early retirement as a labor force policy:
an international overview
In recent years , governments and firms
have increasingly turned to early-out schemes
to soak up excess labor supply;
the projected aging of western populations threatens
the viability of such schemes, which have the unfortunate
side effect of masking macroeconomic failings
B arry A lan M irkin
In grappling with the problems posed by high and persistent
unemployment which continue to plague the countries of
Western Europe and North America, an array of labor mar
ket policies have been implemented to lower or at least
contain the ranks of the unemployed. Such policies aim at
influencing the supply of or the demand for labor.1
Stimulating demand traditionally has been the main pol
icy tool against joblessness. In recent years, however, there
has been a noticeable trend away from demand expansion
out of fear of rekindling the inflationary spiral. Instead,
there has been a growing reliance on supply-oriented meas
ures, such as restrictions on labor migration from abroad,
repatriation of foreign guest workers, reduction of hours of
work, work sharing arrangements, and increases in the legal
working age and the number of years of mandatory school
ing. The most frequently employed among such methods,
however, have been policies to induce early retirement
through various social security schemes.
These early retirement programs, many of which were
initially formulated to achieve broad social goals rather
Barry Alan Mirkin is an economic affairs officer with the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva, Switzerland. This article is an
earlier and somewhat expanded version o f a study published in Economic
Commission for Europe, Economic Survey of Europe in 1985-1986 (New
York, United Nations, 1986), pp. 9 6-109. The views expressed herein are
those o f the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the United
Nations.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
than labor market equilibrium, have taken several forms:
(1) prerecession schemes, originally introduced within
the framework of social policies to benefit older workers,
which have been expanded or more aggressively pursued;2
(2) other types of schemes, such as disability programs, into
which economic and additional health criteria have been
introduced;3 and (3) specific recession-oriented measures to
promote premature retirement which were established in
response to chronic high rates of unemployment of the
1970’s and early 1980’s. In practice, however, it is often
difficult to distinguish among these three categories.
Only incipient in the early 1970’s, the trend toward
broadening eligibility for retirement and disability programs
as a means of alleviating unemployment gained momentum
as unemployment remained resistent to other labor market
policies. This gradual blurring of the boundaries between
the retirement, disability compensation, and employment
objectives of the measures has contributed to enormous
strains on public and private pension systems, while the
extent to which the schemes have alleviated unemployment
remains controversial.
Whereas public policy in the United States has been mod
ified in recent years to encourage the postponement of retire
ment, in Europe, early retirement schemes have tended to be
more pervasive. Several factors help to explain these differ
ing approaches to influencing labor market developments.
19
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
First, the governments of Western Europe have been under
considerably more pressure than that of the United States to
implement early retirement plans to alleviate high unem
ployment. This is a consequence of the stagnation in em
ployment expansion in Western Europe as compared to the
substantial employment generation that has taken place in
the United States. One reflection of this divergence in the
pattern of job creation is the unemployment rate. In 1985,
the average annual unemployment rate for 13 countries of
Western Europe was approximately 9.7 percent. This con
trasts sharply with an unemployment rate of 7.0 percent
experienced by the United States the same year.4 A second
factor can be attributed to differences in the pace of aging.
Normally defined as the population age 60 and over, the
aged in Western Europe made up 14.3 percent of the total
population in 1950 and 19.2 percent in 1985, while in the
United States, the aged represented 12.1 percent and 16.3
percent of the population, respectively. This difference in
the extent of aging is expected to continue into the near
future. By the year 2000, the aged are projected to be 21.1
percent of the population in Western Europe and 16.0 per
cent in the United States.5
This article presents a brief discussion of early retirement
programs in general, followed by an inventory of specific
measures implemented on a country-by-country basis. The
impact of the schemes on the labor force participation of
older workers is then examined. Selected schemes are ana
lyzed in greater detail and provide the basis for conclusions
concerning their use in curbing unemployment.
The nature of early-out schemes
Early retirement strategies are widely used to cope with
problems such as those posed by labor market rigidities, the
introduction of new technologies, restructuring activities
resulting in redundancies and overmanning, and job search
difficulties among certain population groups. These
schemes can be categorized by target group— that is, em
ployed workers, unemployed workers, or disabled workers.
Early retirement for employed workers is often, though
not always, pursued for the purpose of providing greater
employment opportunities for young people, a group that
has suffered from especially high rates of unemployment.
Such schemes may encourage older workers nearing retire
ment age to cease labor market activity prematurely. An
example is the Job Release Scheme, introduced in the
United Kingdom in 1977, which made the retiree’s receipt
of a pension conditional on the hiring by his or her employer
of an unemployed person, although not necessarily to fill the
same position. In Denmark, the implementation in 1979 of
a national program permitting early retirement attracted far
more workers the first year than expected. The plan, how
ever, does not stipulate that another person be recruited to
fill the vacancy left by the retiree.
Early retirement for unemployed workers normally re
quires that a worker be registered as unemployed for a
20
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
specified period before becoming eligible for a pension. For
example, in France, the Guarantee of Resources Agreement
between the employers’ federation and the labor unions
provided a pension of approximately 70 percent of preretire
ment pay to redundant workers at age 60 if they agreed not
to take other employment. Introduced in 1972, this plan was
discontinued in 1984 when the normal retirement age was
lowered from 65 to 60 years of age.
Disability pensions have been a standard feature of social
security schemes in Western industrialized nations for sev
eral decades. Awarded to workers who have a physical or
psychological disability which either precludes gainful em
ployment or only allows employment at a reduced level, the
payments were not explicitly designed to induce early retire
ment. Recently, however, they have taken on growing
prominence as a means for early retirement as definitions of
disability have become increasingly broad.
Exhibit 1 provides a summary of many of the schemes
that have been devised to encourage the premature cessation
of labor market activities. It indicates the diversity as well
as the extent to which such plans have become firmly rooted
in labor market policy. While disability pensions are not
early retirement schemes per se, they have been included in
the discussion because they have been manipulated to re
duce labor supply and unemployment in a number of coun
tries. Generally, early retirement pensions tend to be limited
to groups of workers who meet specified qualifying condi
tions, such as full or partial disability, unemployment, long
service, or employment in arduous or hazardous occupa
tions. In addition, in several countries, those who meet
minimum qualifying conditions and who are willing to ac
cept an actuarially reduced benefit can elect early retire
ment.
Among the myriad types of schemes are those permitting
partial or gradual retirement in France, the Federal Republic
of Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom and a
host of private plans, found in the United Kingdom and the
United States. The schemes can operate at the national,
industry, occupation, or firm level. The trend generally has
been to add new early retirement options to encompass more
workers. More recently, schemes based on agreements
signed between the government and unions (France, the
Federal Republic of Germany, and Italy), between indus
tries and unions (France and the United States), as well as
company-specific plans (the United States) have become
more widespread. As exhibit 2 indicates, the availability of
early retirement options is greatest in Austria, Belgium,
France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, and Swe
den. At the other end of the spectrum are Canada, Norway,6
and Switzerland, where only disability pensions exist.
As a consequence of the long-term trend in improving the
conditions of workers and the implementation of broad so
cioeconomic goals, legislative modifications of pension
schemes have generally expanded the population covered,
increased benefits, lowered the entitlement age, and relaxed
Exhibit 1.
Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961-85
Country
Retirement age
M-male
F-female
Normal
Austria
Belgium
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
65 M
60 F
65 M
60 F
Program
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
Early
55 M
50 F
Early retirement for
the unemployed
(began 1961)
180 months of insurance (24 in previous
3 years) and unemployed 1 year for economic
or structural reasons
30 percent o f earnings in
last 5 years
60 M
55 F
Special retirement
benefit (began 1961)
In certain sectors after 35 years of service; also
for those engaged in physically demanding
work (57 M, 52 F)
67 percent of earnings
during previous year
Disability
Loss of 50 percent of normal earnings capacity
67 percent o f earnings
during previous year or
percent of full pension
corresponding to per
centage loss o f earnings
capacity
55
Contractual early re
tirement for redun
dant older workers
(began 1974)
Workers in private sector or temporary workers
in public sector unemployed for at least 1 year;
in certain cases, early retirement age is below
55
Unemployment benefit
supplemented by al
lowance of 1,000 francs
per mont’i until normal
retirement age
60 M
55 F
Replacement of work
ers taking early retire
ment (1976-83)
Employer must replace the worker by a person
under age 30 who must work for at least 1 year
Unemployment benefit
supplemented by early
retirement pension equal
to one-half o f the differ
ence between the refer
ence wage and the un
employment benefit
60 M
55 F
Special early retire
ment benefit (1978—
82)
Unemployed for at least 1 year
Person can choose be
tween unemployment
benefit plus 1,000
francs/month or old-age
pension based on previ
ous salary
64 M
Pension for longservice or arduous oc
cupations (began
1976)
Employed for 45 years with at least 185 days
in each year or employed in arduous occupa
tions for 5 o f previous 15 years
Full pension
Early retirement for
border commuters
Frontier workers unemployed for at least 2
years
Unemployment benefit
supplemented by al
lowance of 10 percent of
previous net salary
60 M
55 F
Early retirement
(began 1983 to re
place second Belgian
scheme above)
Retiree must be replaced by another worker
Pension entitled to at
normal retirement age
55
Exceptions for the
unemployed over age
55 (Royal decree of
December 29, 1984)
Person must have been unemployed for 624
days during the previous 4 years
Unemployment benefit
Disability
Loss of two-thirds of earnings capacity
If totally disabled, 100
percent of earnings; if
partially disabled, per
centage of full pension
corresponding to degree
of incapacity
21
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
Exhibit 1. Continued—Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961-85
Retirement age
M-male
F-femaie
Country
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
Prolonged incapacity for substantial gainful ac
tivity
If totally disabled, 75
percent to 90 percent of
earnings depending on
Province; if partially dis
abled, proportion of full
pension corresponding to
impairment
Member of an unemployment insurance fund
for at least 10 o f the last 15 years or, in case
of unemployment, satisfy conditions for daily
cash benefits; part-time workers also eligible
For full-time workers,
70.000 kroner for first
l \ years, 56,000 kroner
for next 2 years, and
42.000 kroner until nor
mal retirement age
Earnings capacity that is permanently reduced
by at least 50 percent; for those aged 50 to 66,
ill health or social circumstances
Old-age pension
Disability
Earnings capacity that is permanently reduced
by at least two-thirds
75 percent of average
earnings if totally dis
abled; if 50-percent to
99-percent disabled, per
centage of full pension
proportionate to loss of
earnings capacity
60
Unemployment Pen
sion (began 1961)
Person who has received unemployment bene
fits or assistance for 200 days in previous 60
weeks and for whom authorities cannot find
work; retirement age was temporarily reduced
to 55 in 1983, increasing annually thereafter to
60 in 1988
Up to 80 percent of
earnings
63
Pension Support
(1979-80)
Retiree is replaced by unemployed person
under age 25
55
Special early retire
ment
Under certain circumstances, veterans or farm
ers who sell or transfer ownership of their
farms
Disability
Unable to work because o f permanent physical
or mental disability
Up to 80 percent of
earnings; if working
ability reduced to 40
percent to 60 percent,
one-half of full disability
pension
Special Contracts of
the National Employ
ment Fund (began
1962)
Workers made redundant for economic reasons
80 percent to 90 percent
of previous salary
Normal
Canada
65
Denmark
67
Early
Disability
60
18
Finland
France
65
65 (until
1983)
60 (from
1984)
22
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Program
60
2
Social Pensions Act
of 1984:1
Voluntary early
retirement
(began 1979)
Early retirement
(began 1977)
60
Income guarantee
-for redundant
workers
(1972-83)
-for workers re
signing (1977-83)
60
Early retirement
70 percent o f salary in
the previous 6 months
Hazardous working conditions, manual work
ers, mothers with 3 or more children, prisoners
of war, veterans
Exhibit 1. Continued—Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961- 85
Country
Retirement age
M-male
F-female
Normal
France—
continued
Federal Republic
o f Germany
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63-65
Program
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
55
Agreement for Social
Protection in the Steel
Industry (1977, 1979)
Workers in the steel industry which was in the
process of restructuring
70 percent of previous
gross salary; government
contributes to costs, as
does the eec in some
cases
56
Contracts of the Na
tional Employment
Fund (began 1980)
Workers made redundant for economic reasons
65 percent of net salary
55
Solidarity Contracts
(1982-88)
Youth or unemployed worker must be hired for
2 years; also possibility of partial retirement
whereby worker receives one-half of previous
salary
65 percent of salary
55 (50
in
certain
cases)
General Agreement
for the Protection of
Workers in the Steel
Industry undergoing
restructuring (began
1984)
Workers whose jobs have been abolished
75 percent of former
gross monthly salary and
20 percent of a year’s
wage until retirement
age
Disability
Disability of 50 percent
100 percent o f earnings
60
Early retirement (be
gan 1957)
Women with at least 15 years of contributions
Full pension
60
Early retirement for
unemployment
15 years of contributions and unemployed for
at least 52 weeks within the previous 18
months
Full pension
63
Early retirement for
long service (began
1973)
35 years of contributions
Full pension
59
Social Plan (began
1979) by some
major steel producers
such as Thyssen C o.3
None
Unemployment compen
sation plus a supplement
from the company until
age 60, then normal
early retirement benefits
Automobile Industry
(Opel, Daimler-Benz,
Volkswagen)
Varies according to company
Varies according to
company
Early
Program for individ
ual sectors:
60
Metal industry
(began 1981)
None
90 percent of previous
net salary
58
Chemical indus
try (began 1982)
None
75 percent of previous
net salary
58
Collective agreements
(1984-88)
Vacancy must be filled by person outside the
firm and no company required to grant pension
to more than 5 percent of employees; condi
tions among agreements differ; partial early re
tirement also possible
At least 65 percent of
previous salary; under
certain conditions, gov
ernment pays 35 percent
of pension
Disability
Totally unable to work or earn sufficient
salary; person must have worked for at least 3
years in previous 5-year period; partial disabil
ity available if ability to earn in relation to
healthy person with same qualifications is re
duced by one-half because of medical reasons
Full pension; if partial
disability, two-thirds of
full pension or if earn
ings loss of 20 percent
to 49 percent, pension
corresponds to this loss
23
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
Exhibit 1. Continued—Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961-85
Retirement age
M-male
F-female
Country
Normal
Greece
Italy
65 M
60 F
60 M
55 F
65
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
Early
Early retirement
Arduous work or 10,000 days of insured work
Full pension
Early retirement
(began 1979)
Unemployed due to economic crisis or indus
trial reorganization and member o f pension
scheme for at least 15 years
Not available
Early retirement
35 years o f contribution
Not available
Solidarity contracts
(began 1984)
Company has not dismissed any workers in the
previous year and signs a collective agreement
to increase employment accordingly; worker re
duces working time by 50 percent
Normal pension
Disability (began
1965)
Total inability to work
If totally disabled,
100 percent of earnings
in previous year; if 61percent to 79-percent
disabled, pension pro
portionate to percentage
of incapacity; if 11percent to 60-percent
disabled, pension is 50
percent to 60 percent of
percentage of incapacity
60
Unemployment Bene
fits Act (wwv)
Workers unemployed for preceding
2^ years
Unemployment benefit
62
Early retirement, col
lective agreements in
specific sectors4
( v u t , began 1977)
10 years of employment
80 percent to 85 percent
of final salary
Disability Security
Act ( w a o , began
1967)
Employees with a disability of at least 15 per
cent and unemployed for at least 1 year
Between 50 percent and
90 percent of previous
salary, depending on de
gree of disability
General Disability
Act ( a a w , began
1976)
Employees and non-employees with an income
of at least 4,447 guilders in year preceding dis
ability
Can not exceed net
statutory wage
60
55
or
62
57
M
F
M
F
55 M
50 F
58 M
53 W
Netherlands
Program
Norway
67
18
Disability (began
1971)
Working capacity reduced by at least 50 per
cent due to physical or mental impairment; ac
count is also taken of likelihood of finding em
ployment
Up to 100 percent of
base amount (22,800
kroner in 1983); if par
tial disability, pension
proportional to loss of
earning capacity
Portugal
65 M
62 F
60
Early retirement for
the unemployed
Unemployed for 720 days
Not available
55
Early retirement for
workers in physically
demanding occupa
tions
Miners, fishermen, longshoremen, and sailors
Not available
Disability
Loss of two-thirds of earnings capacity
The higher of two-thirds
of minimum wage or
one-half of earnings; if
disability 30 percent or
more, percentage of full
pension corresponding to
degree of disability
24
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Exhibit 1. Continued—Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961-85
Retirement age
M-male
F-female
Country
Normal
Spain
Sweden
65
65
Switzerland
65 M
62 F
United Kingdom
65 M
60 F
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Program
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
Early retirement
Employer must replace retiree with youth seek
ing first job; the normal retirement age is lower
than 65 for those doing difficult, dangerous, or
unhealthy work
Minimum of 21,000 pe
setas per month
Disability
100-percent reduction of capacity to work in
own trade or profession; for partial pension,
33-percent reduction in work capacity
100 percent o f actual
earnings with minimum
o f 23,565 pesetas per
month
Early
64
60
Actuarially reduced
pension (began 1963)
60
Early retirement
(began 1972)
60
Collective agreement
with large firms and
some industries
(began 1975)
60
Flexible retirement
with part-time em
ployment (began
1976)
Employed 5 out of the last 12 months; worker
must transfer from full- to part-time work and
work at least 17 hours a week
50 percent o f salary lost
due to part-time employ
ment
Disability (began
1970)
Working capacity reduced by one-half due to
physical or mental impairment or on grounds
of redundancy (special medical examination not
required); partial disability available on
grounds o f premature aging or mental incapac
ity
Full pension
Disability (began
1960)
Earnings capacity must be reduced by at least
two-thirds or 360 days o f total incapacity for
work followed by at least 50-percent loss of
earning capacity
Same as old-age pension
plus supplement to guar
antee a minimum subsistance level
62 -6 4 M
59 F
Job Release Scheme5
(began 1977)
Employer must replace retiree with someone
from unemployment register; can be indirectly
replaced by promotion or transfer; early retire
ment age for men also depends on marital
status and income o f spouse; lowered to age 60
for the disabled
£50-71 a week depend
ing on marital status and
degree of disability
60 M
Early Retirement Pen
sion (began 1981)
Men unemployed for at least 1 year
Long-term supplemen
tary unemployment ben
efit
62 -6 4 M
59 F
Part-time Job Release
Scheme (began 1983)
Worker must shift to part-time work and unem
ployed person recruited for other one-half of
job; from May 1985, employers recruiting un
employed replacement workers that meet cer
tain conditions receive grant of up to £840
£29-41 a week depend
ing on marital status,
with supplement o f £4
Disability
100-percent disabled
Up to £54 a week plus
unemployment supple
ment of £31 a week; if
20-percent to 90-percent
disabled, £ 1 1-4 8 a week
Pension reduced by 0.6
percent per month for
each month prior to age
65
Unemployment benefit has been paid for maxi
mum period or labor market assistance has
been paid for 450 days and opportunity to earn
a salary is permanently reduced by one-half
Full pension
70 percent of salary
25
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
Exhibit 1. Continued—Inventory of early retirement and disability schemes in Europe and North America, 1961-85
Retirement age
M-male
F-female
Country
Normal
United States
656
Program
Conditions for eligibility
Amount of pension
Early
Benefits reduced 5/9 of
1 percent for each
month prior to normal
age7
62
Early Retirement Op
tion (began 1956 for
women, 1961 for
men)
558
Private pension plans
Depends on plan
Depends on plan
Public employee
plans
Depends on plan
Depends on plan
Basic steel collective
agreements9
Employees whose service is interrupted by a
plant or department shutdown
Varies
Early retirement in
individual firms (for
example, Dupont,
Caterpillar Tractor,
began 1985)
Varies with firm
Varies with firm
Disability Insurance
Program
Person is unable to work due to physical or
Varies
m ed ic a l im p a irm en t e x p e c te d to la st at lea st
1 year or result in death
Commission o f the
European Commu
nities
55
Social volet, 198110
1 In 1984, the Danish Parliament passed Act No. 217 which codified into a
single act all the previous schemes.
2 Incentive o f 5 percent a year for delaying retirement has been eliminated.
3 Under the reorganization plan adopted in the Saar in 1977, the early retire
ment age was set at 55.
4 In 1979, it was extended to include public sector workers.
5 Originally applicable only in Assisted Areas, it was extended to rest of
country.
6 In 1983, eligibility age for full retirement benefits was raised from 65 to 67,
eligibility requirements. However, since the early 1970’s, a
number of strategies have been implemented based upon
short-run cyclical considerations, rather than on long-term
perspectives. As unfavorable developments in the world
economy beginning in the late 1960’s generally raised un
employment levels and reduced the ability of economically
vulnerable groups, including the aged and the disabled, to
find and retain suitable employment, pressures mounted for
additional initiatives. The result was a series of new plans
combined with a relaxation and reinterpretation of existing
laws. By 1975, for example, Italy had adopted provisions
for early retirement with full benefits for long service, while
Belgium, Finland, France, and Sweden permitted early re
tirement for reasons of involuntary unemployment, and in
Austria and the Federal Republic of Germany either condi
tion was sufficient.
In recent years, governments have shied away from low
ering statutory retirement ages, preferring instead to rely on
early retirement schemes. One possible explanation for this
preference is the intended temporary character of these
schemes, while modifying the statutory retirement age im
26
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Workers in steel companies undergoing restruc
turing; retirement age is 50 in special cases
Given for up to 3 years
to be gradually phased in between 2002 and 2027.
7 jn [ 983 ^the early retirement reduction in benefits claimed at age 62 was raised
from 20 percent to 30 percent, to be phased in gradually between 2002 and 2027.
8 Most common minimum age.
9 For example, Pension Agreement Between the United States Steel Corporation
and the United Steelworkers o f America, July 31, 1980.
10 Matching contribution from member state.
S ources : See Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Survey of Europe
in 1985-1986 (New York, United Nations, 1986), p. 109.
plies a permanent change. Such strategies permit a review
and adjustment of early retirement schemes in the light of
changing employment conditions and minimize the possibil
ity of early retirement being enshrined as a right.
As already noted, other developments have involved dis
ability pensions. In the Federal Republic of Germany, Fin
land, and the Netherlands, a series of changes in the defini
tion of disability in the 1960’s and 1970’s provoked a
substantial jump in the awarding of benefits on these
grounds. In Germany, the Federal Social Court issued rul
ings in 1969 and 1976 requiring pension institutions to place
greater emphasis on whether an appropriate job existed in
adequate numbers before reaching an unfavorable disability
determination. In 1973, legislation in Finland eased the
statutory disability definition to permit a person’s overall
social situation to be taken into account. That same year, the
Netherlands also broadened the definition of disability in the
light of prevailing labor market conditions by taking into
consideration the likelihood of the disabled finding suitable
employment. In Sweden, disability pensions can be
awarded on the grounds of redundancy without a medical
examination of the applicant, and in Norway, the employ
ment situation is one of the factors used in determining the
degree of disability. In addition, Norway and Sweden per
mit early retirement on grounds of “premature aging.” Con
sequently, in a number of countries many awards for total
disability have been granted to those only partially incapac
itated but for whom no suitable job was available.
The nature of the retirement decision
A multitude of factors, alone or in conjunction, influence
a worker’s decision to withdraw prematurely from the labor
force. These factors include the difference between postand pre-retirement income, the unemployment rate, the ex
tent of social security benefits and availability of private
pension plans, the tax structure, and the inflation rate. Other
factors, while not economic (and more difficult to quantify),
are no less important in the decision to opt for early retire
ment. These are job satisfaction, stress, ill health or disabil
ity, the desire for leisure, marital status, and the presence of
dependents.
By encouraging workers to retire prematurely, the
schemes described above have contributed to one of the
most prominent labor market developments since the early
1960’s, namely the unprecedented drop in the participation
rates of older men.7 Since 1960 (and particularly after
1970), participation rates have fallen precipitously among
men aged 60 to 64, while declining less sharply, but in most
cases still substantially, for those aged 55 to 59. This despite
modest increases in life expectancy at older ages, improve
ments in health conditions and levels of educational attain
ment, and a long-term trend towards higher levels of infla
tion, all of which would provide a stimulus for labor market
activity.
Table 1 presents comparative data on the labor force
Exhibit 2.
participation rates of older workers for selected years. For
11 countries of Western Europe and North America, the
unweighted average of activity rates for men aged 60 to 64
fell from 60.6 percent in 1975 to 44.0 percent by around
1984. Within the relatively brief 14-year span between 1970
and 1984, labor market activity rates of such men plum
meted by more than 2.5 percentage points annually in Bel
gium, Denmark, France, Germany, and the Netherlands;
fell to a lesser extent in Austria, Finland, and the United
Kingdom (between 1.5 and 2.5 percentage points a year);
and declined more modestly in Italy, Sweden, and the
United States (less than 1.5 points a year). An average
decline of 2.8 points took place in France, despite pension
rates which are very progressive between the ages of 60 and
65 and which thus would discourage early retirement.8
Falling participation has also characterized men aged 55
to 59 in 9 of the 10 countries for which data are available.
However, in all of those countries, the decline was consid
erably less steep than for men in the subsequent 5-year age
group. This is not surprising given the fact that, for the
majority of early retirement schemes, eligibility is limited to
workers aged 60 to 64. For all countries, the average un
weighted activity rate of men 55 to 59 declined from 83.2
percent to 77.2 percent between 1975 and 1984.
Generalizations concerning the pace of changes in partic
ipation rates are difficult. Since 1980, the rate of decline in
male participation for those aged 60 to 64 has tapered off in
six countries (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Swe
den, and the United States), and it is likely that a lower limit
is being approached in these countries. In France, the
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, the declines in par
ticipation rates have accelerated since 1980.
Trends in women’s participation rates display a greater
degree of divergence than those for men. Between 1970 and
Availability of early retirem ent options in 14 countries, 1985
Early retirem ent option
Country
Disability Unemployment Reduced
benefit
Austria ..................... ..............................................
Belgium ..................................................................
Denmark ................................................................
F in lan d ....................................................................
France ....................................................................
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Federal Republic of G erm any..............................
Italy ........................................................................
Netherlands ...........................................................
Norway ..................................................................
S w eden....................................................................
Switzerland ...........................................................
United Kingdom ...................................................
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C a n a d a ....................................................................
United States .........................................................
X
X
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—
Long
service
Arduous
occupations
Partial
retirem ent
X
X
X
X
_
—
__
__
_
_
_
X
—
X
X
X
X
__
X
X
_
—
__
__
__
__
__
_
_
_
X
X
X
__
X
__
—
—
—
X
—
X
—
—
—
_
27
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Table 1.
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
Labor force participation rates of older workers by age and sex, selected years, 1970-84
Country
and sex
Average
annual
change
1980
1984
_
_
374.0
81.8
67.6
80.9
'75.1
470.5
687.8
70.0
68.1
-2 .0
0.5
-0.5
-1 .7
82.3
74.8
74.2
87.7
90.1
80.1
'73.3
472.6
687.2
82.0
-0 .7
-0 .6
-1.4
-0.3
-0 .8
1970
1975
_
_
65 years and over
60-64 years
55-59 years
1970
1975
1980
1984
Average
annual
change
47.7
65.0
-
37.1
58.3
574.5
52.8
56.7
27.5
340.1
59.7
43.0
47.6
121.5
434.1
656.9
43.0
31.1
-2 .0
-4.0
-2 .9
-1 .6
-2 .8
74.7
48.2
773.9
778.1
782.9
58.3
42.4
64.9
74.0
82.3
44.2
39.6
50.1
69.0
71.2
35.2
136.8
443.7
668.4
56.7
-2 .8
-0.9
-3 .0
-0.9
-2 .0
Average
annual
change
1970
1975
1980
1984
-
19.0
“
212.4
2.547.0
10.4
222.7
25.9
2.38.8
236.0
17.0
214.3
1.26.7
2.46.2
634.5
12.0
211.0
0.3
-1.0
-2.1
-0 .5
-1 .3
230.6
12.9
711.4
728.9
2.730.4
11.0
10.4
8.0
19.9
225.9
7.4
12.6
4.8
14.2
216.6
29.4
116.3
44.1
11.1
213.5
-1 .5
0.3
-0 .7
-1 .6
-1 .3
Men
_
Austria..............................
Belgium ............................
Denmark............................
Finland..............................
France ..............................
76.6
-
82.2
584.5
71.3
83.3
Germany............................
Ita ly ..................................
Netherlands.....................
Sw eden............................
United Kingdom8...............
89.2
81.0
786.9
790.9
793.1
85.7
77.8
80.3
89.7
93.0
Canada..............................
United S tates...................
_
_
_
_
_
89.5
84.4
81.9
80.2
-0 .7
75.0
65.7
61.0
56.1
-1 .4
24.3
26.8
18.5
21.7
14.7
19.1
12.6
16.3
-3 .2
-0.8
Average........................
86.7
83.2
79.5
77.2
-0 .8
68.2
60.6
50.3
44.0
-2.2
23.0
18.9
14.3
12.8
-1 .3
_
_
-
35.9
-
7.8
531.2
32.5
29.8
45.8
630.4
38.0
19.0
-0 .4
-0.3
-0.1
0.2
-1 .2
-
-0 .7
1.8
0.7
-0.1
8.8
36.4
28.9
27.4
27.3
17.6
319.1
52.0
57.0
47.3
125.9
417.2
658.5
66.0
42.9
_
21.3
547.6
56.4
43.5
22.7
2,31.7
212.7
6.0
26.8
1.24 .O
2,42.5
613.1
4.0
225.9
0.4
0.0
0.2
0.0
-0 .6
37.2
18.2
717.7
754.6
750.9
38.4
17.3
17.9
60.8
52.4
38.7
21.4
18.2
68.8
53.6
40.2
120.8
420.2
872.1
51.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
1.6
0.0
22.5
10.6
711.9
734.5
728.8
16.4
8.5
10.7
38.3
28.6
13.0
11.0
9.8
41.0
22.4
11.8
110.5
49.9
646.2
21.2
-0 .8
0.0
-0.2
1.1
- 0 .6
3.0
3.5
0.9
3.7
23.6
24.5
14.3
40.8
3.8
23 .O
-0 .4
0.1
-0.1
-0.4
-0 .3
Canada..............................
United S tates...................
_
_
_
_
-
49.0
47.9
48.6
49.8
0.1
36.1
33.3
A verage.......................
40.5
40.4
42.5
42.2
0.4
25.8
23.7
-
_
_
-
-
Women
_
Belgium ............................
Denmark............................
Finland..............................
France ..............................
Germany............................
Ita ly ..................................
Netherlands.....................
Sw eden............................
United Kingdom8...............
_
56.1
_
_
1 Data relate to 1983.
2
Data relate to persons age 65 to 69 years.
3 Data relate to 1979.
4 Data relate to 1981.
3 Data relate to 1976.
6 Data relate to 1982.
7 Data relate to 1971.
8 Data relate to Great Britain only.
Note : Dashes indicate data are not available.
1984, women aged 60 to 64 reduced their rates by more than
0.5 point a year in three of the countries studied, while in six
countries the activity rate changed little (between —0.3 and
+0.2 point on an average annual basis). Sweden was excep
tional in that a significant increase took place (1.1 percent
age points a year). For women aged 55 to 59, participation
rates declined only in Belgium and France. Generally, the
male-female ratio of early pensioners for Western Europe as
a whole has been approximately 3 to 1, whereas the ratio of
men to women in the labor force has been around 1.6 in
recent years. One conclusion to be drawn from the data is
that older women, particularly those not married, display a
stronger labor force attachment than their male counterparts.
Among the possible reasons for this phenomenon is that the
shorter time women spend in the labor force and lower
wages of female workers result in smaller lifetime earnings
upon which pension benefits are based. In addition, early
retirement programs have been concentrated in the industrial
28
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
33.3
33.4
-0.2
20.8
21.3
-0 .2
-
-
4.4
210.7
2.6
72.2
78.7
276.3
-
22.5
12.1
2.52.9
211.7
4.4
2.1
1.7
6.1
24.9
-
9.7
8.3
4.3
8.1
4.7
7.5
-1.8
-0 .2
6.4
5.7
4.8
4.8
-0 .4
Source: Mikrozensus 1983, Beitrage Zur Osterreichen Statistik, Vienna, 1984; Statistiches
Handbuch für die Republik Österreich, various issues, Österreichischen Statistisches
Zentralamt; Eurostat, Labour Force Sample Surveys, various issues, Luxembourg; Arbeidsmarked, Danmarks Statistik,various issues, Copenhagen; Labour Reports, various issues, Min
istry of Labour, Helsinki, Finland; Annuaire Statistique de la France, 1984, insee, Paris; Enquête
Sur l ’Emploi de 1984, les Collections de I’ insee, D 105; Statistisches Jahrbuch, various issues,
Statistisches Bundesamt, Wiesbaden; Annuario di Statistico delLavoro, various issues, Institute
Centrale di Statistica, Rome; Netherlands, unpublished data provided by the Central Statistical
Office, 1985; For GammaI För Arbete? Betänkande fran aldrearbetskommittén, Stockholm,
1983; The Labour Force Sun/eys 1970-1980, Statistiska Meddelanden, AM 1981:33, Stock
holm; Arbetskraftsandersökningarna 1984, Statistika Meddelanden, Am 12 SM 8501 ; Employ
ment Gazette, July 1985, Department of Employment, London; The Labour Force, various
issues, Statistics Canada, Ottawa; Employment and Earnings, various issues, Department of
Labor, Washington DC.
sector, and particularly manufacturing. It is in this sector
that men predominate to a greater degree than in the total
labor force.
Program characteristics and costs
Despite the extensive number and coverage of early re
tirement schemes, data do not exist in sufficient detail to
permit the scope and effects of the schemes to be quantified.
One difficulty is the fact that several different funds in a
single country may dispense pensions, with no agency col
lecting data on a national basis. (In France, for example,
there are currently more than 100 different pension funds.)
Thus, information on numbers of early retirees, their previ
ous occupational and industrial characteristics, and the costs
incurred for early-out programs is for the most part not
published regularly, if at all. In the United States, the exis
tence of a vast array of private pension schemes (about
500,000) operating independently of the Social Security
system makes data collection virtually impossible.9 In re
cent years, a number of U.S. companies have offered
“golden handshakes,” or early retirement, to employees as
a means of thinning out their work forces, but data on such
programs are, of course, not reported to Social Security
authorities.10 Table 2 provides some estimates of the size of
the various programs, which, if aggregated, indicate that in
Western Europe and North America there were more than 5
million recipients of early retirement pensions and at least
11 million recipients of disability pensions in 1984. To the
extent that private pension plans are operating, these num
bers are understated. To gauge the relative size of such
programs, the numbers of disabled as a proportion of the
total labor force and of early retirees as a proportion of the
appropriate age group have also been calculated.
Many of the legislative and policy changes of recent years
are reflected in the data. The number of disability pensions
in force as a percentage of the labor force increased from 6.4
percent to 8.7 percent in the Federal Republic of Germany
between 1975 and 1984, went from 7.9 percent to 9.4 per
cent in Finland between 1970 and 1983, and almost tripled,
from 4.4 percent to 12.2 percent, in the Netherlands be
tween 1970 and 1984. For many years of the study period,
the number of disability pensions awarded to men in the
Federal Republic of Germany exceeded the number of re
tirement pensions. During the 1970’s, the proportion of
traditional pensions fell from 40 percent to 10 percent of the
total as a consequence of the high takeup of early retirement
and disability schemes. Another contributing factor in the
flourishing of disability pensions in a number of countries is
a replacement ratio (benefits as a proportion of previous
earnings) for disability payments that often is higher than
that for unemployment payments. In some cases, the pen
sion exceeds predisability income. The rapid growth in the
United States disability program, however, is surprising, as
the criteria for disability have remained quite stringent and
the program is not intended to pay benefits to either healthy
unemployed workers or to those with only marginal impair
ments. Nevertheless, the number receiving disability bene
fits in that country rose sharply between 1970 and 1980.11
One basic distinction among national disability systems
has been the minimum reduction of work capacity required
for eligibility. In the Netherlands, a reduction of only 15
percent is necessary, while in many countries, it is between
50 percent and 66 percent. The United Kingdom and the
United States are at the other end of the spectrum, demand
ing that the recipient be totally incapable of work. It is
interesting to note that in the Netherlands and in Sweden
(where only a 50-percent reduction in work capacity is re
quired), more than 85 percent of the beneficiaries were
receiving the full benefit in 1978. This contrasts sharply
with systems that base disability ratings on a medical scale
and under which only a minority of beneficiaries receive the
maximum benefit.
Lack of data severely restricts cross-national comparisons
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and makes it difficult to discern any clear patterns. This is
certainly the case if attempting to generalize about the rela
tionship between early retirement and declining activity
rates among older men. Of those countries with either a
large proportion of early retirees— Denmark, Finland, Ger
many, and the United States, with more than 15 percent of
the appropriate age— or a large proportion of disability pen
sioners— Italy, the Netherlands, and Norway, with more
than 10 percent of the labor force— only in Denmark, the
Federal Republic of Germany, and the Netherlands has there
been a substantial fall in the labor force participation of men
aged 60 to 64.
Looking at the countries with the most significant de
clines in participation rates (for example, Belgium, Den
mark, and the Netherlands), one might conclude that the
decline is a function of more favorable pension characteris
tics (such as higher earnings replacement ratios and lower
thresholds of eligibility) than those in countries such as the
United States which display much smaller declines in partic
ipation rates and less generous benefits. While this may hold
true to a certain extent, it should also be borne in mind that
not negligible declines also have taken place in the United
States. Although Social Security policy in that country was
not altered to foster early retirement over the study period,
and in fact was modified to encourage the postponement of
retirement, the proportion of men aged 62 to 64 who were
out of the labor force rose from 31 percent to 52 percent
between 1970 and 1983.12 In the United States, the response
to mounting unemployment has been to continue the histor
ical approach of temporarily extending the duration of un
employment benefits. Given the lower unemployment bene
fits and shorter eligibility period as compared with most of
the European countries, the United States figures suggest
that a “discouraged worker” effect might be operating,
whereby older workers unable to find employment are drop
ping out of the labor force in order to collect actuarially
reduced pension benefits at an earlier age.13 A negative
relationship between rising unemployment and older male
participation is suggested by the data for Belgium, Den
mark, and the Netherlands, countries that have concomi
tantly experienced substantial increases in unemployment
and large outflows of 60- to 64-year-old men from the labor
force. This contrasts with low unemployment countries such
as Austria, Finland, and Sweden, where declines in the
participation rates of men in the same age bracket have been
of a much more modest nature.
It can be also noted that, by around 1980, a stabilization
or tapering off occurred in the growth of disability pensions
in some countries— Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands,
and the United States— which has been offset to some extent
by an acceleration in the number of workers opting for early
retirement.14 One might thus speculate that, provided with
a choice, workers are showing a growing preference for
early retirement pensions as opposed to disability pensions.
This may also be a reaction to various caps on government
29
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
expenditures which resulted in the application of stricter
criteria in the awarding of disability pensions. The lax inter
pretation of disability criteria which prevailed in the 1970’s
helped foster a situation whereby in some countries, such as
Italy, the Netherlands, and Norway, the ratio of labor force
participants to disability pensioners had fallen to approxi
mately 8 to 1 by the early 1980’s.15
An examination of the available data on early retirees
classified by industry of previous employment reveals that
early retirement is concentrated in those sectors where em
ployment contractions have been most pronounced, such as
textiles and clothing, engineering, metal industries, and
construction. In Belgium, France, the Federal Republic of
Germany, and the United Kingdom, participants tend to be
a very atypical sample of the labor force, with unskilled and
semiskilled manual workers being overly represented
among early retirees and professionals and managers under
Table 2.
represented. The population of disability pensioners in
Sweden also exhibits such a bias, heavily weighted towards
unskilled workers in declining industries.
Evaluating early retirement schemes
How effective a weapon is the promotion of early retire
ment in combating unemployment? Given both the popular
ity and enormous costs associated with early retirement
schemes, the dearth of studies evaluating estimated versus
real costs of the plans is surprising. One method often used
to assess public expenditures, cost-benefit analysis, can
serve as the basis for evaluations of early retirement
schemes. However, the problems that arise with this tech
nique are formidable and involve, firstly, the numerous
factors that must be taken into consideration, and secondly,
the values to impute to the factors. Leaving aside the ques
tion of imputed values, a cost-benefit taxonomy displaying
Number of beneficiaries of selected retirement and disability pensions, 12 countries, selected years, 1970-85
[N u m b e rs in th o u s a n d s ]
Plan type
Country
Austria...................
Belgium .................
Denm ark...............
Finland .................
France ...................
Federal Republic
of Germany ___
Ita ly .......................
Netherlands...........
Noway .................
Sw eden.................
United Kingdom . . .
United S tates........
Long-service/unemployment.............
Percent of population 55-64 ........
Early retirement1 ..............................
Percent of population 55-64 .........
Voluntary early retirement.................
Percent of population 60-69 ........
Disability ...........................................
Percent of labor fo rc e ...................
Unemployment..................................
Percent of population 60-64 .........
Special early retirement ...................
Percent of population 55-64 ........
Disability ...........................................
Percent of labor f o rc e ...................
Early retirement3 ..............................
Percent of population 55-64 ........
Early retirement..................................
Percent of population 55-64 .........
Disability5 .........................................
Percent of labor fo rc e ...................
Disability ...........................................
Percent of labor f o rc e ...................
Early retirement................................
Percent of population 60-64 ........
Disability Security/General
Disability Act ................................
Percent of labor f o rc e ...................
Disability6 .........................................
Percent of labor fo rc e ...................
Flexible (partial) retirement...............
Percent of population 60-64 .........
Disability ...........................................
Percent of labor fo rc e ...................
Job release schem e..........................
Percent of population 60-64 .........
Early retirement................................
Percent of population 60-64 ........
Early retirement11 ............................
Percent of population 60-64 ........
Disability Insurance Program12 .........
Percent of labor f o rc e ...................
-
112
4.7
1
0.4
172
7.9
13
0.5
-
-
1980
52
27.3
333
33.5
149
6.0
13
5.6
249
11.0
84
2.0
64
8.7
81
8.1
53
10.5
152
5.7
17
8.1
243
10.0
215
4.5
73
9.6
99
9.7
63
12.4
151
5.7
23
10.7
“
240
9.7
330
6.5
86
10.9
117
11.1
70
13.8
152
5.7
33
14.9
45
9.2
236
9.3
488
9.1
1,089
18.3
1,715
6.4
-
1,407
23.8
2,025
7.5
20
3.4
1,503
24.6
2,129
7.8
-
1,613
25.2
2,252
8.2
-
661
12.0
689
12.2
192
9.7
67
14.3
293
6.8
»66
2.6
2,017
19.9
4,682
4.3
191
9.7
63
13.0
302
7.0
858
2.2
27
1.0
2,115
20.4
4,456
4.1
-
-
-
"
“
215
4.4
-
212
5.4
1,225
14.1
2,665
3.1
349
6.9
-
715
3.1
289
7.0
810
0.4
-
1,723
18.3
4,352
4.5
1981
1982
1975
1983
1984
1985
_
_
_
“
“
129
11.5
76
15.1
141
5.3
35
15.5
~
238
9.4
696
12.4
-
-
711
12.2
728
12.3
4741
12.2
757
”
197
9.9
61
12.4
309
7.1
867
2.5
204
10.1
54
11.0
314
7.2
995
3.4
219
10.8
-
1054
-
2,213
20.9
3,973
3.5
2,321
21.6
3,813
3.4
1086
~
2,407
23.2
3,822
3.3
11 Retired w o rke rs aged 62 to 64 re ce ivin g S ocial S ecu rity benefits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
"
10 D ata relate to M arch.
8 D a ta re la te to April.
”
1,822
27.6
2,373
8.7
3,046
13.0
3 D a ta re la te to D e c e m b e r 31.
7 D a ta re la te to 1976.
“
1,718
25.6
2,357
8.6
3,139
13.5
-
9 D ata relate to S ep tem be r.
6 N a tion a l in suran ce .
-
4634
1 1ncludes co n tra ctu a l, sta tu to ry, and sp ecia l sch em es.
5 In clu d e s o c c u p a tio n and e m p loye e d isab ility pensions.
-
675
11.7
2 D a ta re la te to 1977.
4 D a ta re la te to J u ly 31.
30
1970
1»2,453
'03,857
3.3
12 D e cem be r o f each year. Includ es d e p e n d e n ts a nd re la tes o n ly to p aym en ts u nd er S ocial
S ecurity.
Note : Dash indicates data not available.
Source : S ee E con o m ic C o m m ission fo r E urope, Economic Survey of Europe in 1985-1986
(N ew Y ork, U nited N ations, 1986), p. 109.
Exhibit 3.
Benefits and costs of early retirement schemes to the program participant, employer, and government
Party
Benefits
Costs
Program participant:
Retiree
• Value of pension
• Value of leisure
• Social and psychological benefits of
not being unemployed1
• Value of salary forgone
• Value of unemployment
benefit foregone1
Worker replacing
retiree2
• Value of salary
• Value of training and experience
• Social and psychological benefits of
not being unemployed
• Value of unemployment benefit foregone
Employer
• Younger age structure of the work
force
• Value of lower salary expenditures
• Loss of experienced worker
Government
• Reduction in expenditures for unemployment benefits and other income
transfer programs
• Increase in social security contributions2
• Increase in income taxes2
• Expenditures on early retirement schemes
1Assumes retiree would have been unemployed in the absence o f scheme.
2For schemes which require that retiree be replaced with another worker.
the gains and losses associated with early retirement
schemes for participants, employers, and governments is
shown in exhibit 3. Even if based on variables that are only
roughly approximated, such an accounting framework can
highlight the equity considerations involved, as well as
focus on economic efficiency. Although not appearing in
the exhibit, another cost to be factored in is that of dead
weight, namely payments to persons who would have re
tired anyway. Depending on whether the retiree is replaced
or not, the exhibit would have to be modified accordingly.
This raises the issue of the extent to which retirees are
replaced with other workers. As few countries have moni
tored schemes in progress or have incorporated an evalua
tion component into them, estimating the overall impact on
employment is hazardous. Based on various published stud
ies, table 3 provides, for selected schemes, estimates of the
proportion of early retirees that have been replaced with
other workers. Apparent is the range of replacement rates,
which vary from a low of 25 percent in the Netherlands to
95 percent in France, where replacement of the retired
worker is mandatory. However, in Belgium, where replace
ment is also obligatory, the rate is only 67 percent, despite
fines which can be levied against offending employers. This
is one indication of the difficulty involved in monitoring
compliance with the schemes. Viewed in this way, alleviat
ing unemployment by means of early retirement is much
more costly in the Netherlands, where only 1 out of 4 early
retirees is replaced, than in France where, under solidarity
contracts, virtually all jobs vacated by early pensioners have
been filled.16 However, even in those countries where the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
• Decrease in social security
contributions3
• Decrease in income taxes3
3 For schemes in which retiree is not replaced with another worker.
replacement of retirees is mandated (Belgium and France),
no studies have followed the employment of newly recruited
workers beyond the obligatory employment period, which is
normally 6 months to a year.
Another possible avenue of analysis would be to compare
early retirement costs to alternative employment policies
such as unemployment benefits. Table 4 compares the two
policy options in terms of replacement ratios, that is, the
ratio of the pension or unemployment benefit to the previous
salary. With the exceptions of France, where unemployment
payments are substantially higher than those for early retire
ment,17 and the Netherlands, where unemployment benefits
are only slightly higher, early retirement payments have
been equal to or have exceeded unemployment benefits in
the countries for which data are available. Thus, the strong
preference shown by workers for early retirement is not
surprising. Furthermore, early retirement schemes are paid
until the normal retirement age is reached, while entitlement
to unemployment benefits usually lasts for a maximum of
2 years.
Conclusions
Even if early retirement schemes fail to boost the overall
level of employment or satisfy criteria of economic effi
ciency, they may still be judged beneficial if employment is
redistributed in favor of groups that suffer from dispropor
tionately high rates of unemployment. On the other hand, if
workers who are already unemployed are merely redefined
as early retirees, nothing has been accomplished to meet the
aspirations of these workers who wish to continue working.
31
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
International Overview o f Early Retirement
In fact, the very existence of early-out schemes may remove
any reluctance employers have in declaring workers redun
dant. This then becomes a rather expensive method of dis
guising unemployment.
The enormous potential outflow of older workers from
the labor force as a consequence of demographic aging,
further reinforced by incentives to retire early, would put
serious pressures on national economies through its impact
on national pension schemes. Part of the strain can be traced
to imposing upon pensions a function for which they were
never designed, that is, a mechanism for narrowing the gap
between the supply of, and demand for, labor.18
By fostering early retirement as an ad hoc method of
lowering unemployment, the danger exists of institutionaliz
ing a short-term policy response. Given the anticipated drain
on pension systems due to the growing propensity for early
retirement and to population aging, the ongoing viability of
early-out schemes will require that a growing share of
national income be devoted to the support of older depend
ents.19 This will have significant ramifications for macroec
onomic policies, public support programs, and tax meas
ures. Dissipating the strain on pension schemes could take
Table 3.
Replacement rates of early retirement schemes
Country and scheme
Percent of retirees
replaced
Belgium:
Early retirement pension............................
67
Denmark:
Early retirement schem e............................
70-75
Finland:
Early retirement for veterans.....................
45
France:
Solidarity contracts....................................
95
Germany:
Early retirement for long service ...............
60
Netherlands:
Early retirement .........................................
25
Sweden:
Partial pension...........................................
50
United Kingdom:
Job release schem e..................................
70-75
Sources : Social Security, Unemployment and Premature Retirement, Studies and Research,
No. 22, International Social Security Administration, Geneva, 1985, pp. 37, 47; Efficiency of
Labour Market and Employment Policy Measures, Study No. 82/6, p. 131, Commission of the
European Communities, Brussels, 1982; M. Frossard, “Crise et cessations anticipées d’activité:
une comparaison internationale," Travail et Emploi, Ministère des affaires sociales et de la
solidarité nationale, April-June 1983, No. 16, Paris, p. 24; Monthly Labor Review, October 1985,
Department of Labor, Washington dc., p. 40; D. Metcalf, Alternatives to Unemployment, Special
Employment Measures in Britain, Policy Studies Institute, London, 1982; R. Layard, Unemploy
ment in Britain, Causes and Cures, Centre for Labour Economics Discussion Paper No. 87,
London School of Economics, 1981.
Table 4. Comparison of early retirement and unemploy
ment benefits, selected countries
Country
Belgium ......................................
Denm ark....................................
Finland ......................................
France ........................................
G erm any....................................
Netherlands................................
Sw eden......................................
Early retirement
benefit1
67
92
80
65-75
377
80-85
85-90
Unemployment
benefit2
67
92
44
90
68
89
82
1 Percent of previous salary.
2 Rate of disposable income replacement of an unemployed “typical worker” (married worker
with three dependents in 1982).
3 Based on monthly net salary of 2,214 dm.
Sources : Exhibit 1; and Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Bulletin for Europe,
vol. 85, no. 3, (New York, Pergamon Press for the United Nations, September 1983), p. 292.
the form of increasing employment, boosting productivity,
raising employee and employer contributions, or some com
bination of the three options. Because the first two options
are a function of macroeconomic developments, they are
extremely difficult to implement.
The third possibility, being an administrative decision,
would be relatively simple to undertake, although it could
have serious and unintended repercussions. Burdening em
ployers and employees with additional payroll taxes could
be counterproductive as it may shrink the demand for labor.
Futhermore, it may also stimulate even more retirement and
promote a shadow, or undergound, economy in which
workers evade the payment of taxes.20 (Yet, for early retire
ment options to be attractive, they should not be based on
actuarially discounted pensions.)
Another factor to be taken into consideration if devoting
a larger slice of national product to the elderly is the possible
backlash against a redistribution of wealth if it is perceived
as being at the expense of other population segments, such
as children. In the United States, the sheltering of the Social
Security program from budget cuts has been viewed by
some as contributing to the substantial reductions in national
programs benefiting children.21
From a long-term perspective, the advisability of encour
aging premature retirement seems highly questionable.
Given falling birth rates and subsequent future contractions
in the working-age population, labor force growth will come
to a virtual standstill in developed countries by the turn of
the century. In addition, the ratio of pensioners to wage
earners contributing to social security programs will rise. A
more appropriate future policy would thus appear to call for
gradually raising the mandatory age of retirement, while
eliminating the incentives to early retirement.
□
-FOOTNOTES1 Wage subsidy schemes, a measure designed to boost the demand for
labor, were discussed in Economic Commission for Europe, Economic
Survey of Europe in 1983 (New York, United Nations, 1984), pp. 3 8-54.
2 For example, under the Social Security system, retirement with actuar
ially reduced benefits prior to age 65 was initially made available to women
32
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in 1956 and in 1961 to men. With the United States in the midst o f a
recession in 1961 and suffering from almost 7-percent unemployment, it
was recognized that unemployed older workers would encounter enormous
difficulties in finding jobs.
3 It should be noted that the expansion of disability programs was also
partly a consequence o f the changing definition of good health; thus,
eligibility criteria for disability have been loosened not only for employ
ment reasons.
4 Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Survey of Europe in
1985-86 (New York, United Nations, 1986), p. 45.
5 World Population Prospects: Estimates and Projections as Assessed in
1984 (New York, United Nations, 1986).
6 In Norway, schemes have been implemented to encourage the contin
uation o f work beyond the normal pensionable age o f 67. Given the ex
tremely low levels o f unemployment in that country, the government has
not found it necessary to foster premature retirement. (Over the 1980-85
period, the unemployment rate in Norway never exceeded 3.3 percent).
7 A substantial amount o f research exists concerning the contribution of
early retirement schemes to falling male participation. See, for example,
Virginia Reno and Daniel Price, “Relationship Between the Retirement,
Disability and Unemployment Insurance Programs: The U .S. Experience,”
Social Security Bulletin, May 1985; Social Security, Unemployment and
Premature Retirement, Studies and Research No. 22 (Geneva, Interna
tional Social Security Association, 1985); and “Bilan de L ’Emploi, 1984,”
Dossiers Statistiques du Travail et de VEmploi (Paris), September 1985,
No. 12-13.
8 In France, the lowering o f the normal retirement age in 1984 from 65
to 60 does not appear to have had any noticeable impact yet on the trend
in male participation. The activity rate for men 6 0 -6 4 was 2.5 percentage
points lower in 1984 than in 1983, which is in keeping with the downward
movement that has been observed in the last few years. It had been pre
dicted that a decline in the retirement age would result in 350,000 addi
tional retirees. See Roland Cuvillier, The Reduction of Working Time
(Geneva, International Labor Office, 1984), p. 63.
9 A 1979 survey o f private pension plan coverage in the United States
found that about 50 percent o f all men and 31 percent of all women who
were employed in private industry were covered by private pension plans.
Gayle Rogers, Pension Coverage and Vesting Among Private Wage and
Salary Workers, 1979: Preliminary Estimates from the 1979 Survey of
Pension Plan Coverage, Working Paper No. 16 (Washington, Office of
Research and Statistics, Social Security Administration, 1980).
10 In the United States, the prevalence of early retirement options in
pension plans o f medium and large sized firms was confirmed in a study
by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics which estimated that 58 percent of
workers were included in plans that permitted early retirement. See Em
ployee Benefits in Medium and Large Firms, Bulletin 2176 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, August 1983).
11 A recent study concerning the United States concluded that the in
creasing relative generosity or leniency of disability programs has had a
small but statistically significant impact on the work choice o f older per
sons. Older low-wage earners with health problems are identified as those
most responsive to changes in program benefits. See Robert Haveman and
Barbara W olfe, “Disability Transfers and Early Retirement: A Causal Re
lationship?” Journal of Public Economics, vol. 24, 1984, pp. 4 7 -6 4 .
12 Based on a detailed analysis of longitudinal data, a recent study
concluded that the accelerating decline in labor force participation of older
men between 1969 and 1973 in the United States can be explained by the
substantial increase in real Social Security benefits that took place in that
period. See Michael Hurd and Michael Boskin, “The Effect of Social
Security on Retirement in the Early 1970’s,” Quarterly Journal of Econom
ics, November 1984, pp. 767-90.
13 Despite the accumulation of a considerable body o f research, a com
prehensive understanding of the interrelations associated with cyclical
labor market behavior does not yet exist. The relationship between changes
in labor force participation and unemployment in terms o f added workers
and discouraged workers continues to invoke controversy. If, during reces
sions, job hunters become discouraged and withdraw from the labor force,
measured unemployment would be artificially deflated. On the other hand,
if people enter the labor market looking for jobs (added worker effect),
possibly due to an out-of-work spouse, recorded unemployment will be
higher. An analysis o f monthly employment-status transition probabilities
for the United States for the years 1968-84 has led one researcher to
suggest that, during recessions, the likelihood of an unemployed person
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
dropping out of the labor force decreases while the probability o f someone
outside the labor force entering the labor force increases. This casts doubt
on the widely held discouraged worker effect which would predict just the
opposite pattern. See Michael Keeley, “Cyclical Unemployment and Em
ployment Effects o f Labor Force Entry and Exit,” Economic Review, Fed
eral Reserve Bank o f San Francisco, Summer 1984, pp. 3 -2 2 .
14 In a number o f studies carried out in the late 1970’s, it was shown that
for the Nordic countries, regional variations in disability density could be
explained by the regional unemployment rate, while in the United States,
the increase in the number of disability benefit applications was linked to
the unemployment rate. See P. Siren, “Taloudellisen tilanteen ja tyokyvyttomyyden valiset sushteet,” Tyokyvyttomyys-tutkimuksen tehtavat ja mahdollisuudet [“The Economic Situation and Disability,” Purpose and Possi
bility of the Study on Disability] (Helsinki, Social Insurance Institution,
1979); and Mordechai Lando, Malcolm Coate, and Ruth Kraus, “Disability
Benefit Applications and the Economy,” Social Security Bulletin, October
1979.
15 In view of the unremitting climb in disability payments, the govern
ment of the Netherlands imposed more restrictive criteria for the determina
tion of disability and instituted a number o f budgetary cutbacks for the
pension system in 1984. The same year, in Italy, legislation came into
effect which eliminated linking disability to the state of the labor market.
The new act refers only to a reduction in work capacity based on an
assessment o f the physical and mental condition o f the applicant. Likewise,
in 1984, the U .S. Congress passed legislation completely overhauling the
disability program. At present, a review of all those on the Social Security
disability rolls is being carried out. The new rules provide that individuals
can only continue receiving disability benefits if there has been no medical
improvement in their ability to work since the last evaluation. In a previous
review process in 1981, 100,000 people lost their disability benefits.
16 Assuming 15-percent nonreplacement and 10-percent deadweight, it
was estimated that under the Job Release Scheme in the United Kingdom,
the net exchequer cost of removing one person from the unemployment
register was 676 pounds in 1978. This was considered to be one-third the
cost associated with a general reduction in retirement age. See David
Metcalf, Alternatives to Unemployment: Special Employment Measures in
Britain, no. 610 (London, Policy Studies Institute, 1982), p. 48.
17 Despite smaller early retirement payments relative to unemployment
benefits in France, in 1983 the government spent 43 billion francs on early
retirement as compared with 41 billion francs for unemployment benefits.
18 In the United States, the possibility of early retirement has been
viewed less as a method to regulate the supply o f labor and more as a means
of providing a greater choice between work and leisure. Under the Social
Security Amendments enacted in 1983, the eligibility age for full retire
ment benefits was raised from 65 to 67, to be gradually phased in between
the years 2002 and 2027. In addition, the early retirement reduction in
benefits claimed at age 62 was increased from 20 percent to 30 percent,
while the benefit increment for delayed receipt of retirement benefits was
augmented from 3 percent to 8 percent a year. These modifications were
motivated by the urgent need to rescue the Social Security system from the
brink of bankruptcy.
19 A series of calculations carried out for nine countries o f Western
Europe and North America indicated that lowering the age of retirement
from 60 to 55 in 1990 would require that an additional 1.5 percent to 3.4
percent of gross domestic product be devoted to pension expenditures. See
Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Bulletin for Europe, vol. 85,
no. 3 (New York, Pergamon Press for the United Nations, September
1983), p. 314.
20 Econometric studies have shown that taxes imposed on wages have a
statistically significant and quantitatively important impact on the probabil
ity o f retirement. This raises the spectre o f a self-reinforcing trend towards
early retirement, spawning even greater levels of nonparticipation on the
part o f those workers unwilling to shoulder the burden of additional taxes.
See, for example, Harvey Rosen, “What is Labor Supply and Do Taxes
Affect It?” American Economic Review, May 1980, pp. 171-76.
21 See S. Preston, “Children and the Elderly: Divergent Paths for Amer
ica’s Dependents,” Demography, November 1984, pp. 4 3 5 -5 7 ; and
“Creating a New Class Among Young, Poor,” The International Herald
Tribune, Oct. 29, 1985, p. 1.
33
The Great Migration
of Afro-Americans, 1915-40
Between the World Wars,
more than 1 million black Americans
left the South to seek opportunity
and fuller citizenship in the North
S pencer R. C rew
The “Great Migration” of Afro-Americans from largely
rural areas of the southern United States to northern cities
during and after World War I altered the economic, social,
and political fabric of American society. It made the re
gional problems of race and sociopolitical equality national
issues and gave Afro-Americans a role in the election of
northern political leaders, in contrast to the absence of a
political role in the South. It helped to spawn a generation
of black leaders who struggled for the full citizenship rights
of Afro-Americans. Because the hundreds of thousands of
people who participated in the migration tended to settle in
northern urban areas, the effects of the population change
were greatly magnified.
The momentousness of the migration as an event does not
alter the fact that the migrants were ordinary people. Like
colonial settlers or western pioneers of an earlier day, they
were not looking to change the world, only their own status.
A mixture of farmers, domestic servants, day laborers, and
industrial workers, they came from all parts of the South,
hoping for a chance to improve their own station or at least
that of their children. When the outbreak of World War I
drastically changed the job structure of northern urban
areas, moving to these cities offered a fresh start and new
opportunities for this massive wave of migrants.
Spencer R. Crew is an historian at the National Museum of American
History, Smithsonian Institution, and curator o f the exhibition, “Field to
Factory: Afro-American Migration, 1915-1940.”
34
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
War trigger
Without the increase in job opportunities caused by
World War I, the Great Migration might never have oc
curred. The fighting in Europe dramatically increased the
demands on companies in the United States to produce mu
nitions and other goods to support the war effort. At the
same time, the labor pool these companies normally de
pended upon— immigrants and native-born Americans—
was dwindling. The draft siphoned off many of these men,
while the turmoil in Europe disrupted the flow of immi
grants from that area. Desperately in need of additional
workers, northern businesses looked southward for new
sources of labor. Because Afro-Americans made up a large
portion of the unskilled work force in the South and because
of social conditions there, they became the targets of aggres
sive recruitment campaigns. Northern companies offered
well-paying jobs, free transportation, and low-cost housing
as inducements to Afro-Americans to move North. They
also sent labor recruiters into the South who received a fee
for every recruit they provided for the company they repre
sented.
Local prod
Socioeconomic and political conditions in the South made
Afro-Americans likely candidates for migration. After the
end of post-Civil War Reconstruction, the Nation’s legisla
tors and the Supreme Court had turned their backs on black
Americans and left determination of their citizenship rights
to local jurisdictions. In the South, this abdication of author
ity resulted in the creation of a two-tiered system of citizen
ship with one set of rules for whites and a more restrictive
set for Afro-Americans. In this system of “Jim Crow” laws,
black Americans, under penalty of imprisonment or possi
bly death, were forced to use special sections when they
rode on public transportation, ate in restaurants, or attended
theaters. Southern statutes also excluded them from voting
through such manipulations of the law as grandfather
clauses, poll taxes, or literacy tests which prevented the
majority of Afro-Americans from voting while allowing
their white counterparts access to the ballot.
Oppressive as the political situation was, the economic
situation was even more oppressive in that it locked tenant
farmers (“sharecroppers”) into an ever-tightening cycle of
debt. While the majority of black Americans in the South
resided in rural areas, they did not own the land they
worked. Most often they rented it from large landowners or
worked as farm laborers. Bad crop years, boll weevil at
tacks, floods, or low crop prices often destroyed profit mar
gins and left sharecroppers in debt to the landlord. In order
to avoid imprisonment, they agreed to work additional years
in hopes of paying off their debts. Unfortunately, profits
rarely were large enough to wipe out their obligations and
Afro-Americans found themselves bound to the landlord
who owned their land or controlled the local store where
they purchased goods on credit. Migrating offered a chance
to escape the oppressiveness of the South and begin anew.
Problems of leave-taking
Leaving, however, was not a simple matter for black
Americans. It should be remembered that Afro-Americans
had strong ties to the South and migrating meant severing
lifelong friendships and strong family bonds. Migrants
rarely left in large groups. Sometimes, members of families
might leave together, but more often individuals left alone.
They usually departed with the expectation that they would
return or would send for loved ones, but migrating always
involved leaving behind loved ones for an uncertain future.
If aged parents or a spouse and children had to remain
behind, the decision to move became even more compli
cated.
Migrating North also meant leaving familiar surroundings
and community institutions which provided support in times
of need. Church activities, social clubs, and fraternal orga
nizations were part of a vibrant Afro-American community
in the South which provided a buffer from the indignities
faced in the outside community. For many Afro-Americans,
this private community offered enough support to make
their lives tolerable despite hardships. While hundreds of
thousands of Afro-Americans chose to leave the South,
many more remained behind or returned home after visiting
northern cities.
Once a decision to depart was made, leaving was often a
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
complicated process. Southern officials tried to slow the tide
of migration by arresting or detaining Afro-Americans who
tried to leave. Local police regularly searched departing
trains for people they thought might be heading North. To
escape police scrutiny, many migrants had to steal away late
at night or devise elaborate plans to get away safely. These
subterfuges forced the migrants either to sell their property
and belongings secretly or to take with them only what they
could carry. Most migrants were working people who did
not possess great wealth and leaving under these circum
stances hurt them financially. Items left behind or given
away brought in no money and buyers rarely gave full value
for items they knew the owner had to sell. Many migrants,
therefore, did not have enough money with them to tide
them over for long periods of time once they reached the
North. Consequently, finding a job became a high priority
as soon as they arrived.
Northern lure
One of the key factors influencing the individuals who did
leave was the letters and visits they received from friends
and relatives who had already moved North. Prior to World
War I, Afro-Americans had moved North in small numbers
but their economic opportunities had been severely limited.
When the war changed the job markets, earlier migrants
wrote letters home, urging others to come North. Also,
when they traveled South to visit family on special occa
sions, they reinforced their letters with personal accounts of
their own successes and the advantage of living outside the
South. These letters and visits must have whet the appetites
of Afro-American Southerners already discontent with their
lot and determined to do something about it. Many oral
interviews with and reminiscences of migrants include pas
sages describing how they decided to leave after hearing
about opportunities in the North from relatives or friends
who had lived or worked there. Having someone to live with
or a clear idea of where jobs were located undoubtedly
removed some of the uncertainty of leaving.
While job opportunities were readily available in most
cities, these jobs were at the lower end of the occupational
ladder. Northern labor unions generally did not accept AfroAmericans as members and often threatened to strike com
panies where nonunion workers performed union jobs. Even
when Afro-American workers acquired better paying jobs
during the war, many of them had to relinquish these jobs
once the war ended.
Types of jobs
Afro-Americans typically wound up in dirty, backbreak
ing, unskilled, and low-paying occupations. These were the
least desirable jobs in most industries, but the ones employ
ers felt best suited their black workers. On average, more
than eight of every ten Afro-American men worked as un
skilled laborers in foundries, in the building trades, in meat
packing companies, on the railroads, or as servants, porters,
35
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
The Great Migration o f Afro-Americans
janitors, cooks, and cleaners. Only a relatively few obtained
work in semiskilled or skilled occupations.
Occupational choices for black women were even more
limited because few of them, in concordance with women in
general, had access to industrial jobs. While some women
found employment in the garment industry, packing houses,
and steam laundries, the majority of Afro-American women
worked as domestic servants or in service-related occupa
tions. While none of these jobs paid high wages, they paid
more than Afro-Americans could obtain for similar work in
the South.
However, the cost of living in the North was higher than
in the South. Funneled into certain areas in most northern
cities, Afro-Americans have paid nearly twice as much as
their white counterparts for equivalent housing. Higher rents
made it harder for them to make housing payments and
encouraged migrants to take in boarders or other family
members to help meet expenses. While the extra income
eased financial problems, it resulted in overcrowded living
conditions, little privacy, and poor sanitation. With the ad
ditional financial burden of having to pay higher prices in
neighborhood stores for food, clothing, and other necessi
ties, settling in the North was a mixed experience for many
migrants. Though they earned better wages in the North,
much of the increased income was offset by higher living
expenses.
More than economics
Economic gain was not the sole reason migrants came
North. Better educational opportunities and greater personal
freedom were also motivating factors. Up to the time of the
migration, Afro-American children rarely advanced past the
sixth grade in the South. “Black” schools received very little
money from southern legislatures, especially at the second
ary level, and landlords placed pressure on parents to put
their children to work rather than have them further their
education. Under these circumstances, only a relatively few
children were able to receive a high school or college educa
tion. In contrast, northern States allocated more money for
education and had compulsory attendance requirements that
forced students to stay in school longer. Moving North gave
36
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
migrants and their children access to better educational op
portunities and a chance for a brighter future.
Another variable that made northern life attractive was
the sense of personal freedom migrants felt after leaving the
South. Northern cities were busy and impersonal; they of
fered greater anonymity than Afro-Americans had experi
enced in southern rural communities. Once they reached the
North, migrants did not have to show deference to each
white person they passed on the street. They could move
about the city without the fear that the wrong word or tone
or action might result in arrest or a more severe or even
violent white response. These new social and political cir
cumstances lifted a heavy burden from the migrants, many
of whom had previously lived in a state of constant fear for
their lives and those of their loved ones.
world then , which migrants found in northern cities
did not always correspond with their expectations. Despite
the encouragements of newpapers like the Chicago De
fender, migrants were not always welcomed by residents of
the northern cities. Both black and white urban residents
worried about the impact of so many new people and, on
occasion, they sought to discourage migrants from coming.
Although not as virulent as it was in the South, racial dis
crimination also existed in northern cities. And while work
was available, it usually was at the bottom of the pay scale
and the occupational pecking order. Housing options and
higher prices presented additional adjustment problems for
the migrants. As a consequence, moving North was not a
panacea for the many troubles migrants faced in the South.
Northern urban areas presented their own set of problems
and adjustments for migrants once they reached their new
destinations.
Despite these difficulties, Afro-Americans continued to
migrate North and to stay. With the many adjustments mi
grants faced, strange environments, new neighbors, and
different ways of behaving and dressing, most found north
ern cities more engaging than the places they left behind.
Though many migrants returned South regularly and refer
red to it as “home,” they did not remain. The South appeared
to hold their hearts, but the North held their futures.
□
T he
Foreign Labor
Developments
Italian labor relations:
a system in transition
T iz ia n o T r e u
The mid-1970’s marked a turning point in Italy’s industrial
relations system. At that time, the system appeared to be a
case of pluralism, recognized and supported by the statute of
workers’ rights (Act 300/1970). The main aspects and insti
tutions of industrial relations remained outside the legal
regulation. In fact, trade unions and employers’ associations
exercised joint power. Trade unions reasoned that the regis
tration procedure prescribed by article 39 of the Constitution
could lead to more state interference in internal union affairs
than the Constitution intended. There were no specific legal
provisions concerning the procedure, scope, unit, or content
of bargaining or the conduct expected of the parties to nego
tiations. Collective agreements were treated as contracts,
binding only on the parties, although the courts indirectly
extended collective wage rates to employees and employers
who were not parties to the negotiations. In addition, no
statutory regulation on work stoppages based on provisions
of article 40 was passed, and the task of imposing limits on
industrial conflict was again left to the courts.
The statute of workers’ rights (Act 300/1970), which is
still the fundamental source of law governing collective
labor relations, marked a change of attitude towards orga
nized labor, both regarding the consitutional approach of
article 39 of the Constitution and the actual “abstentionism”
of the 1950’s and 1960’s. The act intervenes not to regulate
unions at the national level but to promote their presence
and action at the plant level. The focus of the act is no longer
on the recognition of unions and the extension of collective
agreements, but on the basic rights granted to the most
representative unions and workers for the promotion of
union activity and collective bargaining in the workplace
(usually enterprises with 15 employees or more). The most
representative unions and union representatives were granted
the time and the right to hold meetings on company prem-
Tiziano Treu is full professor o f labor law at the University of Pavia (Italy)
and president o f the Italian Industrial Relations Association.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ises, employee time off for union activities, checkoffs, and
special protection against discrimination.
Legislative support, a favorable labor market, and politi
cal conditions of the late 1960’s contributed to the develop
ment of unionization1 (from its lowest level of 22 percent in
the mid-1960’s to more than 50 percent in the mid-1970’s)
and collective bargaining. Individual labor law favored this
approach, with minimum legal conditions providing a safety
net for marginal employees, and nationwide and enter
prisewide collective bargaining regulating wages and work
ing conditions for the majority of employees. It is estimated
that in the mid-1970’s, more than 75 percent of factory
employees were covered by collective agreements. Some
features of individual labor law are more effective in sup
porting collective action. These include the protection of
employees against discrimination and unfair dismissal con
tained in the statute of workers’ rights; restrictions imposed
by the act on employers’ directive and disciplinary powers;
and Social Security legislation which provides more than
80 percent of the wages lost by employees who are laid off
or employed on a short-term basis because of production
difficulties or restructuring in the enterprise. Social Security
legislation departs from that of the 1950’s and 1960’s and
responds to the new problems of an industrial system which
faces difficulties and changes.
The pressure for change came in the mid-1970’s during
the serious economic crisis and consequent technological
transformation which affected the socioeconomic system of
most developed countries.
Italian industrial relations were built on the assumption
that the economic system was capable of continuous and
predictable growth within a relatively stable organization
and technology. Collective bargaining, like unionization,
was expected to expand much in the same way. Some schol
ars assumed that a stable environment would bring about
stability and convergence in labor-management relations
practices.
In the late 1970’s, a series of events called these assump
tions into question: (1) the general slowdown of economic
growth; (2) the growing uncertainty of domestic and interna
tional markets’ (3) the rapid technological innovations re
quiring or allowing changes in production or organization
which might undermine collective bargaining; (4) the
37
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Foreign Labor Developments
changing nature of labor (white-collar and service em
ployees) which is less inclined to accept traditional forms of
unionization and easier to organize; and (5) the growing
initiative of management in industrial relations and person
nel practices.
Difficulties in the Italian system were heightened by the
structural weakness of industry and fragmentation of the
economy and the inefficiency of public administration. Po
litical tensions and polarization among the two major polit
ical parties (Christian Democrats and Communists) dimin
ished the effectiveness and stabilizing capacity of state
intervention in industrial relations and also undermined the
internal cohesiveness of trade unions, thereby contributing
to further reducing their bargaining power.
Signs of changed attitudes and strategies first emerged at
the macro level of industrial relations. Participants acknowl
edged that the crucial problems of the period— recovery of
the economy and international competitiveness, control of
inflation (more than 20 percent in 1977 and again in 1982)
and a reduction in unemployment— could not be solved
without a more consensual, less conflictual attitude.
The adjustment process was long and difficult and culmi
nated in three major trilateral agreements in 1977, 1983, and
1984 between the top organizations of the social partners
and the government.
The underlying pattern was similar to that of other coun
tries, even as early as the 1960’s and 1970’s, commonly
referred to as “concertation” or neocorporatism in industrial
relations. The terms of the economic and political tradeoff
between the parties varied in the three agreements, but all
implied a clear shift away from traditional economic and
acquisitive collective bargaining. The trade unions accepted
a slowdown of economic gains— mainly wage indexation
(—18 percent in 1983 and - 3 0 percent in 1984), which
stopped or slightly reversed real wage growth— and com
mitted themselves to greater labor flexibility and control
over decentralized bargaining and conflict. In exchange, the
government granted tax benefits, particularly for low-paid
workers, and made the following commitments: to control
public expenditures and administer prices consistent with
curbing inflation;2 to enact a series of measures to promote
employment and to favor union participation in labor market
policies and,with the employers’ consent, the union’s role in
controlling industrial restructuring and innovation proc
esses; to promote workers’ participation in capital formation
through a solidarity fund (financed by 0.5 percent of wages
controlled by the unions). A reduction of working time was
agreed upon with the employers as a means of combatting
growing unemployment. This latter directive has been im
plemented unevenly, depending on the sector (usually 40 hours
yearly on an average 40-hour workweek).
These experiences of broad trilateral agreement and social
neocorporatism have proved only partly successful. Schol
ars have indicated that the Italian system lacks elements
which account for the success and stability of neocorpo
38
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ratism: a united labor movement linked to a political labor
government, a strong tradition of centralization in industrial
relations, and an efficient government capable of imple
menting the difficult long-term promises of the political
tradeoff. Some functional equivalents of these elements
have been operating in Italy: unity of action among the three
major confederations, growing political and ideological
control by the central confederation over the rank and file
and middle-level union officers in order to respect social
commitments, and a coalition government inclined to decide
labor matters jointly with the Communists or with Commu
nist consent only.
The effectiveness of these factors has proved precarious,
and political tensions exist between the Communists and the
coalition government. In fact, the agreements of 1977 and
1983 were unanimously supported by the trade unions,
whereas the 1984 round ended in disagreement and the most
serious split within the labor movement since the 1950’s.
The Communist-dominated confederation ( c g il ) withdrew
from the negotiations and opposed the decree which the
government issued to implement some points of the agree
ment (mainly the slowing down of indexation) reached with
the other two unions ( c is l and u il ) and the employers’
association.
The government-issued decree represents a step towards
direct legal intervention in crucial bargaining matters, and
an exceptional alteration of the unwritten rule that any major
legislation in labor matters needs the largely unanimous
consent of the trade union movement (including the Com
munist sector). This rule has been in effect since the 1950’s
(no major labor law has been passed in the face of Commu
nist opposition) and had made up for the exclusion of the
Communist Party from national government.3 The arrange
ment was an imperfect functional equivalent of the prolabor
government usually held to be necessary for corporatism to
work, and it presupposed a tacit division of roles with the
Christian Democrats running the state (together with minor
allied parties) and the Communists having a veto or power
of codecision on labor matters (and sharing in local govern
ment).
As with many other major directives of Italian industrial
relations, it remains to be seen just how exceptional this
decision by decree will be. In mid-1985, top negotiations
resumed between the three major confederations (United)
and the central employer associations; this led to another
agreement further sectoring and stabilizing the escalator
clause first for the public sector, then extended to the private
sector. The agreement represents a continuation, although
partial, of the policy of “concertation” adopted in the past
years.
□
---------- FOOTNOTES---------1
Organized labor in Italy is traditionally divided into three major confed
erations based on ideological and political lines: the c g il , majority Com-
munists, minority socialists: 4,570,000 members in 1983; the c is l , tradi
tionally grouping Catholic workers and linked to the Christian Democratic
party in recent years, with a growing number of politically noncommitted
workers (3,005,000 members); and the uiL-socialists, minority social
democrats, and republicans (1,300,000 members).
2 That is, within the maximum inflation targets (set in the 1983 agree
ment) o f 13 percent in 1983, 10 percent in 1984, and 7 percent in 1985.
3 Indeed, this is the major argument used by scholars and courts claiming
that these decrees are unconstitutional in that they militate against the
principle o f trade unions’ freedom of negotiation by substantially altering
the functioning o f a previously negotiated system of indexation without the
full consent o f the parties involved. Those who defend the constitutionality
o f the decree point out that under Decision 142 of 1980, the court should
reject these objections. They maintain that while union consent is a condi
tion o f effectiveness, it does not constitute a necessary or sufficient condi
tion o f legitimacy.
How are Japanese unions responding
to microelectronics-based automation?
W
il l ia m
E arle K lay
Japan, a world leader in the development and production of
electronics technology, is now attempting to transform itself
into an “information society”— one in which virtually all
social institutions fully utilize, and are profoundly affected
by, computer-based technology.1 Not surprisingly, the
growing impact of microelectronics-based automation is
causing widespread concern among Japanese unions. Rather
than dealing piecemeal with the many effects of the new
programmable automation technology, they are developing
multiple, integrated strategies which include an increased
emphasis upon contractual protections and a desire to as
sume a role of international leadership.
Japanese unions do not oppose the introduction of the
technology, but they are greatly concerned about the possi
ble adverse effects that microelectronics could have on
workers. Of the 554 unions surveyed by the Japan Institute
of Labor, 53.6 percent of the unions said they were “in favor
as a rule” toward the adoption of the technology while only
2 percent were “opposed as a rule,” and 36.6 percent said it
was “unavoidable.” More than half of the unions said that
they had already conducted some sort of negotiations about
microelectronics technology issues, and most union leaders
expected the technology to spread rapidly. Anticipating the
automation of offices as well as factories, the unions said
that the “growth of surplus labor” would be the greatest
problem in both the manufacturing and clerical sectors.2
In Japan, there are four major nationwide organizations of
labor unions, commonly known as national centers. These
are: Sohyo (General Council of Trade Unions of Japan),
Domei (Japanese Confederation of Labor), Churitsuroren
(National Federation of Independent Unions of Japan), and
William Earle Klay is an associate professor in the Department of Public
Administration, Florida State University.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Shinsanbetsu (Federation of Independent Unions of Japan).
All four national centers have adopted written guidelines
related to microelectronics-based technology, with those of
Domei, Sohyo, and Churitsuroren being particularly broad
in scope.3
These guidelines generally promote a continuation of the
policies established in the landmark written agreement of
March 1, 1983, between the Nissan Motor Workers’ Union
and the Nissan Motor Co., previously cited in the Review.4
The provisions of that agreement included a commitment to
consultations between union and management in advance of
introducing new technologies into the workplace; job and
wage protection through the renouncement of layoffs, dis
missals, or downgrading of positions; an employer commit
ment to provide necessary training and education; and pro
tections for safety and health. It is now evident, however,
that many Japanese union leaders consider that agreement to
be only a beginning.
Domei, the national center with the largest number of
private sector workers, has agreed upon specific action
guidelines to be implemented or negotiated at each enter
prise, industrial, subnational, national, and international
level. While stressing the importance of predecision joint
consultations and consensus building at all levels, Domei
calls for the negotiation of a labor-management agreement
on technological innovation in each enterprise. All of its
action guidelines are based upon five “basic principles:”
• “Progress of Human Society and Acknowledgment of
Welfare.” The intent of this principle is to assure that the
new technology serves social and economic progress, and
that it promotes general welfare for all of society.
• “Establishment of Principle of Assessment.” The princi
ple of assessment is that the impact of technology on the
worker is to be assessed prior to the introduction of mi
croelectronic equipment into the workplace, and that nec
essary policies to ease the transition are to be decided in
advance.
• “Securing Social Equity.” Domei is concerned that the
benefits of microelectronics-based technology might not
be fully shared with workers and that the technology
might “widen the gaps among workers, industries, and
regions,” not merely within Japan, but among nations as
well. It is, therefore, “essential to establish a rule of dis
tributing the fruits of technological innovation equitably.”
• “Improvement in Worker’s Participation and LabourManagement Consultation.” Arguing that the new tech
nology deeply affects not only the employment relation
ship, but all of society, Domei says it is essential to the
building of “a public consensus” that labor-management
consultation on these issues become a universal practice
and that worker representation be included in setting the
directions for national science and technology policy.
• “Establishment of International Cooperation.” Realizing
that Japan’s economic success is causing stress among its
39
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Foreign Labor Developments
major industrial competitors, Domei is concerned that
“the advancement of the m e [microelectronics] revolu
tion” might isolate Japan from the rest of the world.
Therefore,
. .it is vital that Japan, where m e [mi
croelectronic] equipment is being introduced more
rapidly than anywhere else, should take the initiative for
establishing international cooperation.”
Domei calls for the establishment of a new national
quadripartite organization, including labor and public inter
est representation as well as government and management,
to set the basic directions for Japan’s science and technology
policy. It also plans to promote the adoption of international
fair labor standards which would, Domei hopes, be based
upon principles such as the ones it has adopted. At the
national level, Domei calls for a major research institute
devoted solely to the prior assessment of problems associ
ated with the implementation of microelectronics-based
technology.
At the enterprise level, Domei intends to negotiate com
pulsory prior consultation beginning with the planning and
designing stages. Specific objectives include increased in
comes and shorter working hours, employment stability,
and employer provided training opportunities through an
inhouse “lifelong vocational training system.” Particular
emphasis is placed upon the protection of opportunities for
women and older workers.
Even though it is not a common practice for Japanese
employers to impose layoffs, unions are clearly concerned
that the new technology might cause this to eventually hap
pen. Denki Roren, the Japanese Federation of Electrical
Machine Workers’ Unions, has developed guidelines and a
model agreement covering the introduction of microelec
tronic systems. It states, “Where there would be a direct
impact on employment through personnel reductions, the
union should express opposition to the entire concept of
microelectronic technology and prevent the company from
implementing its plans.”5
All of the national centers are concerned about the protec
tion of safety and health and the stresses associated with
working long hours at video display terminals, as well as
with robots, which have caused fatal accidents on rare occa
sions. The survey of the Japan Institute of Labor, mentioned
above, revealed that microelectronics-related safety and hy
giene issues have invoked intensified negotiations. Unions
are concerned that the introduction of machine-regulated
working conditions would be especially stressful to workers.
In this regard, Sohyo’s guidelines are the most stringent.
This national center, with by far the largest number of public
employees in its ranks, fears that unrestricted use of mi
croelectronics technology could cause increased authoritari
anism and invasions of privacy. Sohyo recognizes that man
agement has a need to gather information to monitor the
overall speed and status of work that is being performed but,
at the same time, Sohyo wants to prevent such computer
40
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
generated information from being used in personnel deci
sions about the performance and pay of any individual em
ployee. Its guidelines, therefore, call for the prohibition of
management’s use of computer monitoring to oversee and
evaluate the performance of individual workers. It also re
jects the practice of pay differentials based on individual
differences in ability to work at a computer. Sohyo’s policy
is that any use of computer-generated data about an individ
ual requires prior approval of the individual and the labor
union.
From an international perspective, the most problematic
aspect of microelectronics technology is its potential to re
place labor. Japanese unions recognize that this potential,
one that might be realized sooner in Japan than in any other
country, could jeopardize employment opportunities in that
country. At the same time, they realize that rapid adoption
of the technology in Japan could undermine the economies
and employment of other nations, especially in less devel
oped countries where labor intensiveness is an important
element of international competitiveness. To avert unem
ployment in Japan, they are actively promoting economic
expansion, especially through labor-management coopera
tion, to assure a flexible and motivated work force. Domei’s
guidelines, for example, call for the achievement of sus
tained real growth of 5 percent in the Japanese economy.
Whether Japanese unions can successfully follow a dual
policy of averting domestic unemployment through the pro
motion of economic expansion and, at the same time,
promote the international adoption of labor standards to
avert such unemployment in other countries, remains to be
seen.
□
---------- FOOTNOTES--------1 See Report of the General Policy Committee of the Social Policy
Council, The Information Society and Human Life (Tokyo, Social Policy
Bureau, Economic Planning Agency of the Japanese Government, March
31, 1983); also, Yonenji Masuda, The Information Society as PostIndustrial Society (Tokyo, Institute for the Information Society, 1980),
printed in the United States by the World Future Society, Bethesda, m d .
2 Microelectronics and the Response of Labor Unions (Tokyo, Japan
Institute of Labor, March 1984), tables 9 and 26.
3 “Sohyo’s Guidelines in the Interest of Regulating v d t Labor,” Inochi
[Life] (Tokyo, Sohyo, July 1985) (in Japanese); “Harmony Between New
Technology and Mankind— Dom ei’s Position to m e Revolution” (Tokyo,
Domei, January 1985); “Employment Questions Accompanying m e Based
Transformation: Towards Symmetry (A Proposal)” (Tokyo, Churitsuroren,
September 1983) (in Japanese); “ v d t Guidelines,” Activity Policies for
1985-86 (Tokyo, Shinsanbetsu, adopted at 35th Regular National Conven
tion, July 1984) (in Japanese).
4 Steven Deutsch, “International experiences with
change,” Monthly Labor Review, March 1986, p. 39.
technological
5 Denki Roren, “Guidelines for Securing Employment and Achieving
Humane Working Conditions in the Microelectronics Era” (Tokyo,
Japanese Federation of Electrical Machine Workers’ Unions, 1985), p. 15.
The use of such emphatic language is a signal to management that union
leaders’ concerns must be viewed seriously, for it implies the ultimate
sanction o f a work stoppage, something which both sides usually strive
hard to avoid.
M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
This list of selected collective bargaining agreements expiring in April is based on information collected
by the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering
1,000 workers or more. Private industry is arranged in order of Standard Industrial Classification.
Industry or activity
Em ployer and location
L abor organization1
N um ber of
workers
Associated General Contractors (Hartford, ct ) ............................................
Associated General Contractors (Columbus, oh ) .......................................
Associated General Contractors (Dayton, oh ) ..............................................
Associated General Contractors (Denver, c o ) ..............................................
Associated General Contractors o f Colorado (Colorado) .........................
Associated General Contractors, Building Chapter (Colorado) ..............
Associated General Contractors (Marquette, M i) ..........................................
Associated General Contractors and one other (C onnecticut)...................
Associated General Contractors (C o lo ra d o )...................................................
Associated Contractors o f Essex County (New Jersey) ............................
Building Contractors Association (New Jersey) ..........................................
Building Contractors Association (New Jersey) ..........................................
Building Contractors o f Southern N ew Jersey (N ew Jersey) ...................
Construction Employers Association (Cleveland, oh ) ..............................
Construction Contractors Association (Cleveland, O H )..............................
Independent Contractors (C olorad o).................................................................
Mason Contractors Association (Cleveland, O H )..........................................
Minneapolis/St. Paul Building Contractors (M in n esota)............................
National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc. (Washington, DC) . . .
National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc. Nassau-Suffolk
Chapter (New York)
National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc.
(Minneapolis, MN)
North Texas Contractors Association ( T e x a s ) ..............................................
North Texas Contractors Association ( T e x a s ) ..............................................
Pipe Line Contractors Association (Interstate) ............................................
Twin Cities Piping Industry Association (Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN) . .
Nestle C o., Inc. (Fulton, n y ) ............................................................................
L a b o rers...................................................
L ab orers...................................................
L a b o rers...................................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Carpenters ..............................................
L a b o rers...................................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Operating Engineers ............................
Iron Workers ..........................................
Carpenters ..............................................
L a b o rers...................................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Painters ...................................................
Operating Engineers ............................
B rick layers..............................................
Plumbers ................................................
Electrical Workers ( ibew ) ...................
Electrical Workers ( ibew ) ..................
5,000
1,700
1,000
4,150
1,500
3,100
1,000
3,000
1,050
1,850
12,500
14,000
2,200
4,000
1,250
2,500
1,200
1,350
2,200
1,400
Electrical Workers (ibew ) ..................
1,700
L a b o rers...................................................
Carpenters ..............................................
Plumbers ................................................
Plumbers ................................................
Retail, W holesale Department
Store
Teamsters (Ind.) ...................................
Paperworkers ..........................................
W oodw orkers..........................................
Leather Goods, Plastic and Novelty
Workers
Flint Glass Workers ............................
Glass, Pottery, Plastics and Allied
Workers
Boilermakers ..........................................
Glass, Pottery, Plastics and Allied
Workers
Auto Workers .......................................
D iesel Workers’ Union ( I n d .) ............
Electrical Workers (IBEW)..................
Electrical Workers (ibew ) ...................
Plumbers ................................................
Utility Co-Workers Association
(Ind.)
Electrical Workers ( ibew ) ...................
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
2,000
1,500
5,000
1,450
1,000
Private
C onstruction..........................................
Food products .....................................
Paper .....................................................
L ea th er...................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products . ..
Gentry-Foremost and two others (Salinas, CA) ............................................
Consolidated Papers, Inc., Consoweld Corp. (W isco n sin ).......................
Boise Cascade Co. (International Falls, M N )................................................
New York Industrial Council o f the National Handbag Association
(New York)
Glass Container Industrial Relations Council (Interstate) .........................
Owens-Illinois, Inc. (Interstate) ........................................................................
Lone Star Industries Inc. (Interstate) ..............................................................
Diamond Bathurst (Interstate)............................................................................
Primary m e ta ls .....................................
Machinery ............................................
Electrical p rod u cts..............................
Utilities .................................................
Wholesale tr a d e ...................................
Retail trade
..........................................
H o te ls .....................................................
Mueller Brass Co. (Port Huron, mi) ..............................................................
Cummins Engine Co. (Columbus, in ) ............................................................
Zenith Radio Corp., Rauland D ivision (Melrose Park, il ) .......................
Public Service Electric and Gas Co. (New J e r s e y ).....................................
Public Service Electric and Gas Co. (New J e r s e y ).....................................
Public Service Electric and Gas Co. (New J e r s e y ).....................................
Arizona Public Service Co. (Arizona) ............................................................
Greater New York Association o f Meat and Poultry Dealers (New
York, n y )
Shoprite, Pathmark, Grand Union, Foodtown, and others (Interstate) .
Kroger (Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX) ..........................................................................
Colonial Stores Inc. (South Carolina, North C arolin a)..............................
Nevada Resort Association (Las Vegas, n v ) ................................................
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Food and Commercial Workers . . . .
Operating Engineers; Teamsters
(Ind.)
1,400
2,600
1,300
4,000
3,500
7,000
1,200
7,000
1,000
5,500
1,550
4,450
1,450
1,400
2,800
2,100
21,000
5,000
1,500
3,500
Public
Social s e r v ic e s .....................................
1Affiliated
Ohio: Cuyahoga County welfare departm ent................................................
with AFL-CIO except where noted as independent (Ind.).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
State, County and Municipal
Employees
1,000
Developments in
Industrial Relations
twa
pilots extend current contract
At Trans World Airlines ( t w a ) , 3,000 pilots agreed to
extend their current agreement by 3 years, to January 1992.
During the agreement term, they will receive three 5-percent
pay increases, nearly restoring pay to the same level as in
1985 when the pilots took a 22-percent cut, which was
partly offset by profit-sharing and stock plans that will be
continued during the extension period. They had agreed to
the cut to help financier Carl C. Icahn’s efforts to thwart a
purchase bid by Frank Lorenzo, head of nonunion Texas Air
Corp. The pilots are represented by the Air Line Pilots
Association.
In January 1989, the pilots’ pay would have automatically
reverted to the 1985 level if they had not agreed to the
extension. In return for the extension, Icahn agreed that any
sales of assets will not exceed operating losses. Under the
1985 accord, Icahn had the right to sell unlimited assets if
the carrier lost money. The extension accord also includes
additional job protection for pilots affected by sales of
assets.
Other provisions include full restoration of a cut in paid
vacation negotiated in 1985, and an increase to 2 years
(from 1 year) in the period during which pilots are prohib
ited from bidding for work on different equipment.
Meanwhile, members of the Machinists union, who had
accepted cuts similar to Air Line Pilots Association mem
bers in 1985, were continuing to resist t w a ’ s requests for
negotiations on an extension agreement.
In a related development, t w a pilots voted to merge se
niority lists with 425 Air Line Pilots Association members
at Ozark Airlines, which was acquired by t w a in 1986.
According to a union official, the Ozark pilots were ex
pected to approve the merger of seniority lists, even though
coverage by the t w a contract will result in a 25-percent pay
cut for them.
The Independent Federation of Flight Attendants, which
lost a strike against t w a (see Monthly Labor Review July
1986, p. 48) but still represents the 4,000 strikers and re
placements, was seeking National Mediation Board recogni-
“ D e v e lo p m e n ts in Industrial R e la tio n s ” is prepared b y G e o r g e R u b en o f the
D iv is io n o f D e v e lo p m e n ts in L a b o r-M a n a g em en t R e la tio n s, B ureau o f
L ab or S ta tis tic s , and is la r g e ly b a sed on in fo rm a tio n from seco n d a ry
so u r ces.
42
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tion as sole bargaining representative for all t w a attendants,
while the Association of Flight Attendants, which repre
sented the 700 Ozark attendants, was petitioning the Board
to hold a representation election for all t w a attendants.
Elsewhere in the industry, 650 pilots employed by the
Flying Tiger Line cargo unit of Tiger International Inc.
agreed to a 3^-year contract calling for a 25-percent pay cut.
Prior to the settlement, the pilots’ pay had averaged
$117,000 a year. The parties also established a two-tier pay
system under which new employees will be paid less than
those already on the payroll. The unit, which reported a
$55.5 million loss during the latest 9-month period, has
been hurt by a recent increase in trans-Pacific cargo flights
by other carriers.
In return for these changes and cuts in supplemental pen
sions and other benefits, the pilots will share in the unit’s
profits and were allotted a seat on the unit’s 11-member
board of directors.
Kroger workers forgo bonus plan to save jobs
Employees of 40 Kroger Co. stores in Southwestern Vir
ginia and Tennessee accepted a wage cut, averting the
planned closing of 13 of the stores. In proposing the closing,
Kroger had called for a wage freeze and a new bonus system
at the stores that would have remained open, but the mem
bers of United Food and Commercial Workers ( u f c w ) Local
278 chose to forgo the bonus plan and take the pay cut to
save the jobs at the stores scheduled to close.
The pay cut was $1 an hour for top-rated grocery clerks,
who formerly earned $9.71, and 90 cents for meat depart
ment heads (formerly $11.43 to $11.74) and top-rated meatcutters (formerly $10.74). The cut will be partly restored
when the 3,200 employees receive a 25-cent-an-hour pay
increase in November 1987 and a 37-cent increase in
November 1988.
Another cost-reducing provision of the 34-month contract
was elimination of various job classifications in the meat
department, resulting in only a few groupings: full-time or
part-time employees and department heads.
Kroger also offered meatcutters inducements to quit their
jobs by December 27, 1986: $12,000 for those with more
than 12 years’ service and $10,000 for others. Similarly, all
clerks at top pay rates (attained after 3 years’ service) were
offered a $10,000 departure payment.
Elsewhere, Kroger negotiated a pay cut with the u f c w for
2,500 employees of 28 stores in the Dayton, o h , area. The
36-cent-an-hour cut, to be accomplished in three 12-cent
stages during the second half of the 3-year contract, applies
only to top-rated clerks and meatcutters. Pay was frozen for
all other employees. Prior to the settlement, top-rated clerks
earned $10.14 in Dayton stores and $9.69 for nearby rural
areas. For top-rated meatcutters, the respective rates were
$11.90 and $11.40.
Other terms included the elimination of four paid personal
days off, leaving clerks with two such days and meatcutters
with three, in addition to six regular paid holidays.
Kroger said that the cost-reducing terms, were needed to
aid the company in competing with discount stores and
nonunion stores.
Elsewhere in the industry, Jewel Food Stores and the
u f c w negotiated a new contract that equalized pay rates for
company employees in Northwest Indiana with those for its
employees in the Chicago area. The 700 employees in Indi
ana had been receiving $1.25 an hour less than the 16,300
Chicago employees.
Other terms for the food clerks included a 35-cent in
crease in their $10.90 hourly rate, followed by a 15-cent
increase in October 1987, and a 25-cent increase in October
1988. General merchandise clerks received 35-, 20-, and
20-cent increases on the corresponding dates, bringing their
rate to $9.75.
Compensation increases for realty service workers
In New York City, janitorial and other service employees
of about 1,000 commercial buildings were covered by a
settlement between the Realty Advisory Board of Labor
Relations and Local 32B-32J of the Service Employees.
The union said the terms were expected to be extended to
“virtually all” of the major commercial buildings in the city,
bringing the total number of covered employees to 30,000.
The 3-year contract provides for annual wage increases
totaling $62 a week, raising the average weekly rate to
$471, according to the union. Other provisions included
three annual $25 a month increases in pensions for future
retirees, bringing the benefit to $500 for workers retiring at
age 65 with 25 years of service; a $3 a week employer
payment into an annuity fund beginning in the third year;
doubling of major medical insurance coverage, to $1 mil
lion; a $2,500 increase in life insurance, to $20,000; in
creased dental and surgical benefits; and adoption of optical
coverage for family members.
Hawaiian nurses settle, avert strike
A scheduled strike by nearly 1,800 registered nurses was
averted when the Hawaii Nurses Association and five Hon
olulu hospitals agreed on 3-year contracts. The reported
19-percent increase in compensation included wage in
creases of 85 cents an hour in the first year and 50 cents each
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in the second and third years. A union official said that the
prior average wage rate was $12,425. The “charge nurse”
differential was increased to 60 cents an hour, from 40, and
the night shift differential was increased to 85 cents an hour,
from 75.
Benefit changes included pension improvements, bring
ing the monthly benefit to $550 for nurses retiring after 30
years’ service; an increase in the hospitals’ financing of
medical and dental insurance that apparently obviates the
need for employee contributions during the contract term; a
tuition reimbursement plan, financed by annual employer
payments of $15,000 ($25,000 at Queen’s Medical Center);
increased educational leave; and a requirement that nurses
working two weekends in a row be paid time and one-half
for the second weekend.
The parties also agreed to include some 150 “flying
nurses” in the bargaining unit. These nurses fly in from the
U.S. mainland for temporary assignments to ease a shortage
in Hawaii.
In addition to Queens, the hospitals covered by the settle
ment were St. Francis Hospital, Kapiolani Women’s and
Children’s Medical Center, Kaiser Foundation Hospital,
and Kuakini Medical Center.
Parts workers pay guaranteed if plant closes
In the automotive parts industry, Dana Corp. and the
Auto Workers negotiated a 3-year contract that provided for
lower than usual wage gains in return for improved income
guarantees for workers affected by plant closings. At the
beginning of the respective contract years, the 2,500 cov
ered employees will receive lump-sum payments equal to 2,
2.25, and 2.25 percent of earnings during the preceding 12
months. They will also continue to receive automatic quar
terly cost-of-living pay adjustments. Under the prior 3-year
contract, employees received 3-percent specified wage in
creases at the beginning of each contract year.
The improvements in job security included increased
company financing of Supplemental Unemployment Bene
fits and a new $4 million fund to guarantee 1 year of pay
continuation for workers losing their jobs because of plant
closings.
Other terms included retirement inducements of up to
$10,000 and improved pension and insurance benefits. The
contract covers plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Illinois, and Indiana.
High court rulings affect pregnant workers
In a 6 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld a Califor
nia law requiring employers to provide unpaid pregnancy
leave to employees. Writing for the majority, Justice Thurgood Marshall rejected arguments by business representa
tives and the Reagan Administration that the California law
violated provisions of the Federal Pregnancy Disability Act
of 1978 requiring that pregnant employees be treated the
43
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Developments in Industrial Relations
same as, but not better than, workers with other disabilities.
According to the rejected arguments, it is discriminatory to
require employers to provide leave for a pregnant employee
when they are not required to provide leave for an employee
with an injury or other disability.
Justice Marshall said the intent of the 1978 act was not to
limit benefits for pregnant women. Rather, he said, it was
only “a floor beneath which pregnancy disability benefits
may not drop— not a ceiling above which they may not
rise.” Continuing, Justice Marshall said that while there was
no intent to require States to give preferential treatment to
pregnant employees, there also was no congressional intent
to prohibit preferential treatment.
Despite this permissive aspect of the Federal Act, Justice
Marshall said the California law was narrowly drawn be
cause it covers only the period of actual physical disability
due to pregnancy or related medical conditions and does not
require employers to pay employees during the leave period.
Thus, Justice Marshall concluded, the “only benefit preg
nant workers derive” from the law is a general right to
reinstatement.
In the minority opinion, Justice Byron R. White, writing
for Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Lewis F.
Powell, said that the California law was in “square conflict”
with the Pregnancy Disability Act because it required “every
employer to have a disability leave policy for pregnancy
even if it has none for any other disability.” In their opinion,
this preferential treatment is “contrary to the mandate” of the
Federal law.
The case, California Federal Savings and Loan Associa
tion v. Guerra, arose when Lillian Garland lost her recep
tionist job at the firm after taking 3 months’ pregnancy
leave. When State officials charged California Federal with
violating the State law, the firm sued to have the law de
clared invalid.
In a related case, the Court held that Federal law permits
States to deny unemployment benefits to women who give
up their jobs because of pregnancy. The case, Wimberly v.
Labor and Industrial Relations Commission o f Missouri,
arose when Linda Wimberly, a cashier at a store in Kansas
City, took a leave of absence in 1980 to have a baby. She
asked to return a few months later, but was told that there
were no jobs. Missouri officials then rejected her request for
unemployment compensation, citing provisions of State law
permitting benefit payments only for job losses resulting
from work-related disabilities or an employer’s decision to
lay off workers.
In the 8 -0 decision, written by Justice Sandra Day
O’Connor, the Court held that the Federal Unemployment
44
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Tax Act of 1976 requires that pregnant employees not be
treated less favorably than fellow employees with other dis
abilities, but also does not require that they be treated more
favorably than fellow employees. Justice O’Connor said
that, under Missouri law, “all persons who leave work for
reasons not causally connected to the work or the employers
are disqualified from receiving benefits.” Continuing, Jus
tice O’Connor wrote, “to apply this law . . . all that is
relevant is that she stopped work for a reason” that was not
work related. Justice Harry Blackmun did not participate in
the case.
Only Vermont, Minnesota, North Dakota, and the Dis
trict of Columbia have unemployment compensation laws as
restrictive as those in Missouri. In most other States, women
who cannot regain their jobs after pregnancy leave, then
become eligible for unemployment benefits.
Court rules on accommodating religious holidays
The Supreme Court held that Federal law gives employers
latitude in accommodating the religious beliefs of workers
by changing work schedules and leave policies. Writing for
the 8-member majority, Chief Justice William Rehnquist
said that an employer must make a “reasonable” effort to
accommodate a worker’s religious beliefs but need not ac
cept the worker’s suggestions on how to attain the accom
modations.
The case arose when an Ansonia, c t , teacher requested
permission to use three annual paid personal business days
for religious holidays, although the labor contract specifi
cally prohibited such use. The school maintained it had
fulfilled its contractual obligation by giving the teacher three
unpaid days off. (The employee’s three other annual reli
gious holidays were covered by a provision giving all em
ployees three paid days off for unspecified holidays of their
choice.)
In the suit, the teacher claimed that the school system had
violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which
prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race,
sex, or religion.
In overruling the Federal court of appeals, the Supreme
Court held that the lower court should have considered
whether the school officials’ decision was reasonable, rather
than finding that the teacher’s suggestion was valid because
it did not impose “undue hardship” on the school system. In
the majority opinion, the Justices said that the officials’
decision was, in fact, reasonable.
Justices Thurgood Marshall and John Paul Stevens dis
sented, in part, from the majority.
□
Book Reviews
Listen up, America!
Trade Talks: America Better Listen! By C. Michael Aho and
Jonathan David Aronson. New York, Council on For
eign Relations, 1985. 178 pp. $8.95, paper.
The morning papers in late September 1986 carried sto
ries that identified five issues that the U.S. Trade Represen
tative thought so important he would walk away from the
talks if they were not on the table. These issues— agricul
ture, services, intellectual property, foreign investment, and
dispute settlement— provide much of the focus of C.
Michael Aho and Jonathan David Aronson’s analysis. In
general, this book demonstrates a high level of awareness of
the issues, the processes of international negotiation, and
the intricacies of foreign economic policymaking.
After setting the admittedly challenging economic and
political context for the latest series of trade negotiations,
Aho and Aronson set ambitious goals for them in terms of
higher economic growth and greater discipline. The second
part of the book analyzes the national goals and constraints
of the three major blocs in the negotiations— the United
States, other industrial countries, and the developing coun
tries. The concluding section outlines the authors’ view on
negotiating strategy. The sections are of uniformly high
quality; the chapters on goals, constraints, and internal pol
icymaking of the major actors will be of value to anyone
with a general interest in foreign trade policy.
The successful pursuit of accessibility and generality in
evitably left gaps which various specialists will clamor to
fill. For example, because the focus of Trade Talks is indeed
trade talks, the discussion of labor adjustment measures was
perfunctory, and perhaps not in tune with the most current
thinking. Aho and Aronson concentrate their analysis on the
functioning of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act and
measures to stretch out the timeframes for adjustment in
selected basic industrial sectors. By comparison, a task
force set up by the U.S. Secretary of Labor on economic
adjustment and worker dislocation is examining policies that
apply to displaced workers from all sectors of the economy,
with a view toward compressing the timeframe in which an
individual can make a satisfactory adjustment to economic
change. One result of this approach may be to lower the
profile of adjustment policy as a constraint on trade negoti
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ations. Aho and Aronson state the problem faced by adjust
ment policy very succinctly: “Trade does create new jobs—
probably more than it destroys— but they are entirely
different jobs, requiring entirely different skills.” However,
they seem not to have looked closely at measures that are
currently being considered to promote a more flexible, mo
bile, and skilled labor force.
Other, less important, misconceptions have been allowed
to pass into the book. Because there is little space in a
general work for detailed analysis of each and every issue,
current cliches about the economy are often accepted at face
value. In one case, the authors blandly assert that the pace
of economic change is accelerating. This is one of the most
unexamined propositions in circulation today. The scant
statistical data that can be found to examine the hypothesis
more closely turn out to contain a mass of contradictions.
One particularly vivid example of the contrariness of the
data is a table appearing in a recent business strategy text
book that indicates that the number of new products devel
oped by a sample of 44 large firms actually/«?// from 133 in
1961-65 to 75 in 1971-75. At the same time, however, the
percentage of those new products being produced in foreign
markets within 1 year of U.S. introduction rose from 24 to
39 percent.
The authors also seem to tacitly accept the notion of a
“declining industrial base” or the “deindustrialization” of
the U.S. economy. Most of the evidence in favor of such an
hypothesis is based on the kind of manufacturing employ
ment data referenced briefly in the chapter, “Setting the
Context.” It is true that in the medium term, factory employ
ment has fallen; however, it takes only the simplest look at
the data on growing manufacturing capacity or the continu
ing uptrend in actual production to cast serious doubt on the
notions of “declining base” or “deindustrialization.” It is a
shame that in a book very likely to be read by the generalist
policymaker, the authors could not find the space to outline
more clearly ongoing debates about contextual assumptions.
Aho and Aronson present some very interesting proposals
for advancing international trade agreements. They make
some very good points: Admit that trade, investment, mi
gration, the international monetary system and so on are
intimately related but that trying to put them all on one table
at one time will lead to a hopeless snarl. The authors then
advocate disaggregating the trade bargain. Another possibil45
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Book Renews
ity that is not presented would be to disaggregate the nego
tiations themselves. The General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (gatt) could be retained as the framework for the
issues concerning trade in industrial goods. The residuum of
tariffs, nontariff barriers, and dispute resolution would be at
the core of that round of talks. At the same time, new
general arrangements could come into being where the
trade-in-goods model has proved troublesome: for trade in
services (including intellectual property), gats ; for trade in
agriculture and commodities, gatac ; and so on. At the
completion of the negotiations of these general arrange
ments, preparations could begin for a technical round to
coordinate the agreements. In the longer term, the adminis
tration of the separate arrangements might, by further nego
tiation, be consolidated into a single, broad, international
trade organization, thus bringing the vision of the postwar
Bretton Woods treatymakers full circle.
— R ichard M. D evens , Jr .
Division of Labor Force Statistics
Bureau of Labor Statistics
There are chapters on Federal, State, and local government
roles, and also one on electric utilities. There appears to be
no easy way for governments to correct for the flaws and
failings of the private sector’s energy conservation deci
sions.
Private sector performance has also been uneven. For
example, in a chapter on industrial conservation, the authors
note that the cement industry has outperformed the steel
industry in energy savings, although both industries have
suffered from well-known problems in the last 12 years.
I particularly appreciate The Brookings Institution’s prac
tice of including commentaries on the essays by other ex
perts, usually with different perspectives. The perspectives
in this volume include a broad cross section of opinion. The
volume provides some useful information for those govern
ment employees who desire to promote conservation as well
as intelligent commentary on the pressures that affect re
source allocation in public organizations. This is an interest
ing volume on political economy.
— E dward A. S chroeder IV
School of Administrative Science
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Checks and balances
Energy Conservation: Successes and Failures. Edited by
John C. Sawhill and Richard Cotton. Washington, The
Brookings Institution, 1986. 270 pp. $28.95, cloth;
$10.95, paper.
Have American energy conservation efforts since 1973
been successful? In terms of overall reductions in energy use
per dollar of the gross national product, the answer is yes.
Have government programs played a strong role in this
success? While this book does not give a definitive answer
to this question, it does present sufficient evidence to show
that information is not yet available.
There are some well-known reasons for doubting that
purely private sector decisions on energy issues will always
lead to desirable results for society. The authors consider the
arguments for a public sector role in long-term research and
development, in dealing with national security type exter
nalities, and in the provision of information to consumers of
energy. In general, the authors conclude that government
activity is needed to assist the private sector markets in
achieving greater efficiency. A chapter on the financial bar
riers to conservation surveys the arguments of imperfections
in the financial capital markets, and generally argues that
these markets have worked reasonably well.
The book does not offer much comfort to those who
prefer allocation of resources by governmental decisions.
Several of the essays discuss cases of poor public sector
performances in choosing and implementing policies and
making decisions, in failing to perform followup studies to
evaluate programs and policies properly, and in terms of the
absence of strong financial incentives for cost efficiency.
46
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Publications received
Economic and social statistics
Altonji, Joseph G. and Aloysius Siow, Testing the R esponse o f
Consum ption to Incom e Changes with (N oisy) P anel D ata.
Cambridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
1986, 43 pp. (Working Paper Series, 2012.) $2, paper.
Banks, Vera J ., “Who Make Up the U.S. Farm Population?” Rural
D evelopm ent P erspectives, October 1986, pp. 18-20.
Freeman, Richard B. and Brian Hall, Perm anent H om elessness in
A m eric a ? Cambridge, M A , National Bureau of Economic Re
search, Inc., 1986, 38 pp. (Working Paper Series, 2013.) $2,
paper.
La Londe, Robert J., “Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of
Training Programs with Experimental Data,” The Am erican
Econom ic R eview , September 1986, pp. 604-20.
The Japan Institute of Labor, Japanese Working Life Profile:
S tatistical A sp e c ts . Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan, 1986, 80 pp.
Industrial relations
Chelius, James, ed., Current Issues in W orkers’ C om pen sation .
Kalamazoo, m i , W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Re
search, 1986, 372 pp. $19.95, cloth; $14.95, paper.
Doeringer, Peter B., Philip I. Moss, and David G. Terkla,
“Capitalism and Kinship: Do Institutions Matter in the Labor
Market? Industrial and L abor R elations R eview , October 1986,
pp. 48-60.
Ichniowski, Casey, “The Effects of Grievance Activity on Produc
tivity,” Industrial and L abor R elations R eview , October 1986,
pp. 75-89.
McGuiness, Kenneth C. and Jeffrey A. Norris, H ow to Take a
C ase Before the n l r b . 5th ed. Washington, The Bureau of Na
tional Affairs, Inc., 1986, 814 pp. $65.
U.S. Department of Commerce Im plications o f Internationaliza
Mishel, Lawrence, “The Structural Determinants of Union Bar
gaining Power,” Industrial and L abor R elations R eview , Octo
ber 1986, pp. 90-104.
Department of Commerce, Office of Economic Affairs, 1986,
285 pp.
Potter, Edward E., ed., Em ployee Selection: L egal and P ractical
A lternatives to C om pliance and L itig a tio n . 2d ed. Washington,
National Foundation for the Study of Equal Employment Policy,
1986, 330 pp. $19.75, paper.
Rose, Joseph B., “Legislative Support for Multi-Employer Bar
gaining: The Canadian Experience,” Industrial and L abor R ela
tions R eview , October 1986, pp. 3-18.
Sockell, Donna, “The Scope of Mandatory Bargaining: A Critique
and a Proposal,” Industrial and L abor R elations R eview , Octo
ber 1986, pp. 19-34.
The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Affirm ative Action Today: A
L egal and P ractical A nalysis; A ppendix. Washington, 1986,
172 and 92 pp., bibliography. $75.
Williams, Robert E., P ersonal Liability o f M anagers and Supervi
sors f o r Em ploym ent D iscrim in ation . 2d ed. Washington, Na
tional Foundation for the Study of Equal Employment Policy,
1986, 56 pp.
Industry and government organization
Barnett, Donald F. and Robert W. Crandall, Up from the Ashes:
The R ise o f the Steel M inim ill in the U nited States. Washington,
The Brookings Institution, 1986, 135 pp. $26.95, cloth; $9.95,
paper.
tion o f the U.S. Econom y. (P roceedings o f a Workshop on
Structural Change H eld January 14, 1986.) Washington, U.S.
Labor force
Allen, Steven G., Can Union L abor E ver C ost Less ? Cambridge,
M A , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 35 pp.
(Working Paper Series, 2019.) $2, paper.
Hertz, Rosanna, M ore Equal Than Others: Women and Men in
D u al-C areer M arriages. Berkeley, University of California
Press, 1986, 245 pp. $18.95.
Hewlett, Sylvia Ann, Alice S. Ilchman, John J. Sweeney, eds.,
Fam ily and Work: B ridging the G ap. Cambridge, M A , Ballinger
Publishing Co., 1986, 218 pp. $29.95.
Sonnenstuhl, William J. and Harrison M. Trice, Strategies fo r
E m ployee A ssistance P rogram s: The C rucial Balance. Ithaca,
N Y , Cornell University, New York State School of Industrial
and Labor Relations, 1986, 74 pp. (Key Issues Report, 30.) $7,
paper.
Waldinger, Roger D., Through the E ye o f the N eedle: Im m igrants
and Enterprise in N ew York’s G arm ent Trades. New York, New
York University, 1986, 231 pp. $35, Columbia University
Press, New York.
Management and organization theory
Danzinger, James N. and Kenneth L. Kraemer, P eople and C om
Ferris, James and Elizabeth Graddy, “Contracting Out: For What?
With Whom?” P ublic A dm inistration R eview , July-August
1986, pp. 332-44.
puters: The Im pacts o f Com puting on E nd U sers in O rganiza
tions. New York, Columbia University Press, 1986, 268
Levy, Robert A. and James M. Jondrow, “The Adjustment of
Employment to Technical Change in the Steel and Auto Indus
tries,” The Journal o f Business, July 1986, pp. 475-91.
Harrington, H. James, The Im provem ent P rocess: H ow A m erica’s
Leading C om panies Im prove Q uality. New York, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., 1987, 239 pp. $24.95.
Murphy, Patrick V. and Wayne S. Watkins, “Rural America Ben
efits from Airline Deregulation, but Less than Urban America,”
R ural D evelopm ent P erspectives, October 1986, pp. 2-7.
Monetary and fiscal policy
U.S. Department of Commerce, The Service Econom y: O pportu
nity, Threat or M yth? (P roceedings o f a Workshop on Structural
Change H eld on Oct. 22, 1985.) Washington, U.S. Department
of Commerce, Office of Economics Affairs, 1986, 155 pp.
International economics
pp. $32.50
Bosworth, Barry P., “Fiscal Fitness: Deficit Reduction and the
Economy,” The Brookings R eview , Winter/Spring 1986,
pp. 3-8.
Kitchen, John and Frank Zahn, “Interest Rates, Farm Prices, and
the U.S. Farm Sector,” R ural D evelopm ent P erspectives, Octo
ber 1986, pp. 21-24.
Bohi, Douglas R. and Michael A. Toman, “International Planning
for Future Oil Crises,” Resources, Summer 1986, pp. 13-16.
Wages and compensation
Burre-Hagglund, Kaarina, ed., The Finnish N ational R eports to
Akerlof, George A. and Lawrence F. Katz, D o D eferred W ages
the Twelfth C ongress o f the International A cadem y o f C om par
ative Law, H eld in Sydney and M elbourne, Australia, Aug.
1 8 -2 6 , 1986. Helsinki, Finland, University of Helsinki, Depart
D om inate Involuntary Unem ploym ent as a W orker D iscipline
D e v ic e ? Cambridge, M A , National Bureau of Economic Re
ment of Comparative Law, 1986, 188 pp.
Mills, D. Quinn, “Destructive Trade-Offs in U.S. Trade Policy,”
H arvard Business R eview , November-December 1986, pp.
119-24.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, o e c d
Em ploym ent Outlook, 1 9 8 6 . Paris, France, 1986, 155 pp. $24.
Available from OECD Publications and Information Center, Suite
1207, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue n w , Washington 200064582.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
search, Inc., 1986, 46 pp. (Working Paper Series, 2025.) $2,
paper.
Dickens, William T. and Lawrence F. Katz, Interindustry W age
Differences and Industry C haracteristics. Cambridge, M A , Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 45 pp. (Work
ing Paper Series, 2014.) $2, paper.
Lazear, Edward P., “Salaries and Piece Rates,” The Journal o f
Business, July 1986, pp. 405-31.
New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Flexible
P ay System s: “Introduction,” by Harry C. Katz and George T.
47
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Book Reviews
Milkovich; “The Promise of Gain Sharing,” by Robert B. McKersie; “Brother, Can You Share a Dime,” by Eugene Keilin,
Joshua Gotbaum, and Ron Bloom; “Knowledge-based Pay: A
Strategic Analysis,” by Ian V. Ziskin; “Two-Tier Compensation
Plans,” by Stephen A. Ploscowe, ilr R eport, Fall 1986,
pp. 4-28.
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 27 pp.
(Working Paper Series, 1887.) $2, paper.
Krueger, Alan B. and Lawrence H. Summers, Efficiency W ages
and the W age Structure, Cambridge, M A , National Bureau of
Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 37 pp. (Working Paper Series,
1952.) $2, paper.
Cam
bridge, m a , National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986,
38 pp. (Working Paper Series, 1968.) $2, paper.
Schwartz, Saul, “Earnings Capacity and the Trend in Inequality
Among Black Men,” The Journal o f Human R esources, Winter
1986, pp. 44-63.
----------- R eflections on the Inter-Industry W age Structure.
Welfare programs and social insurance
Bane, Mary Jo and David T. Ellwood, “Slipping Into and Out of
Poverty: the Dynamics of Spells,” The Journal o f Human R e
sources, Winter 1986, pp. 1-23.
Bishop, John H. and Mark Montgomery, “Evidence on Firm Par
ticipation in Employment Subsidy Programs,” Industrial R ela
tions, Winter 1986, pp. 56-64.
Chen, Yung-Ping and George F. Rohrlich, eds., Checks and B al
ances in Social Security: Sym posium in H onor o f R obert J.
M yers. Lanham, m d , University Press of America, Inc., 1986,
382 pp. $32.25, cloth; $17.50, paper.
Fuchs, Victor R., The Fem inization o f P overty? Cambridge, M A ,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 22 pp.
(Working Paper Series, 1934.) $2, paper.
Ehrenberg, Ronald G., Richard P. Chaykowski, Randy A. Ehren
berg, M erit P ay fo r School Superintendents? Cambridge, m a ,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1986, 48 pp.
(Working Paper Series, 1954.) $2, paper.
Hamermesh, Daniel S. and John R. Wolfe, Com pensating W age
D ifferentials and the D uration o f W age L oss. Cambridge, m a ,
Worker training and development
Dickinson, Katherine P., Terry R. Johnson, Richard W. West,
“An Analysis of the Impact of c e t a Programs on Participants’
Earnings,” The Journal o f Human Resources, Winter 1986,
pp. 64-91.
Great Britain, Department of Employment, “Postcards and Piers or
Plums Ripe for Picking?” by Sean Gough, Em ploym ent G azette,
August 1986, pp. 297-99.
Prais, S. J. and Hilary Steedman, “Vocational Training in France
and Britain: The Building Trades,” N ational Institute Econom ic
R eview , May 1986, pp. 45-55.
Seeberg, Irmtraud Streker, Michael C. Seeborg, Abera Zegeye,
“Training and Labor Market Outcomes of Disadvantaged
Blacks,” Industrial R e la tio n s , Winter 1986, pp. 33-44.
□
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
polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Depart
ment of Labor, Washington, D C 20212.
48
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Current
Labor Statistics
S c h e d u le o f r e le a s e d a te s fo r m a jo r
N o te s o n C u r r e n t L a b o r S ta tis tic s
bls
s ta tis tic a l s e r ie s
......................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................
50
51
C o m p a r a tiv e in d ic a to r s
1. Labor market indicators...................................................................................................................................................................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, andproductivity ..........................................................................................
3. Alternative measures o f wage and compensation changes ....................................................................................................................................
60
61
61
L a b o r fo r c e d a ta
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Employment status of the total population, data seasonally ad ju sted .................................................................................................................
Employment status of the civilian population, data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................................................................
Selected employment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ....................................
Selected unemployment indicators, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates by sex and age, data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................................................................................
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, data seasonally a d ju sted ...................................................................................................
Duration o f unemployment, data seasonally adjusted .............................................................................................................................................
Unemployment rates of civilian workers, by State .................................................................................................................................................
Employment of workers by State ................................................................................................................................................................................
Employment of workers by industry, data seasonally adjusted...........................................................................................................................
Average weekly hours by industry, data seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................................................
Average hourly earnings by industry ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Average weekly earnings by in d ustry..........................................................................................................................................................................
Hourly Earnings Index by industry..............................................................................................................................................................................
Indexes of diffusion: proportion of industries in which employment increased, seasonally adjusted .......................................................
Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population
...........................................................................................................
Annual data: Employment levels by industry ..........................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Average hours and earnings levels by in d ustry...............................................................................................................................
62
63
64
65
66
66
66
67
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
73
73
74
L a b o r c o m p e n s a tio n a n d c o lle c tiv e b a r g a in in g d a ta
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Employment Cost Index, compensation, by occupation and industry group ..................................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry g r o u p .........................................................................................
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area s i z e ..............................................................
Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments,
situations covering'1,000 workers or more ...............................................................................................................................................................
Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, bargainingsituations covering 1,000 workers or m o r e ......................................
Average effective wage adjustments, bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers ormore ..........
Specified compensation and wage adjustments, State and local government bargaining
situations covering 1,000 workers or more ...............................................................................................................................................................
Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more .................................................................................................................................................
75
76
77
78
78
79
79
79
P r ic e d a ta
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Consumer Price Index: U .S. City average, by expenditurecategory and commodity and service groups ................................................
Consumer Price Index: U .S. City average and local data, all items ....................................................................................................................
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items and major groups ......................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing ........................................................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ...................................................................................................................................................
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes by stage of p ro cessin g ...............................................................................................................................
U .S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade C lassification .........................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade C lassification..................................................
U .S. export price indexes by end-use category .........................................................................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by
end-use ca teg o ry .....................................................................................................................................
U .S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial C lassification...........................................................................................................................
U .S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification .........................................................................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
80
83
84
85
86
86
87
88
89
89
89
90
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics
Contents— Continued
Productivity data
42. Indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted .............................................................................
43. Annual indexes o f multifactor productivity ...............................................................................................................................................................
44. Annual indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and p r ic e s.................................................................................................
90
91
91
International comparisons
45. Unemployment rates in nine countries, data seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................................................
46. Annual data: Employment status o f civilian working-age population, ten countries ....................................................................................
47. Annual indexes o f productivity and related measures, twelve countries ...........................................................................................................
92
93
94
Injury and illness data
48. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness incidence r a te s...............................................................................................................................
Schedule of release dates for
Series
bls
95
statistical series
Release
date
Period
covered
Release
date
Period
covered
April 27
1st quarter
April 3
March
Release
date
Period
covered
MLRtable
number
Productivity and costs:
Nonfarm business and
manufacturing ................................
Nonfinancial corporations...................
March 2
4th quarter
Employment situation ............................
March 6
February
2; 42-44
2; 42-44
May 8
April
1; 4-21
Producer Price Index..............................
March 13
February
April 10
March
May 15
April
2; 33-35
Consumer Price Index............................
March 27
February
April 24
March
May 22
April
2; 30-32
Real earnings.........................................
March 27
February
May 22
April
14-17
April 24
March
Major collective bargaining
settlem ents.........................................
April 27
Employment Cost Index ........................
April 28
1st quarter
1st quarter
1-3;22-24
U.S. Import and Export
Price Indexes......................................
April 30
1st quarter
36-41
50
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3; 25-28
NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS
This section o f the Review presents the principal statistical series collected
and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics: series on labor force,
employment, unemployment, collective bargaining settlements, consumer,
producer, and international prices, productivity, international comparisons,
and injury and illness statistics. In the notes that follow, the data in each
group o f tables are briefly described, key definitions are given, notes on the
data are set forth, and sources of additional information are cited.
Adjustments for price changes. Some data— such as the Hourly
Earnings Index in table 17— are adjusted to eliminate the effect of changes
in price. These adjustments are made by dividing current dollar values by
the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate component of the index, then
multiplying by 100. For example, given a current hourly wage rate of $3
and a current price index number of 150, where 1967 = 1 0 0 , the hourly rate
expressed in 1967 dollars is $2 ($3/150 x 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars.
General notes
Additional information
The following notes apply to several tables in this section:
Seasonal adjustment.
Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect on the data of such factors as climatic conditions,
industry production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday
buying periods, and vacation practices, which might prevent short-term
evaluation o f the statistical series. Tables containing data that have been
adjusted are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” (All other data are not
seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past
experience. When new seasonal factors are computed each year, revisions
may affect seasonally adjusted data for several preceding years. (Season
ally adjusted data appear in tables 1 -3 , 4 -1 0 , 13, 14, 17, and 18.) Begin
ning in January 1980, the b l s introduced two major modifications in the
seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are
seasonally adjusted with a procedure called x - n a r im a , which was devel
oped at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard x - u method
previously used by b l s . A detailed description of the procedure appears in
The x -ll a r im a Seasonal Adjustment Method by Estela Bee Dagum (Statis
tics Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E , February 1980). The second change
is that seasonal factors are calculated for use during the first 6 months of
the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at midyear
for the July-December period. However, revisions of historical data con
tinue to be made only at the end of each calendar year.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 1 and 4 -1 0 were revised
in the February 1987 issue of the Review, to reflect experience through
1986.
Annual revisions o f the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in tables
13, 14, and 18 were made in the July 1986 Review using the x - ll a r im a
seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for productivity
data in table 42 are usually introduced in the September issue. Seasonally
adjusted indexes and percent changes from month to month and from
quarter to quarter are published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price
Index series. However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for
the U .S. average All Items c p i . Only seasonally adjusted percent changes
are available for this series.
Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the
Bureau in a variety of sources. News releases provide the latest statistical
information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule preceding these general notes. More
information about labor force, employment, and unemployment data and
the household and establishment surveys underlying the data are available
in Employment and Earnings, a monthly publication of the Bureau. More
data from the household survey are published in the two-volume data
book— Labor Force Statistics Derived From the Current Population Sur
vey, Bulletin 2096. More data from the establishment survey appear in two
data books— Employment, Hours, and Earnings, United States, and Em
ployment, Hours, and Earnings, States and Areas, and the annual supple
ments to these data books. More detailed information on employee com
pensation and collective bargaining settlements is published in the monthly
periodical, Current Wage Developments. More detailed data on consumer
and producer prices are published in the monthly periodicals, The c p i
Detailed Report, and Producer Prices and Price Indexes. Detailed data on
all of the series in this section are provided in the Handbook of Labor
Statistics, which is published biennally by the Bureau, b l s bulletins are
issued covering productivity, injury and illness, and other data in this
section. Finally, the Monthly Labor Review carries analytical articles on
annual and longer term developments in labor force, employment, and
unemployment; employee compensation and collective bargaining; prices;
productivity; international comparisons; and injury and illness data.
Symbols
p = preliminary. To increase the timeliness of some series, prelim
inary figures are issued based on representative but incom
plete returns.
r = revised. Generally, this revision reflects the availability o f later
data but may also reflect other adjustments,
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified,
n.e.s. = not elsewhere specified.
COMPARATIVE INDICATORS
(Tables 1-3)
Comparative indicators tables provide an overview and comparison of
major b l s statistical series. Consequently, although many of the included
series are available monthly, all measures in these comparative tables are
presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include employment measures from two ma
jor surveys and information on rates of change in compensation provided
by the Employment Cost Index ( e c i ) program. The labor force participation
rate, the employment-to-population ratio, and unemployment rates for
major demographic groups based on the Current Population (“household ”)
Survey are presented, while measures of employment and average weekly
hours by major industry sector are given using nonagricultural payroll data.
The Employment Cost Index (compensation), by major sector and by
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
b arg a in in g sta tu s, is c h o s e n fro m a va riety o f
bls
co m p e n sa tio n and w a g e
m ea su res b e c a u se it p ro v id es a c o m p r e h e n s iv e m ea su re o f e m p lo y e r c o sts
fo r h irin g la b o r, n ot ju st o u tla y s fo r w a g e s , and it is n ot a ffecte d by
e m p lo y m e n t sh ifts a m o n g o cc u p a tio n s and in d u stries.
Data on changes in compensation, prices, and productivity are pre
sented in table 2. Measures of rates of change of compensation and wages
from the Employment Cost Index program are provided for all civilian
nonfarm workers (excluding Federal and household workers) and for all
private nonfarm workers. Measures of changes in: consumer prices for all
urban consumers; producer prices by stage of processing; and the overall
export and import price indexes are given. Measures of productivity (output
per hour of all persons) are provided for major sectors.
51
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics
Alternative measures of wage and compensation rates of change,
which reflect the overall trend in labor costs, are summarized in table 3.
Differences in concepts and scope, related to the specific purposes of the
series, contribute to the variation in changes among the individual mea
sures.
Notes on the data
Definitions o f each series and notes on the data are contained in later
sections of these notes describing each set of data. For detailed descriptions
of each data series, see bls Handbook of Methods, Volumes I and II,
Bulletins 2134-1 and 2 1 34-2 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982 and 1984,
respectively), as well as the additional bulletins, articles, and other publi
cations noted in the separate sections of the Review's “Current Labor
Statistics Notes.” Historical data for many series are provided in the Hand
book of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
Users may also wish to consult Major Programs, Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, Report 718 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
EMPLOYMENT DATA
(Tables 1; 4-21)
Household survey data
the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of Employment and
Earnings.
Description of the series
in this section are obtained from the Current Population
Survey, a program o f personal interviews conducted monthly by the Bureau
o f the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of
about 59,500 households selected to represent the U .S. population 16 years
o f age and older. Households are interviewed on a rotating basis, so that
three-fourths o f the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive months.
Data in tables 4 - 1 0 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1986.
e m pl o y m e n t d a t a
Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all civilians who worked for pay any time
during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who worked
unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and (2) those
who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness,
vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. Members o f the Armed
Forces stationed in the United States are also included in the employed
total. A person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at
which he or she worked the greatest number of hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey
week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had
looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for
work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within the
next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The overall unem
ployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent o f the labor
force, including the resident Armed Forces. The civilian unemployment
rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor
force.
The labor force consists of all employed or unemployed civilians plus
members o f the Armed Forces stationed in the United States. Persons not
in the labor force are those not classified as employed or unemployed; this
group includes persons who are retired, those engaged in their own house
work, those not working while attending school, those unable to work
because o f long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because
o f personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The
noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years of age and
older who are not inmates o f penal or mental institutions, sanitariums, or
homes for the aged, infirm, or needy, and members of the Armed Forces
stationed in the United States. The labor force participation rate is the
proportion o f the noninstitutional population that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is total employment (including the resident
Armed Forces) as a percent o f the noninstitutional population.
Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjustments
are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for estimating
errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect the comparabil
ity o f historical data. A description of these adjustments and their effect on
52
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Additional sources of information
For detailed explanations of the data, see b ls Handbook of Methods ,
Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 1, and for
additional data, Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1985). A detailed description of the Current Population
Survey as well as additional data are available in the monthly Bureau of
Labor Statistics periodical, Employment and Earnings. Historical data
from 1948 to 1981 are available in Labor Force Statistics Derived from the
Current Population Survey: A Databook, Vols. I and II, Bulletin 2096
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” Monthly
Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
Establishment survey data
Description of the series
E m p l o y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a t a in this section are compiled from
payroll records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies by more than 250,000
establishments representing all industries except agriculture. In most indus
tries, 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 ware
house.) Self-employed persons and others not on a regular civilian payroll
are outside the scope o f the survey because they are excluded from estab
lishment records. This largely accounts for the difference in employment
figures between the household and establishment surveys.
Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which produces goods or services
(such as a factory or store) at a single location and is engaged in one type
of economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holiday
and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th of the
month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 percent of all persons
in the labor force) are counted in each establishment which reports them.
Production workers in manufacturing include working supervisors and
all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with production operations.
Those workers mentioned in tables 12-17 include production workers in
manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construction; and non
supervisory workers in the following industries: transportation and public
utilities; wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and
services. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employ
ment on private nonagricutural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers re
ceive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime or
late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special payments.
Real earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of changes in
consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived from the Consumer
Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers ( cpi- w ). The
Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from average hourly earnings data
adjusted to exclude the effects o f two types o f changes that are unrelated
to underlying wage-rate developments: fluctuations in overtime premiums
in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available)
and the effects o f changes and seasonal factors in the proportion of workers
in high-wage and low-wage industries.
Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsupervi
sory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard
or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the portion of gross average
weekly hours which were in excess of regular hours and for which overtime
premiums were paid.
The Diffusion Index, introduced in the May 1983 Review, represents
the percent o f 185 nonagricultural industries in which employment was
rising over the indicated period. One-half of the industries with unchanged
employment are counted as rising. In line with Bureau practice, data for
the 1-, 3-, and 6-month spans are seasonally adjusted, while those for the
12-month span are unadjusted. The diffusion index is useful for measur
ing the dispersion of economic gains or losses and is also an economic
indicator.
Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are peri
odically adjusted to com prehensive counts o f em ploym ent (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the release
o f May 1986 data, published in the July 1986 issue o f the Review. Conse
quently, data published in the Review prior to that issue are not necessarily
comparable to current data. Unadjusted data have been revised back to
April 1984; seasonally adjusted data have been revised back to January
1981. These revisions were published in the Supplement to Employment
and Earnings (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1986). Unadjusted data from
April 1985 forward, and seasonally adjusted data from January 1982 for
ward are subject to revision in future benchmarks.
In the establishment survey, estimates for the 2 most recent months are
based on incomplete returns and are published as preliminary in the tables
(13 to 16 in the Review). When all returns have been received, the esti
mates are revised and published as final in the third month of their appear
ance. Thus, August data are published as preliminary in October and
November and as final in December. For the same reason, quarterly estab
lishment data (table 1) are preliminary for the first 2 months of publication
and final in the third month. Thus, second-quarter data are published as
preliminary in August and September and as final in October.
Additional sources of information
Detailed data from the establishment survey are published monthly in the
periodical, Employment and Earnings. Earlier comparable unadjusted
and seasonally adjusted data are published in Employment, Hours, and
Earnings, United States, 1909-84, Bulletin 1312-12 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1985) and its annual supplement. For a detailed discussion o f the
methodology o f the survey, see bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 2. For additional data, see
Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and
establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing
employment estimates from household and payroll surveys,” Monthly
Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
bls
Unemployment data by State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained from two major sources— the
Current Population Survey ( c p s ) and the Local Area Unemployment Statis
tics ( l a u s ) program, which is conducted in cooperation with State employ
ment security agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force, employment, and unemployment
for States and sub-State areas are a key indicator of local economic condi
tions and form the basis for determining the eligibility o f an area for
benefits under Federal economic assistance programs such as the Job Train
ing Partnership Act and the Public Works and Economic Development Act.
Insofar as possible, the concepts and definitions underlying these data are
those used in the national estimates obtained from the c p s .
Notes on the data
Data refer to State of residence. Monthly data for 11 States— California,
Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas— are obtained directly from the
c p s , because the size of the sample is large enough to meet b l s standards
of reliability. Data for the remaining 39 States and the District o f Columbia
are derived using standardized procedures established by b l s . Once a year,
estimates for the 11 States are revised to new population controls. For the
remaining States and the District of Columbia, data are benchmarked to
annual average c ps levels.
Additional sources of information
Information on the concepts, definitions, and technical procedures used
to develop labor force data for States and sub-State areas as well as addi
tional data on sub-States are provided in the monthly Bureau of Labor
Statistics periodical, Employment and Earnings, and the annual report,
Geographic Profile of Employment and Unemployment (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics). See also bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 4.
COMPENSATION AND WAGE DATA
(Tables 1-3; 22-29)
are gathered by the Bureau from business
establishments, State and local governments, labor unions, collective bar
gaining agreements on file with the Bureau, and secondary sources.
C o m p e n s a t io n
a n d w age d a ta
Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index ( e c i ) is a quarterly measure of the rate of
change in compensation per hour worked and includes wages, salaries, and
employer costs o f employee benefits. It uses a fixed market basket of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
labor— similar in concept to the Consumer Price Index’s fixed market
basket of goods and services— to measure change over time in employer
costs of employing labor. The index is not seasonally adjusted.
Statistical series on total compensation costs and on wages and salaries
are available for private nonfarm workers excluding proprietors, the selfemployed, and household workers. Both series are also available for State
and local government workers and for the civilian nonfarm economy,
which consists o f private industry and State and local government workers
combined. Federal workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability sample consists o f about 2,200
private nonfarm establishments providing about 12,000 occupational ob
servations and 700 State and local government establishments providing
53
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics
3,500 occupational observations selected to represent total employment in
each sector. On average, each reporting unit provides wage and compensa
tion information on five well-specified occupations. Data are collected each
quarter for the pay period including the 12th day of March, June, Septem
ber, and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed employment weights from the
1980 Census of Population are used each quarter to calculate the indexes
for civilian, private, and State and local governments. (Prior to June 1986,
the employment weights are from the 1970 Census of Population.) These
fixed weights, also used to derive all of the industry and occupation series
indexes, ensure that changes in these indexes reflect only changes in com
pensation, not employment shifts among industries or occupations with
different levels o f wages and compensation. For the bargaining status,
region, and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan area series, however, employ
ment data by industry and occupation are not available from the census.
Instead, the 1980 employment weights are reallocated within these series
each quarter based on the current sample. Therefore, these indexes are not
strictly comparable to those for the aggregate, industry, and occupation
series.
Definitions
Total compensation costs include wages, salaries, and the employer’s
costs for employee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions, in
cluding production bonuses, incentive earnings, commissions, and cost-ofliving adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers for paid leave, supplemental pay
(including nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retirement and savings
plans, and legally required benefits (such as Social Security, workers’
compensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and employee benefits are such items
as payment-in-kind, free room and board, and tips.
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, when combined with the wages and salaries
series, a measure of the percent change in employer costs for employee
total compensation. State and local government units were added to the eci
coverage in 1981, providing a measure of total compensation change in the
civilian nonfarm economy (excluding Federal employees). Historical in
dexes (June 1981 = 100) o f the quarterly rates of change are presented in the
May issue o f the b ls monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments.
Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion of the Employment Cost Index, see the
Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982),
chapter 11, and the fo llo w in g M onthly L abor R eview articles:
“Employment Cost Index: a measure of change in the ‘price o f labor’,” July
1975; “How benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost In
dex,” January 1978; “Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost
Index,” May 1982; and “Introducing new weights for the Employment Cost
Index,” June 1985.
Data on the ec i are also available in bls quarterly press releases issued
in the month following the reference months of March, June, September,
and December; and from the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217
(Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1985).
Collective bargaining settlements
(wage and benefit costs) and wages alone, quarterly for private industry and
semiannually for State and local government. Compensation measures
cover all collective bargaining situations involving 5,000 workers or more
and wage measures cover all situations involving 1,000 workers or more.
These data, covering private nonagricultural industries and State and local
governments, are calculated using information obtained from bargaining
agreements on file with the Bureau, parties to the agreements, and second
ary sources, such as newspaper accounts. The data are not seasonally
adjusted.
Settlement data are measured in terms of future specified adjustments:
those that will occur within 12 months after contract ratification— firstyear— and all adjustments that will occur over the life of the contract
expressed as an average annual rate. Adjustments are worker weighted.
Both first-year and over-the-life measures exclude wage changes that may
occur under cost-of-living clauses that are triggered by future movements
in the Consumer Price Index.
Effective wage adjustments measure all adjustments occurring in the
reference period, regardless of the settlement date. Included are changes
from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred from con
tracts negotiated in earlier periods, and changes under cost-of-living adjust
ment clauses. Each wage change is worker weighted. The changes are
prorated over all workers under agreements during the reference period
yielding the average adjustment.
Definitions
Wage rate changes are calculated by dividing newly negotiated wages
by the average hourly earnings, excluding overtime, at the time the agree
ment is reached. Compensation changes are calculated by dividing the
change in the value of the newly negotiated wage and benefit package by
existing average hourly compensation, which includes the cost of previ
ously negotiated benefits, legally required social insurance programs, and
average hourly earnings.
Compensation changes are calculated by placing a value on the benefit
portion of the settlements at the time they are reached. The cost estimates
are based on the assumption that conditions existing at the time of settle
ment (for example, methods of financing pensions or composition of labor
force) will remain constant. The data, therefore, are measures of negotiated
changes and not of total changes in employer cost.
Contract duration runs from the effective date of the agreement to the
expiration date or first wage reopening date, if applicable. Average annual
percent changes over the contract term take account of the compounding of
successive changes.
Notes on the data
Care should be exercised in comparing the size and nature of the settle
ments in State and local government with those in the private sector because
of differences in bargaining practices and settlement characteristics. A
principal difference is the incidence of cost-of-living adjustment ( c o l a )
clauses which cover only about 2 percent of workers under a few local
government settlements, but cover 50 percent of workers under private
sector settlements. Agreements without c o l a ’s tend to provide larger speci
fied wage increases than those with c o l a ’ s . Another difference is that State
and local government bargaining frequently excludes pension benefits
which are often prescribed by law. In the private sector, in contrast,
pensions are typically a bargaining issue.
Additional sources of information
Description of the series
For a more detailed discussion on the series, see the bls Handbook of
Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 10.
Collective bargaining settlements data provide statistical measures of
negotiated adjustments (increases, decreases, and freezes) in compensation
Comprehensive data are published in press releases issued quarterly (in
January, April, July, and October) for private industry, and semi-
54
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
annually (in February and August) for State and local government. Histor
ical data and additional detailed tabulations for the prior calendar year
appear in the April issue o f the b l s monthly periodical, Current Wage
monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments. Historical data appear in
the bls Handbook of Labor Statistics.
Developments.
Other compensation data
Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the number and duration of major
strikes or lockouts (involving 1,000 workers or more) occurring during the
month (or year), the number of workers involved, and the amount o f time
lost because o f stoppage.
Data are largely from newspaper accounts and cover only establishments
directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or second
ary effect o f stoppages on other establishments whose employees are idle
owing to material shortages or lack o f service.
Definitions
Number of stoppages:
The number o f strikes and lockouts involving
workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
Workers involved: The number of workers directly involved in the
stoppage.
Number of days idle: The aggregate number of workdays lost by
workers involved in the stoppages.
Days of idleness as a percent of estimated working time: Aggregate
workdays lost as a percent of the aggregate number of standard workdays
in the period multiplied by total employment in the period.
1,000
Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one terminated in 1981 that
covered strikes involving six workers or more.
Additional sources of information
Data for each calendar year are reported in a b l s press release issued in
the first quarter o f the following year. Monthly data appear in the bls
Other b l s data on pay and benefits, not included in the Current Labor
Statistics section of the Monthly Labor Review, appear in and consist o f the
following:
Industry Wage Surveys provide data for specific occupations selected to
represent an industry’s wage structure and the types of activities performed
by its workers. The Bureau collects information on weekly work schedules,
shift operations and pay differentials, paid holiday and vacation practices,
and information on incidence o f health, insurance, and retirement plans.
Reports are issued throughout the year as the surveys are completed.
Summaries of the data and special analyses also appear in the Monthly
Labor Review.
Area Wage Surveys annually provide data for selected office, clerical,
professional, technical, maintenance, toolroom, powerplant, material
movement, and custodial occupations common to a wide variety o f indus
tries in the areas (labor markets) surveyed. Reports are issued throughout
the year as the surveys are completed. Summaries of the data and special
analyses also appear in the Review.
The National Survey of Professional, Administrative, Technical, and
Clerical Pay provides detailed information annually on salary levels and
distributions for the types of jobs mentioned in the survey’s title in private
employment. Although the definitions of the jobs surveyed reflect the
duties and responsibilities in private industry, they are designed to match
specific pay grades of Federal white-collar employees under the General
Schedule pay system. Accordingly, this survey provides the legally re
quired information for comparing the pay of salaried employees in the
Federal civil service with pay in private industry. (See Federal Pay Com
parability Act of 1970, 5 u.s.c. 5305.) Data are published in a bls news
release issued in the summer and in a bulletin each fall; summaries and
analytical articles also appear in the Review.
Employee Benefits Survey provides nationwide information on the inci
dence and characteristics o f employee benefit plans in medium and large
establishments in the United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Data are
published in an annual b l s news release and bulletin, as well as in special
articles appearing in the Review.
PRICE DATA
(Tables 2; 30-41)
P rice d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from retail and
primary markets in the United States. Price indexes are given in relation to
a base period (1967 = 100, unless otherwise noted).
Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index ( c pi ) is a measure of the average change in
the prices paid by urban consumers for a fixed market basket o f goods and
services. The cpi is calculated monthly for two population groups, one
consisting only o f urban households whose primary source of income is
derived from the employment o f wage earners and clerical workers, and the
other consisting o f all urban households. The wage earner index ( c pi - w ) is
a continuation o f the historic index that was introduced well over a halfcentury ago for use in wage negotiations. As new uses were developed for
the CPI in recent years, the need for a broader and more representative index
became apparent. The all urban consumer index ( cpi - u ), introduced in
1978, is representative o f the 1982-84 buying habits o f about 80 percent
o f the noninstitutional population o f the United States at that time, com
pared with 32 percent represented in the cpi- w . In addition to wage earners
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and cleric a l w o rk ers, the
cpi - u
c o v e r s p r o fe s s io n a l, m a n a g eria l, and te c h
n ica l w o rk ers, th e s e lf-e m p lo y e d , short-term w o rk ers, th e u n e m p lo y e d ,
re tirees, and o th ers n ot in the lab or fo rce .
The cpi is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, trans
portation fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods and services
that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quality o f these
items are kept essentially unchanged between major revisions so that only
price changes will be measured. All taxes directly associated with the
purchase and use o f items are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 21,000 retail establishments and 60,000
housing units in 91 urban areas across the country are used to develop the
“U .S. city average.” Separate estimates for 27 major urban centers are
presented in table 31. The areas listed are as indicated in footnote 1 to the
table. The area indexes measure only the average change in prices for each
area since the base period, and do not indicate differences in the level o f
prices among cities.
Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the way in which homeownership
costs are measured for the cpi- u . A rental equivalence method replaced the
55
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics
asset-price approach to homeownership costs for that series. In January
1985, the same change was made in the cpi- w . The central purpose of the
change was to separate shelter costs from the investment component of
homeownership so that the index would reflect only the cost of shelter
services provided by owner-occupied homes. An updated cpi -u and c pi -w
were introduced with release of the January 1987 data.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion o f the general method for computing the
c p i,
see
b l s
Handbook of Methods, Volume II, The Consumer Price Index, Bulletin
2 1 3 4 -2 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1984). The recent change in the mea
surement o f homeownership costs is discussed in Robert Gillingham and
Walter Lane, “Changing the treatment of shelter costs for homeowners in
the c p i ,” Monthly Labor Review, June 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 . An overview o f the
recently introduced revised c p i , reflecting 1982-84 expenditure patterns, is
contained in The Consumer Price Index: 1987 Revision , Report 736 (Bu
reau o f Labor Statistics, 1987).
Additional detailed cpi data and regular analyses of consumer price
changes are provided in the c p i Detailed Report, a monthly publication of
the Bureau. Historical data for the overall cpi and for selected groupings
may be found in the Handbook of Labor Statistics , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1985).
Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes ( ppi) measure average changes in prices re
ceived in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodi
ties in all stages o f processing. The sample used for calculating these
indexes currently contains about 3,200 commodities and about 60,000
quotations per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all
commodities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing,
mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The stage o f proc
essing structure o f Producer Price Indexes organizes products by class of
buyer and degree o f fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate
goods, and crude materials). The traditional commodity structure of ppi
organizes products by similarity of end use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price Indexes
apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the United States
from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally
collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. Most prices are 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 o f the month.
Since January 1976, price changes for the various commodities have
been averaged together with implicit quantity weights representing thenimportance in the total net selling value o f all commodities as of 1972. The
detailed data are aggregated to obtain indexes for stage-of-processing
groupings, commodity groupings, durability-of-product groupings, and a
number o f special composite groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
Notes on the data
Beginning with the January 1986 issue, the Review is no longer present
ing tables o f Producer Price Indexes for commodity groupings, special
composite groups, or sic industries. However, these data will continue to
be presented in the Bureau’s monthly publication Producer Price Indexes.
The Bureau has completed the first major stage of its comprehensive
overhaul o f the theory, methods, and procedures used to construct the
Producer Price Indexes. Changes include the replacement of judgment
sampling with probability sampling techniques; expansion to systematic
56
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
coverage of the net output of virtually all industries in the mining and
manufacturing sectors; a shift from a commodity to an industry orientation;
the exclusion of imports from, and the inclusion of exports in, the survey
universe; and the respecification of commodities priced to conform to
Bureau o f the Census definitions. These and other changes have been
phased in gradually since 1978. The result is a system of indexes that is
easier to use in conjunction with data on wages, productivity, and employ
ment and other series that are organized in terms of the Standard Industrial
Classification and the Census product class designations.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the methodology for computing Producer Price In
dexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 7.
Additional detailed data and analyses o f price changes are provided
monthly in Producer Price Indexes. Selected historical data may be found
in the Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1985).
International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The b l s International Price Program produces quarterly export and
import price indexes for nonmilitary goods traded between the United
States and the rest of the world. The export price index provides a measure
of price change for all products sold by U .S . residents to foreign buyers.
(“Residents” is defined as in the national income accounts: it includes
corporations, businesses, and individuals but does not require the organiza
tions to be U .S. owned nor the individuals to have U .S. citizenship.) The
import price index provides a measure of price change for goods purchased
from other countries by U .S. residents. With publication of an all-import
index in February 1983 and an all-export index in February 1984, all U .S.
merchandise imports and exports now are represented in these indexes. The
reference period for the indexes is 1977 = 100, unless otherwise indicated.
The product universe for both the import and export indexes includes raw
materials, agricultural products, semifinished manufactures, and finished
manufactures, including both capital and consumer goods. Price data for
these items are collected quarterly by mail questionnaire. In nearly all
cases, the data are collected directly from the exporter or importer, al
though in a few cases, prices are obtained from other sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered refer to prices at the U .S. border
for exports and at either the foreign border or the U .S. border for imports.
For nearly all products, the prices refer to transactions completed during the
first 2 weeks o f the third month of each calendar quarter— March, June,
September, and December. Survey respondents are asked to indicate all
discounts, allowances, and rebates applicable to the reported prices, so that
the price used in the calculation o f the indexes is the actual price for which
the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices for U .S. exports and imports,
indexes are also published for detailed product categories of exports and
imports. These categories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit level of detail
of the Standard Industrial Trade Classification System ( sitc ). The calcula
tion of indexes by sitc category facilitates the comparison of U .S. price
trends and sector production with similar data for other countries. Detailed
indexes are also computed and published on a Standard Industrial Classifi
cation (sic-based) basis, as well as by end-use class.
Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are weighted indexes o f the
Laspeyres type. Price relatives are assigned equal importance within each
weight category and are then aggregated to the s u e level. The values
assigned to each weight category are based on trade value figures compiled
by the Bureau o f the Census. The trade weights currently used to compute
both indexes relate to 1980.
Because a price index depends on the same items being priced from
period to period, it is necessary to recognize when a product’s specifica
tions or terms o f transaction have been modified. For this reason, the
Bureau’s quarterly questionnaire requests detailed descriptions of the phys
ical and functional characteristics of the products being priced, as well as
information on the number of units bought or sold, discounts, credit terms,
packaging, class o f buyer or seller, and so forth. When there are changes
in either the specifications or terms of transaction of a product, the dollar
value o f each change is deleted from the total price change to obtain the
“pure” change. Once this value is determined, a linking procedure is
employed which allows for the continued repricing o f the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free
alongside ship) U .S. port o f exportation. When firms report export prices
f.o.b. (free on board), production point information is collected which
enables the Bureau to calculate a shipment cost to the port o f exportation.
An attempt is made to collect two prices for imports. The first is the import
price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation, which is consistent with the
basis for valuation o f imports in the national accounts. The second is the
import price c.i.f. (cost, insurance, and freight) at the U .S. port of impor
tation, which also includes the other costs associated with bringing the
product to the U .S. border. It does not, however, include duty charges.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method of computing International Price
Indexes, see b l s Handbook of Methods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1982), chapter 8.
Additional detailed data and analyses of international price develop
ments are presented in the Bureau’s quarterly publication U.S. Import and
Export Price Indexes and in occasional Monthly Labor Review articles
prepared by bls analysts. Selected historical data may be found in the
Handbook of Labor Statistics , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
PRODUCTIVITY DATA
(Tables 2; 42-47)
U. S. productivity and related data
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real physical output to real input. As
such, they encompass a family o f measures which include single factor
input measures, such as output per unit of labor input (output per hour) or
output per unit o f capital input, as well as measures of multifactor produc
tivity (output per unit of labor and capital inputs combined). The Bureau
indexes show the change in output relative to changes in the various inputs.
The measures cover the business, nonfarm business, manufacturing, and
nonfinancial corporate sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly compensation, unit labor costs, unit
nonlabor payments, and prices are also provided.
Unit profits include corporate profits and the value o f inventory adjust
ments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours paid of payroll workers, selfemployed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Capital services is the flow of services from the capital stock used in
production. It is developed from measures of the net stock o f physical
assets— equipment, structures, land, and inventories— weighted by rental
prices for each type o f asset.
Labor and capital inputs combined are derived 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
Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant prices produced per hour of labor input.
Output per unit of capital services (capital productivity) is the value of
goods and services in constant dollars produced per unit of capital services
input.
Multifactor productivity is the ratio output per unit of labor and capital
inputs combined. Changes in this measure reflect changes in a number of
factors which affect the production process such as changes in technology,
shifts in the composition of the labor force, changes in capacity utilization,
research and development, skill and efforts o f the work force, manage
ment, and so forth. Changes in the output per hour measures reflect the
impact o f these factors as well as the substitution of capital for labor.
Compensation per hour is the wages and salaries of employees plus
employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans, and
the wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the self-employed
(except for nonfinancial corporations in which there are no selfemployed)— the sum divided by hours paid for. Real compensation per
hour is compensation per hour deflated by the change in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compensation costs expended in the
production o f a unit of output and are derived by dividing compensation by
output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, interest,
and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by subtracting
compensation of all persons from current dollar value of output and divid
ing by output. Unit nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit
nonlabor payments except unit profits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Output measures for the business sector and the nonfarm businesss sector
exclude the constant dollar value o f owner-occupied housing, rest of world,
households and institutions, and general government output from the con
stant dollar value of gross national product. The measures are derived from
data supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of
Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing out
put indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to annual esti
mates of output (gross product originating) from the Bureau o f Economic
Analysis. Compensation and hours data are developed from data o f the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
The productivity and associated cost measures in tables 4 2 -4 4 describe
the relationship between output in real terms and the labor time and capital
services involved in its production. They show the changes from period to
period in the amount of goods and services produced per unit of input.
Although these measures relate output to hours and capital services, they
do not measure the contributions of labor, capital, or any other specific
factor of production. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of many influ
ences, including changes in technology; capital investment; level o f output;
utilization of capacity, energy, and materials; the organization o f produc
tion; managerial skill; and the characteristics and efforts of the work force.
Additional sources of information
Descriptions of methodology underlying the measurement o f output per
hour and multifactor productivity are found in the b l s Handbook of Meth
ods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 13. His
torical data for selected industries are provided in the Bureau’s Handbook
of Labor Statistics , 1985, Bulletin 2217.
57
MONTHLY LABOR
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
(Tables 45-47)
Labor force and unemployment
Description of the series
Tables 45 and 46 present comparative measures of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment— approximating U .S. concepts— for the
United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and six European countries. The
unemployment statistics (and, to a lesser extent, employment statistics)
published by other industrial countries are not, in most cases, comparable
to U .S. unemployment statistics. Therefore, the Bureau adjusts the figures
for selected countries, where necessary, for all known major definitional
differences. Although precise comparability may not be achieved, these
adjusted figures provide a better basis for international comparisons than
the figures regularly published by each country.
Definitions
For the principal U .S. definitions of the labor force, employment, and
unemployment, see the Notes section on EMPLOYMENT DATA: House
hold Survey Data.
Notes on the data
The adjusted statistics have been adapted to the age at which compulsory
schooling ends in each country, rather than to the U .S. standard of 16 years
o f age and over. Therefore, the adjusted statistics relate to the population
age 16 and over in France, Sweden, and from 1973 onward, Great Britain;
15 and over in Canada, Australia, Japan, Germany, the Netherlands, and
prior to 1973, Great Britain; and 14 and over in Italy. The institutional
population is included in the denominator of the labor force participation
rates and employment-population ratios for Japan and Germany; it is ex
cluded for the United States and the other countries.
In the U .S. labor force survey, persons on layoff who are awaiting recall
to their job are classified as unemployed. European and Japanese layoff
practices are quite different in nature from those in the United States;
therefore, strict application of the U .S. definition has not been made on this
point. For further information, see Monthly Labor Review, December
1981, pp. 8 -1 1 .
The figures for one or more recent years for France, Germany, Great
Britain, Italy, and the Netherlands are calculated using adjustment factors
based on labor force surveys for earlier years and are considered prelimi
nary. The recent-year measures for these countries are, therefore, subject
to revision whenever data from more current labor force surveys become
available.
Additional sources of information
For further information, see International Comparisons of Unemploy
ment, Bulletin 1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978), Appendix B and
unpublished Supplements to Appendix B available on request. The statis
tics are also analyzed periodically in the Monthly Labor Review . Additional
historical data, generally beginning with 1959, are published in the Hand
book o f Labor Statistics and are available in unpublished statistical supple
ments to Bulletin 1979.
Manufacturing productivity and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 47 presents comparative measures of manufacturing labor produc
tivity, hourly compensation costs, and unit labor costs for the United
58
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
States, Canada, Japan, and nine European countries. These measures are
limited to trend comparisons— that is, intercountry series of changes over
time— rather than level comparisons because reliable international com
parisons of the levels of manufacturing output are unavailable.
Definitions
Output is constant value output (value added), generally taken from the
national accounts of each country. While the national accounting methods
for measuring real output differ considerably among the 12 countries, the
use of different procedures does not, in itself, connote lack of comparabil
ity— rather, it reflects differences among countries in the availability and
reliability of underlying data series.
Hours refer to all employed persons including the self-employed in the
United States and Canada; to all wage and salary employees in the other
countries. The U .S. hours measure is hours paid; the hours measures for the
other countries are hours worked.
Compensation (labor cost) includes all payments in cash or kind made
directly to employees plus employer expenditures for legally required in
surance programs and contractual and private benefit plans. In addition, for
some countries, compensation is adjusted for other significant taxes on
payrolls or employment (or reduced to reflect subsidies), even if they are
not for the direct benefit of workers, because such taxes are regarded as
labor costs. However, compensation does not include all items of labor
cost. The costs o f recruitment, employee training, and plant facilities and
services— such as cafeterias and medical clinics— are not covered because
data are not available for most countries. Self-employed workers are in
cluded in the U .S. and Canadian compensation figures by assuming that
their hourly compensation is equal to the average for wage and salary
employees.
Notes on the data
For most of the countries, the measures refer to total manufacturing as
defined by the International Standard Industrial Classification. However,
the measures for France (beginning 1959), Italy (beginning 1970), and the
United Kingdom (beginning 1976), refer to manufacturing and mining less
energy-related products and the figures for the Netherlands exclude
petroleum refining from 1969 to 1976. For all countries, manufacturing
includes the activities of government enterprises.
The figures for one or more recent years are generally based on current
indicators of manufacturing output, employment, hours, and hourly com
pensation and are considered preliminary until the national accounts and
other statistics used for the long-term measures become available.
Additional sources of information
For additional information, see the bls Handbook of Methods, Bulletin
2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 16 and periodic Monthly
Labor Review articles. Historical data are provided in the Bureau’s Hand
book of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217, 1985. The statistics are issued
twice per year— in a news release (generally in May) and in a Monthly
Labor Review article (generally in December).
OCCUPATIONAL INJURY AND ILLNESS DATA
(Table 48)
Description of the series
The Annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses is designed to
collect data on injuries and illnesses based on records which employers in
the following industries maintain under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act o f 1970: agriculture, forestry, and fishing; oil and gas extraction;
construction; manufacturing; transportation and public utilities; wholesale
and retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and services. Excluded
from the survey are self-employed individuals, farmers with fewer than 11
employees, employers regulated by other Federal safety and health laws,
and Federal, State, and local government agencies.
Because the survey is a Federal-State cooperative program and the data
must meet the needs of participating State agencies, an independent sam
ple is selected for each State. The sample is selected to represent all pri
vate industries in the States and territories. The sample size for the
survey is dependent upon (1) the characteristics for which estimates are
needed; (2) the industries for which estimates are desired; (3) the charac
teristics o f the population being sampled; (4) the target reliability of the
estimates; and (5) the survey design employed.
While there are many characteristics upon which the sample design could
be based, the total recorded case incidence rate is used because it is one of
the most important characteristics and the least variable; therefore, it re
quires the smallest sample size.
The survey is based on stratified random sampling with a Neyman
allocation and a ratio estimator. The characteristics used to stratify the
establishments are the Standard Industrial Classification (sic) code and size
o f employment.
Definitions
Recordable occupational injuries and illnesses are: (1) occupational
deaths, regardless of the time between injury and death, or the length of the
illness; or (2) nonfatal occupational illnesses; or (3) nonfatal occupational
injuries which involve one or more of the following: loss of consciousness,
restriction o f work or motion, transfer to another job, or medical treatment
(other than first aid).
O ccupational injury is any injury such as a cut, fracture, sprain, ampu
tation, and so forth, which results from a work accident or from exposure
involving a single incident in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal condition or disorder, other than
one resulting from an occupational injury, caused by exposure to environ
mental factors associated with employment. It includes acute and chronic
illnesses or disease which may be caused by inhalation, absorption, inges
tion, or direct contact.
Lost workday cases are cases which involve days away from work, or
days o f restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workday cases involving restricted work activity are those cases
which result in restricted work activity only.
Lost workdays away from work are the number of workdays (consec
utive or not) on which the employee would have worked but could not
because o f occupational injury or illness.
Lost workdays—restricted work activity are the number of workdays
(consecutive or not) on which, because of injury or illness: (1) the em
ployee was assigned to another job on a temporary basis; or (2) the em
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ployee worked at a permanent job less than full time; or (3) the employee
worked at a permanently assigned job but could not perform all duties
normally connected with it.
The number of days away from work or days of restricted work
activity does not include the day of injury or onset of illness or any days
on which the employee would not have worked even though able to work.
Incidence rates represent the number of injuries and/or illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers.
Notes on the data
Estimates are made for industries and employment-size classes and for
severity classification: fatalities, lost workday cases, and nonfatal cases
without lost workdays. Lost workday cases are separated into those where
the employee would have worked but could not and those in which work
activity was restricted. Estimates o f the number of cases and the number of
days lost are made for both categories.
Most o f the estimates are in the form of incidence rates, defined as the
number of injuries and illnesses, or lost workdays, per 100 full-time em
ployees. For this purpose, 200,000 employee hours represent 100 em
ployee years (2,000 hours per employee). Only a few of the available
measures are included in the Handbook of Labor Statistics . Full detail is
presented in the annual bulletin, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the
United States, by Industry.
Comparable data for individual States are available from the bls Office
o f Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to b l s by the Mine Safety and
Health Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration, respec
tively. Data from these organizations are included in b l s and State publica
tions. Federal employee experience is compiled and published by the Occu
pational Safety and Health Administration. Data on State and local
government employees are collected by about half of the States and territo
ries; these data are not compiled nationally.
Additional sources of information
The Supplementary Data System provides detailed information describ
ing various factors associated with work-related injuries and illnesses.
These data are obtained from information reported by employers to State
workers’ compensation agencies. The Work Injury Report program exam
ines selected types of accidents through an employee survey which focuses
on the circumstances surrounding the injury. These data are not included
in the Handbook of Labor Statistics but are available from the b l s Office
of Occupational Safety and Health Statistics.
The definitions of occupational injuries and illnesses and lost workdays
are from Recordkeeping Requirements under the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970. For additional data, see Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses in the United States, by Industry, annual Bureau o f Labor
Statistics bulletin; b l s Handbook of Methods , Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1982), chapter 17; Handbook of Labor Statistics , Bulletin
2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985), pp. 411-14; annual reports in the
Monthly Labor Review, and annual U .S. Department of Labor press
releases.
59
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Comparative Indicators
1. Labor market indicators
1986
1985
Selected indicators
1985
1986
I
IV
III
II
I
IV
III
II
Employment data
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey)’
Labor force participation r a te ..............................................................
Employment-population r a tio ...............................................................
Unemployment rate ..............................................................................
M e n .......................................................................................................
16 to 24 years .................................................................................
25 years and o v e r ...........................................................................
Women .................................................................................................
16 to 24 years .................................................................................
25 years and o v e r ...........................................................................
Unemployment rate, 15 weeks and o v e r .......................................
65.1
60.5
7.1
6.9
13.5
5.3
7.3
13.1
5.7
1.9
65.2
60.6
7.1
7.0
14.2
5.3
7.2
13.1
5.7
1.9
65.3
60.8
6.9
6.9
13.7
5.4
6.9
2.0
64.9
60.3
7.1
6.9
14.2
5.2
7.3
13.1
5.6
1.9
97,295
80,958
24,947
19,323
72,347
97,897
81,414
24,866
19,241
73,031
98,668
82,069
24,937
19,261
73,731
99,403
82,731
25,028
19,284
74,375
99,848
83,144
24,952
19,194
74,896
100,316
83,650
24,872
19,116
75,444
101,062
84,167
24,892
19,152
76,170
35.0
40.4
3.3
34.9
40.4
3.2
34.9
40.6
3.3
34.9
40.8
3.5
34.9
40.7
3.4
34.8
40.7
3.4
34.7
40.7
3.5
34.7
40.8
3.5
1.3
.7
65.3
60.7
7.0
6.9
13.7
5.4
7.1
2.0
5.5
1.9
6.0
2.1
Total ...........................................................................................................
Private sector .........................................................................................
G oods-producing....................................................................................
M anufacturing.....................................................................................
Service-producing .................................................................................
97,614
81,199
24,930
19,314
72,684
100,165
83,430
24,938
19,186
75,227
96,581
80,341
24,970
19,439
71,611
Average hours:
Private sector .........................................................................................
Manufacturing ..................................................................................
O vertim e...........................................................................................
34.9
40.5
3.3
34.8
40.7
3.4
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal w o rk e rs )......
Private industry workers .....................................................................
Goods-producing2 ............................................................................
Service-producing2 ..........................................................................
State and local government w o rk e rs ................................................
4.3
3.9
3.4
4.4
5.7
3.6
3.2
3.1
3.2
5.2
Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
U n io n ......................................................................................................
Nonunion ...............................................................................................
2.6
2.1
4.6
3.6
12.8
65.4
60.9
6.9
6.9
13.4
5.4
64.7
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.0
5.3
7.4
12.9
5.9
64.8
60.1
7.3
7.1
14.2
5.4
7.5
13.1
64.8
60.1
7.2
7.0
14.1
5.3
7.4
13.0
5.9
64.7
60.0
7.2
7.0
14,0
5.3
7.5
12.9
6.0
2.0
12.6
5.4
1.9
6.8
12.5
5.3
1.8
Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data), in thousands:1
Employment Cost Index
’ Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-
60
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1.6
.6
1.8
1.2
1.5
1.0
1.2
.8
.7
1.0
.2
3.4
.7
.6
1.0
1.4
1.6
1.3
.8
.6
.6
.6
.5
.7
.5
.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
.8
.9
.6
.6
1.0
1.2
.2
producing industries include all other private sector industries.
.7
.9
1.1
.7
.6
.8
2.8
.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.5
.3
.7
.8
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes In compensation, prices, and productivity
1985
Selected measures
1985
1986
1986
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
Compensation data 1, 2
Employment Cost Index-com pensation (wages, salaries,
benefits):
Civilian nonfarm .................................
Private nonfarm .....................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries
Civilian nonfarm ........................................
Private n o n fa rm ..............................................
4.3
3.9
3.6
3.2
4.4
4.1
3.5
3.1
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.6
0.7
.8
0.6
.6
.6
.6
1.3
.9
1.7
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
.8
.8
1.1
1.1
0.6
.6
6
.9
.7
.5
0.7
.7
Price data1
Consumer Price Index (All urban consumers): All ite m s ......
Producer Price Index:
Finished g o o d s ..........................
Finished consumer g o o d s .........................
Capital equipment .....................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ...............
Crude m ate rials.....................................
1.1
3.8
1.8
.0
-2 .5
-3 .8
1.5
2.7
-.3
-5.6
1.1
1.0
.7
.7
.4
-.3
1.3
-.4
-3.1
2.1
-4.4
-9 .7
.7
-1.4
-1.4
-1.4
-.5
-4.5
.2
-2.1
.9
-.4
.6
.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
.4
4.3
-3.1
-4.1
.5
.4
-.7
-.7
-.7
-2.9
-7.6
-.9
-1.5
.2
.6
.3
.9
.6
2.0
- 4
-.2
-.2
-.5
Productivity data3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business s e c to r.................................
Nonfarm business s e c to r...........................
Nonfinancial corporations 4 ................................
1.0
.5
1.2
.7
.7
.9
.3
2.7
.8
“
w iaiiyco aio ucv,cmuci- iu - u cu o iiluci uMctiiyu. wuaneny cnanges
are calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price
data are not seasonally adjusted and the price data are not compounded.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.
3.4
1.8
2.2
-3.2
-3.5
-2.8
2.2
4.9
3.3
4.3
-.5
.5
.5
-.3
-.4
-.3
-2.3
-1.7
.2
dexes. The data are seasonally adjusted.
Output per hour of all employees.
- Data not available.
4
Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Quarterly average
1S85
C o m p o n e n ts
III
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector.............................................
All employees, nonfarm business sector.........................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 2 ....................................................
Private nonfarm ..............................................................
Union..............................................................
Nonunion...................................................................
State and local governments..........................................
Employment Cost Index—wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2 ............................................................
Private nonfarm .........................................................
Union........................................................... "1 .".
Nonunion...................................................................
State and local governments...........................................
Total effective wage adjustments3 ...........................................
From current settlements................................................
From prior settlements.......................................................
From cost-of-living provision..............................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements:3
First-year adjustments.......................................................
Annual rate over life of contract.......................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:6
First-year adjustment..........................................................
Annual rate over life of contract........................
1 Seasonally adjusted.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.
3 Limited to major collective bargaining units
most recent data are preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Four quarters ended-
1986
IV
I
4.4
3.2
3.8
3.7
1.6
1.3
.8
.5
1.4
3.4
.7
.6
.6
.6
II
2.5
3.1
1985
III
2.8
IV
IV
4.4
3.9
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.8
3.0
2.7
2.7
.7
1.1
.6
.6
4.9
4.7
3.2
5.4
4.3
3.9
4.1
3.8
2.9
4.2
5.5
4.0
3.8
2.5
4.2
5.8
3.6
3.2
2.3
3.5
5.2
3.6
3.2
4.2
3.9
3.2
4.3
5.5
3.1
4.1
3.7
2.5
4.1
5.7
2.9
.5
3.5
3.1
2.3
3.4
5.4
2.3
.5
.8
.2
.9
.6
.8
.7
.5
.8
.6
.5
.2
.7
3.2
.5
.7
.7
.5
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
.7
.7
3.0
1.4
.6
1.2
.9
.4
.9
.4
.7
.2
.6
(4)
.4
<4)
.1
.5
(4)
1.3
1.6
.3
.7
.8
2.8
1.1
.7
.6
1.9
of 1,000 workers or more. The
III
4.4
4.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
.7
1.1
1.0
.6
.2
.8
II
2.4
3.1
3.1
.5
.4
I
2.9
2.3
2.0
1.2
.2
IV
2.3
.6
.6
.5
.6
.8
.5
.1
.2
.1
2.1
1.7
1.3
.9
1.5
3.5
III
1986
.8
1.2
2.6
6.0
4.6
5.7
5.0
4.8
3.6
5.4
5.6
3.5
.9
4.4
4.1
3.1
4.6
5.6
3.3
.7
.2
.2
.1
2.0
2.1
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.7
2.7
2.4
3.1
2.7
2.6
1.8
.8
1.8
.7
2.7
.6
.8
2.0
1.7
2.5
2.3
2.5
1.8
.7
1.6
2.2
1.4
2.0
1.6
.2
1.2
1.7
.9
1.4
2.1
3.6
5.2
3.5
3.1
2.0
3.5
5.4
2.3
.5
1.7
.2
1.2
1.8
1.1
1.6
4 Data round to zero.
6 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
4.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Employment status of the total population, by sex, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1987
1986
Annual average
Employment status
1985
1986
Jan.
Feb.
Apr.
Mar.
May
June
Sept.
Aug.
July
Oct.
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
TOTAL
Noninstitutional population 1, 2 .......
Labor force2 .....................................
Participation rate 3 .................
Total employed 2 ..........................
Employment-population
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian e m p lo ye d ......................
A g ricu ltu re ...............................
Nonagricultural in dustries.....
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
Not in labor fo r c e ...........................
183,575
120,782
65.8
112,759
179,912
117,167
65.1
108,856
182,293
119,540
65.6
111,303
181,361
118,485
65.3
110,583
181,512
118,733
65.4
110,248
181,678
118,880
65.4
110,500
181,843
118,987
65.4
110,664
181,998
119,274
65.5
110,852
182,183
119,685
65.7
111,293
182,354
119,789
65.7
111,559
182,525
119,821
65.6
111,764
182,713
119,988
65.7
111,703
182,935
120,163
65.7
111,941
183,114
120,426
65.6
112,183
183,297
120,336
65.7
112,387
60.5
1,706
107,150
3,179
103,971
8,312
7.1
62,744
61.1
1,706
109,597
3,163
106,434
8,237
6.9
62,752
61.0
1,691
108,892
3,280
105,612
7,902
6.7
62,876
60.7
1,691
108,557
3,105
105,452
8,485
7.1
62,779
60.8
1,693
108,807
3,252
105,555
8,380
7.0
62,798
60.9
1,695
108,969
3,199
105,770
8,323
7.0
62,856
60.9
1,687
109,165
3,151
106,014
8,422
7.1
62,724
61.1
1,680
109,613
3,164
106,449
8,392
7.0
62,498
61.2
1,672
109,887
3,124
106,763
8,230
6.9
62,565
61.2
1,697
110,067
3,057
107,010
8,057
6.7
62,704
61.1
1,716
109,987
3,142
106,845
8,285
6.9
62,725
61.2
1,749
110,192
3,162
107,030
61.3
1,751
110,432
3,215
107,217
8,243
61.3
1,750
110,637
3,161
107,476
7,949
62,772
62,688
62,961
62,793
86,025
65,967
76.7
61,447
87,349
66,973
76.7
62,443
86,882
76.7
62,392
86,954
66,737
76.7
62,142
87,035
66,793
76.7
62,221
87,120
66,770
76.6
62,253
87,195
66,854
76.7
62,201
87,288
66,937
76.7
62,318
87,373
66,968
76.6
62,402
87,460
66,911
76,5
62,483
87,556
67,128
76.7
62,528
87,682
67,130
76.6
62,565
87,773
67,407
76.8
62,833
87,868
67,425
76.7
62,986
88,020
67,672
76.9
63,187
71.4
1,556
59,891
4,521
6.9
71.5
1,551
60,892
4,530
71.5
1,539
60,603
4,595
6.9
71.5
1,540
60,681
4,572
71.5
1,541
60,712
4,517
71.4
1,525
60,793
4,619
6.9
71.4
1,541
60,942
4,428
71.6
1,592
61,241
4,574
71.7
1,593
61,393
4,439
71.8
1,591
61,596
4,484
6.6
71.4
1,560
60,968
4,600
6.9
71.4
1,590
60,975
4,565
6.8
71.3
1,533
60,668
4,653
7.0
71.4
1,518
60,884
4,566
6.8
71.8
1,539
60,853
4,274
6.4
93,886
51,200
54.5
47,409
94,944
52,568
55.4
48,861
94,479
51,819
54.8
48,191
94,558
51,996
55.0
48,106
94,643
52,087
55.0
48,279
94,723
52,217
55.1
48,411
94,803
52,420
55.3
48,651
94,895
52,748
55.6
48,975
94,981
52,821
55.6
49,157
95,065
52,910
55.7
49,281
95,156
52,860
55.6
49,175
95,253
53,033
55.7
49,376
95,341
53,019
55.6
49,350
95,429
52,911
55.4
49,401
95,556
53,110
55.6
49,572
50.5
150
47,259
3,791
7.4
51.5
155
48,706
3,707
7.1
51.0
152
48,039
3,628
7.0
50.9
152
47,954
3,890
7.5
51.0
153
48,126
3,808
7.3
51.1
154
48,257
3,806
7.3
51.3
154
48,497
3,769
7.2
51.6
155
48,820
3,773
7.2
51.8
154
49,003
3,664
6.9
51.8
156
49,125
3,629
6.9
51.7
156
49,019
3,685
7.0
51.8
159
49,217
3,657
6.9
51.8
159
49,191
3,669
6.9
51.8
157
49,244
3,510
51.9
157
49,415
3,538
6.7
8,222
6.8
6.6
6.8
61.4
1,748
111,011
3,145
107,866
8,023
6.6
Men, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population ' , 2 .......
Participation rate 3 ..................
Total employed 2 ..........................
Employment-population
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
66,666
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.6
6.6
Women, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population ’ , 2 .......
Participation rate 3 ..................
Total employed2 ...........................
Employment-population
Resident Armed Forces ' .......
Civilian em p lo ye d ......................
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation.
Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
62
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4 Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including
Forces).
the resident Armed
5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
Employment status
1986
1987
y
1985
1986
178,206
115,461
64.8
107,150
180,587
117,834
65.3
109,597
60.1
8,312
7.2
62,744
60.7
8,237
7.0
62,752
77,195
60,277
78.1
56,562
73.3
2,278
54,284
3,715
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
179,670
116,794
65.0
108,892
179,821
117,042
65.1
108,557
179,985
117,187
65.1
108,807
180,148
117,292
65.1
108,969
180,311
117,587
65.2
109,165
180,503
118,005
65.4
109,613
180,682
118,117
65.4
109,887
180,828
118,124
65.3
110,067
180,997
118,272
65.3
109,987
60.6
7,902
60.5
8,380
7.2
62,798
60.5
8,323
7.1
62,856
60.5
8,422
7.2
62,724
60.7
8,392
7.1
62,498
60.8
8,230
7.0
62,565
60.9
8,057
62,876
60.4
8,485
7.2
62,779
62,704
60.8
8,285
7.0
62,725
78,523
61,320
78.1
57,569
78,101
61,143
78.3
57,599
78,171
61,092
78.2
57,296
78,236
61,177
78.2
57,388
78,309
61,080
78.0
57,392
78,387
61,158
78.0
57,338
78,484
61,330
78.1
57,522
78,586
61,355
78.1
57,544
78,634
61,219
77.9
57,585
73.3
2,292
55,277
3,751
6.1
73.7
2,340
55,259
3,544
5.8
73.3
2,261
55,035
3,796
73.4
2,389
54,999
3,789
73.3
2,319
55,073
3,688
73.1
2,279
55,059
3,820
73.3
2,309
55,213
3,808
73.2
2,275
55,269
3,811
86,506
47,283
54.7
44,154
87,567
48,589
55.5
45,556
87,112
47,897
55.0
44,952
87,185
48,009
55.1
44,820
87,263
48,065
55.1
44,934
87,355
48,181
55.2
45,094
87,444
48,433
55.4
45,335
87,547
48,739
55.7
45,657
51.0
596
43,558
3,129
52.0
614
44,943
3,032
51.6
677
44,275
2,945
51.4
591
44,229
3,189
51.5
589
44,345
3,131
6.5
51.6
585
44,509
3,087
6.4
51.8
604
44,731
3,098
6.4
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
181,186
118,414
65.4
110,192
181,363
118,675
65.4
110,432
181,547
118,586
65.3
110,637
111,011
60.8
6.9
62,772
60.9
8,243
6.9
62,688
60.9
7,949
6.7
62,961
61.1
8,023
6.7
62,793
78,722
61,412
78.0
57,607
78,802
61,409
77.9
57,595
78,874
61,703
78.2
57,883
78,973
61,826
78.3
58,101
79,132
61,948
78.3
58,227
73.2
2,185
55,400
3,634
5.9
73.2
2,286
55,321
3,805
73.1
2,297
55,298
3,814
73.4
2,303
55,580
3,820
73.6
2,289
55,812
3,725
73.6
2,254
55,974
3,720
87,629
48,879
55.8
45,869
87,689
48,950
55.8
45,956
87,779
48,920
55.7
45,905
87,856
49,014
55.8
46,020
87,933
49,043
55.8
46,067
88,016
48,923
55.6
46,058
88,150
49,161
55.8
46,261
52.2
583
45,074
3,082
6.3
52.3
607
45,262
3,010
52.4
622
45,334
2,994
52.3
614
45,291
3,015
52.4
612
45,408
2,994
52.4
675
45,392
2,976
52.3
621
45,437
2,865
5.9
52.5
628
45,633
2,900
5.9
Jan.
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 ......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e .........................
Participation rate ..................
Employed ....................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
Unem ployed...........................
Unemployment ra te ................
Not in labor force ...........................
6.8
6.8
8,222
181,827
119,034
65.5
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
E m ployed......................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
A g riculture..................................
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed........................
Unemployment ra te ...............
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.0
Women, 20 years ond over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
Employed ...............................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
A g riculture..................................
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed.................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
6.6
6.2
6.1
6.6
6.2
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ...................
Employed ....................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
A g riculture..................................
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed................................
Unemployment ra te ...............
14,506
7,901
54.5
6,434
14,496
7,926
54.7
6,472
14,458
7,754
53.6
6,341
14,465
7,941
54.9
6,441
14,485
7,945
54.9
6,485
14,484
8,031
55.4
6,483
14,480
7,996
55.2
6,492
14,472
7,936
54.8
6,434
14,467
7,883
54.5
6,474
14,505
7,955
54.8
6,526
14,496
7,940
54.8
6,475
14,527
7,991
55.0
6,577
14,557
7,929
54.5
6,482
14,558
7,837
53.8
6,478
14,545
7,926
54.5
6,524
44.4
305
6,129
1,468
18.6
44.6
258
6,215
1,454
18.3
43.9
263
6,078
1,413
18.2
44.5
253
6,168
1,500
18.9
44.8
274
6,211
1,460
18.4
44.8
295
6,188
1,548
19.3
44.8
268
6,224
1,504
18.8
44.5
272
6,162
1,502
18.9
44.8
242
6,232
1,409
17.9
45.0
250
6,276
1,429
18.0
44.7
242
6,233
1,465
18.5
45.3
253
6,324
1,414
17.7
44.5
237
6,245
1,447
18.2
44.5
251
6,227
1,359
17.3
44.9
264
6,260
1,402
17.7
153,679
99,926
65.0
93,736
155,432
101,801
65.5
95,660
154,784
100,993
65.2
95,099
154,889
101,178
65.3
94,780
155,005
101,208
65.3
94,955
155,122
101,237
65.3
95,095
155,236
101,531
65.4
95,283
155,376
101,946
65.6
95,720
155,502
102,015
65.6
95,861
155,604
155,723
102,158
65.6
96,000
155,856
102,297
65.6
96,147
155,979
102,455
65.7
96,281
156,111
102,503
65.7
96,533
156,313
102,746
65.7
96,717
61.0
6,191
61.5
6,140
61.4
5,894
5.8
61.2
6,398
6.3
61.3
6,253
61.3
6,142
61.4
6,248
61.6
6,226
61.6
6,154
61.8
5,945
5.8
61.6
6,158
61.7
6,150
61.7
6,174
61.8
5,970
5.8
61.9
6,029
5.9
20,002
20,028
12,553
62.7
10,716
20,056
12,652
63.1
10,799
20,089
12,720
63.3
10,895
20,120
12,611
63.0
10,822
12,719
63.2
10,910
20,152
12,707
63.1
10,968
20,187
12,831
63.6
10,997
54.1
1,789
14.2
53.5
1,837
14.6
53.8
1,853
14.6
54.2
1,825
14.3
54.2
1,809
14.2
54.4
1,739
13.7
54.5
1,833
14.3
White
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ...................
Employed ............................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
Unem ployed................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
6.2
6.0
6.2
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.0
102,122
65.6
96,177
6.0
6.0
6.0
Black
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ...................
Employed ......................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
U nem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
19,664
12,364
62.9
10,501
19,989
12,654
63.3
10,814
19,837
12,561
63.3
10,723
19,863
12,572
63.3
10,704
19,889
12,634
63.5
10,770
19,916
12,687
63.7
10,809
19,943
12,721
63.8
10,839
19,974
12,712
63.6
10,818
53.4
1,864
15.1
54.1
1,840
14.5
54.1
1,838
14.6
1,868
53.9
54.2
1,864
14.8
54.3
1,878
14.8
54.3
1,882
14.8
54.2
1,894
14.9
14.9
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
5. Continued— Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1987
1986
Annual average
Employment status
1985
1986
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
11,915
7,698
64.6
6,888
12,344
8,076
65.4
7,219
12,148
7,796
64.2
6,994
12,184
7,922
65.0
6,991
12,219
7,926
64.9
7,095
12,255
7,969
65.0
7,129
12,290
8,006
65.1
7,136
57.8
811
10.5
58.5
857
10.6
57.6
802
10.3
57.4
931
11.8
58.1
831
10.5
58.2
840
10.5
58.1
870
10.9
July
Aug.
12,326
8,085
65.6
7,224
12,362
8,121
65.7
7,269
12,397
8,130
65.6
7,248
58.6
861
10.6
58.8
852
10.5
58.5
882
10.8
June
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
12,432
8,179
65.8
7,286
12,469
8,200
65.8
7,345
12,505
8,226
65.8
7,437
12,540
8,320
66.3
7,446
12,653
8,431
58.6
893
10.9
58.9
855
10.4
59.5
789
9.6
59.4
874
10.5
59.6
893
Sept:
Hispanic origin
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Participation rate ....................
E m p lo ye d ......................................
Employment-population
U nem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
1 The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
6.
7,538
10.6
because data for the “ other races” groups are not presented and Hispanics are included
in both the white and black population groups.
Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
1987
1986
Annual average
Selected categories
1985
1986
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
CHARACTERISTIC
Civilian employed, 16 years and
Married men, spouse present ..
Married women, spouse
Women who maintain families .
107,150
59,891
47,259
39,248
109,597
60,892
48,706
39,658
108,892
60,853
48,039
39,558
108,557
60,603
47,954
39,363
108,807
60,681
48,126
39,396
108,969
60,712
48,257
39,504
109,165
60,668
48,497
39,582
109,613
60,793
48,820
39,613
109,887
60,884
49,003
39,634
110,067
60,942
49,125
39,735
109,987
60,968
49,019
39,691
110,192
60,975
49,217
39,780
110,432
61,241
49,191
39,952
110,637
61,393
49,244
40,093
111,011
61,596
49,415
40,102
26,336
5,597
27,144
5,837
26,820
5,703
26,695
5,723
26,761
5,754
26,889
5,799
27,016
5,734
27,354
5,719
27,474
5,812
27,388
5,832
27,249
5,926
27,323
6,016
27,333
6,041
27,400
6,005
27,525
5,985
1,535
1,458
185
1,547
1,447
169
1,642
1,482
165
1,512
1,444
158
1,655
1,450
169
1,539
1,467
173
1,489
1,472
177
1,508
1,492
163
1,504
1,434
171
1,509
1,387
174
1,521
1,460
159
1,562
1,451
164
1,582
1,425
198
1,621
1,400
152
1,650
1,370
136
95,871
16,031
79,841
1,249
78,592
7,811
289
98,299
16,342
81,957
1,235
80,722
7,881
255
97,752
16,333
81,419
1,245
80,174
7,693
271
97,500
16,155
81,345
1,208
80,137
7,711
261
97,661
16,160
81,501
1,227
80,274
7,713
243
97,858
16,231
81,627
1,309
80,318
7,634
251
98,047
16,333
81,714
1,261
80,453
7,793
235
98,314
16,377
81,937
1,267
80,670
7,832
236
98,312
16,582
81,730
1,241
80,489
8,019
258
98,586
16,446
82,140
1,247
80,893
7,956
271
98,692
16,333
82,359
1,229
81,130
7,939
275
98,846
16,264
82,582
1,216
81,366
7,993
265
98,869
16,457
82,412
1,183
81,229
8,179
252
99,164
16,443
82,721
1,189
81,532
8,056
239
99,550
.16,412
83,138
1,269
81,869
8,192
246
5,590
2,430
2,819
13,489
5,588
2,456
2,800
13,935
5,551
2,377
2,870
13,877
5,446
2,385
2,724
13,800
5,548
2,352
2,908
13,778
5,853
2,534
2,922
13,900
5,825
2,605
2,843
13,853
5,538
2,437
2,813
14,142
5,442
2,473
2,661
13,967
5,471
2,417
2,741
13,981
5,544
2,472
2,772
13,922
5,740
2,481
2,826
14,178
5,563
2,510
2,714
14,021
5,596
2,444
2,867
13,877
5,505
2,473
2,695
14,170
5,334
2,273
2,730
13,038
5,345
2,305
2,719
13,502
5,297
2,231
2,770
13,386
5,214
2,242
2,669
13,354
5,295
2,160
2,819
13,351
5,567
2,382
2,806
13,528
5,569
2,485
2,749
13,412
5,322
2,307
2,727
13,613
5,222
2,317
2,609
13,578
5,269
2,283
2,678
13,606
5,303
2,314
2,710
13,520
5,450
2,314
2,739
13,736
5,319
2,366
2,626
13,567
5,342
2,286
2,765
13,455
5,201
2,281
2,599
13,750
MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS
OF WORKER
Agriculture:
Wage and salary w o rk e rs ........
Self-employed w o rk e rs .............
Unpaid family w o rk e rs ..............
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary w o rk e rs ........
Private in d u strie s....................
Private households..............
O th e r ......................................
Self-employed w o rke rs .............
Unpaid family w o rk e rs ..............
PERSONS AT WORK
PART TIME1
All industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack w o r k ..................................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part t im e .......................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack w o r k ..................................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part t im e .......................
1 Excludes persons “ with a job but not at work” during the survey perio
64
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
for such reasons a s vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.
7.
Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Unemployment rates)
Annual average
1986
Selected categories
1985
1986
7.2
18.6
7.0
18.3
6.2
6.6
6.1
6.2
White, t o t a l...............................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .
Men, 16 to 19 y e a rs ......
Women, 16 to 19 years
Men, 20 years and over .....
Women, 20 years and o v e r .
6.2
15.7
16.5
14.8
5.4
5.7
15.6
16.3
14.9
5.3
5.4
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 o v e r.
15.1
40.2
41.0
39.2
13.2
13.1
Hispanic origin, to ta l.
Married men, spouse p re s e n t.....
Married women, spouse present .
Women who maintain fa m ilie s....
Full-time w o rk e rs ...........................
Part-time workers ..........................
Unemployed 15 weeks and o v e r.
Labor force time lost1 ...................
1987
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
6.8
7.2
18.9
7.2
18.4
7.1
19.3
7.2
18.8
7.1
18.9
7.0
17.9
6.2
6.6
6.2
6.0
6.2
6.2
6.1
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.2
5.8
15.1
15.0
15.1
5.0
5.4
6.3
16.0
16.6
15.4
5.4
5.9
6.2
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.0
15.0
15.9
14.1
5.4
5.7
16.3
17.1
15.4
5.2
5.5
15.9
17.0
14.7
5.4
5.5
15.9
17.1
14.6
5.4
5.4
15.2
15.6
14.7
5.4
5.3
14.5
39.3
39.3
39.2
12.9
12.4
14.6
41.5
41.1
41.9
12.9
14.8
42.4
42.6
42.2
12.8
12.3
14.8
41.9
41.2
42.7
12.8
12.5
14.8
40.5
40.5
40.5
12.9
12.7
14.9
39.5
39.7
39.4
13.3
12.7
14.2
38.0
40.5
35.0
12.9
12.2
14.9
40.0
39.5
40.7
13.3
12.5
10.5
10.6
10.3
11.8
4.3
5.6
10.4
6.8
9.3
4.4
5.2
9.8
4.3
5.1
9.9
6.5
8.7
4.5
5.5
9.9
6.9
9.3
1.8
2.0
7.7
8.1
6.8
10.7
7.2
9.5
13.0
7.3
7.4
7.1
5.3
7.8
5.9
3.8
13.8
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
6.8
18.0
5.9
7.0
18.5
6.2
6.9
17.7
6.9
18.2
6.7
17.3
6.7
17.7
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.1
6.2
6.1
5.9
5.9
5.8
15.4
16.6
14.2
5.1
5.2
6.0
6.0
6.0
15.9
16.6
15.1
5.4
5.3
15.4
15.7
15.2
5.4
5.2
16.0
16.3
15.7
5.4
5.2
5.8
15.1
15.5
14.6
5.3
5.0
5.9
15.0
16.1
13.8
5.3
5.1
14.6
40.3
38.8
41.9
13.2
12.5
14.6
38.4
38.6
38.3
13.4
12.4
14.3
35.8
37.8
33.8
13.1
12.4
14.2
36.0
35.0
37.0
12.9
12.5
13.7
36.5
36.1
36.9
11.8
12.3
14.3
39.5
36.5
43.2
CHARACTERISTIC
Total, all civilian w o rkers..........
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .
Men, 20 years and o v e r .....
Women, 20 years and o v e r.
6.0
6.6
2.0
8.1
9.1
1.9
7.9
7.2
9.5
13.1
7.7
7.6
7.8
5.1
7.6
5.6
3.9
13.2
7.0
13.5
13.1
7.1
6.9
7.4
5.1
7.6
5.5
3.6
12.5
18.2
5.8
10.5
4.5
5.5
10.1
6.8
9.1
1.9
8.1
4.2
5.3
9.5
6.7
9.4
12.1
10.6
4.4
5.3
10.8
6.6
1.8
8.1
6.9
9.1
1.9
8.2
4.5
5.2
10.0
6.7
9.1
1.9
8.1
9.2
1.9
7.8
6.4
9.3
1.9
7.7
7.1
12.4
12.3
6.9
6.9
6.9
5.5
7.9
5.8
3.6
13.4
7.2
13.6
13.0
7.4
7.3
7.5
5.3
7.9
5.5
3.6
15.3
7.1
17.3
12.4
7.2
7.0
7.5
5.4
7.7
5.5
3.6
13.2
7.1
16.6
13.0
6.9
6.7
7.2
5.5
7.8
5.7
3.3
11.4
6.9
16.6
12.4
6.9
6.8
6.9
4.8
7.5
5.6
3.3
13.3
10.1
4.4
5.2
9.5
4.2
5.1
10.1
6.0
7.9
4.6
5.0
8.9
6.6
9.2
1.8
7.8
7.0
13.9
12.9
7.0
6.5
7.7
4.7
7.6
5.6
3.5
12.9
7.0
14.5
13.8
7.3
7.2
7.3
5.2
7.4
5.4
3.7
11.9
6.6
9.3
2.0
12.8
10.6
10.4
4.3
5.1
9.8
12.2
4.5
5.0
9.7
6.6
9.1
1.9
7.7
4.3
4.8
9.8
6.3
8.8
1.8
7.6
4.2
4.8
9.8
6.4
9.0
1.8
7.6
INDUSTRY
Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ....
M ining........................................................................
C onstruction.............................................................
Manufacturing ..........................................................
Durable g o o d s .......................................................
Nondurable g o o d s ................................................
Transportation and public utilities ........................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ....................................
Finance and service in dustries.............................
Government w o rk e rs ....................................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers .....................
12.8
7.1
7.0
7.2
4.5
7.3
5.3
3.5
11.5
7.1
10.5
13.0
7.2
6.9
7.6
5.8
7.7
5.6
3.9
12.1
7.0
14.5
15.1
7.1
6.6
7.9
4.4
7.2
5.4
3.6
10.1
6.8
14.1
13.7
6.9
6.4
7.7
4.6
7.2
5.1
3.3
11.5
6.7
14.0
12.2
6.8
6.8
6.8
4.8
7.5
5.2
3.6
11.6
Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
65
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
8.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Civilian workers)
Annual
average
1987
1986
Sex and age
Feb.
Jan.
1986
1985
Mar.
Apr.
June
May
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
Jan.
6.7
13.1
17.7
Total, 16 years and o v e r ............
16 to 24 y e a rs ...........................
16 to 19 y e a rs ........................
16 to 17 years ....................
18 to 19 y e a r s ....................
20 to 24 y e a rs .......................
25 years and o v e r ....................
25 to 54 years ....................
55 years and o v e r .............
7.2
13.6
18.6
21 0
17.0
11.1
5.6
5.8
4.1
7.0
13.3
18.3
20.2
17.0
10.7
5.4
5.7
3.9
6.8
13.1
18.2
21.0
16.6
10.5
5.2
5.5
3.9
7.2
13.6
18.9
21.6
17.1
10.9
5.6
5.9
4.3
7.2
13.3
18.4
19.8
17.2
10.7
5.6
5.9
4.2
7.1
13.7
19.3
20.8
18.4
10.8
5.4
5.7
3.9
7.2
13.8
18.8
20.8
17.4
11.2
5.5
5.9
3.7
7.1
13.5
18.9
20.7
17.5
10.7
5.5
5.9
3.8
7.0
13.2
17.9
19.8
16.2
10.8
5.4
5.7
3.8
6.8
12.9
18.0
19.8
16.8
10.3
5.4
5.7
3.7
7.0
13.6
18.5
20.0
17.2
11.1
5.4
5.6
4.0
6.9
13.0
17.7
19.3
16.5
10.5
5.5
5.7
4.1
6.9
12.9
18.2
20.6
16.7
10.2
5.5
5.8
3.8
6.7
12.9
17.3
18.8
16.3
10.7
5.2
5.5
3.5
Men, 16 years and o v e r ......
16 to 24 years ....................
16 to 19 y e a rs .................
16 to 17 y e a rs ...............
18 to 19 y e a rs ..............
20 to 24 y e a rs..................
25 years and o v e r .............
25 to 54 y e a rs ..............
55 years and o v e r........
7.0
14.1
19.5
21.9
17.9
11.4
5.3
5.6
4.1
6.9
13.7
19.0
20.8
17.7
11.0
5.4
5.6
4.1
6.6
13.1
18.3
21.3
16.8
10.5
5.1
5.4
3.9
7.0
13.6
19.5
22.9
17.2
10.8
5.5
5.7
4.3
7.0
13.7
19.2
20.5
18.3
11.0
5.4
5.7
4.1
6.9
14.2
20.0
21.1
19.2
11.3
5.2
5.5
4.0
7.1
14.5
20.0
21.3
19.1
11.7
5.4
5.7
3.9
7.1
13.9
19.9
20.0
19.4
10.9
5.4
5.7
4.1
7.0
13.6
18.4
20.3
16.7
11.1
5.4
5.7
4.0
6.8
13.3
19.1
20.9
18.0
10.3
5.3
5.6
4.1
7.0
14.3
19.1
21.0
17.5
11.9
5.4
5.5
4.2
7.0
13.2
18.2
19.8
17.0
10.7
5.5
5.7
4.4
6.9
13.4
18.3
21.3
16.2
10.9
5.5
5.7
4.1
6.7
13.4
17.8
19.1
17.0
11.3
5.2
5.5
4.0
6.8
13.4
18.5
21.4
16.9
10.7
5.4
5.7
3.5
Women, 16 years and over
16 to 24 y e a rs ..................
16 to 19 y e a rs ...............
16 to 17 years ...........
18 to 19 years ............
20 to 24 y e a rs ...............
25 years and o v e r............
25 to 54 years ...........
55 years and o v e r .....
7.4
13.0
17.6
20.0
16.0
10.7
5.9
6.2
4.1
7.1
12.8
17.6
19.6
16.3
10.3
5.5
5.9
3.6
7.0
13.1
18.1
20.6
16.4
10.6
5.4
5.6
3.9
7.5
13.5
18.3
20.1
17.1
11.0
5.8
6.1
4.3
7.3
12.8
17.5
19.0
16.2
10.3
5.8
6.1
4.3
7.3
13.1
18.5
20.4
17.6
10.2
5.7
6.0
3.8
7.2
13.1
17.5
20.3
15.5
10.8
5.6
6.0
3.5
7.2
13.0
17.9
21.4
15.6
10.4
5.6
6.0
3.3
7.0
12.7
17.3
19.2
15.6
10.4
5.4
5.8
3.6
6.9
12.4
16.7
18.7
15.4
10.2
5.4
5.8
3.3
7.0
12.8
17.7
18.8
16.9
10.2
5.5
5.8
3.6
6.9
12.7
17.2
18.6
16.0
10.3
5.4
5.7
3.6
6.9
12.4
18.2
19.8
17.2
9.4
5.5
5.8
3.4
6.7
12.4
16.8
18.4
15.7
10.0
5.2
5.5
2.9
6.7
12.7
16.8
18.7
15.3
9.
20.1
16.2
10.7
5.2
5.6
3.2
10.6
5.1
5.5
2.7
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
1985
Other job lo s e rs ..........................................................
Job leavers ....................................................................
Reentrants .....................................................................
1986
1987
1986
Annual average
Reason for unemployment
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
June
May
Sept.
Aug.
July
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
3,947
1,073
2,874
1,056
2,119
1,076
3,890
1,078
3,971
1,036
2,019
1,015
891
2,054
1,084
4,139
1,157
2,982
877
2,256
1,039
4,033
1,090
2,943
1,015
2,160
1,029
3,802
1,143
2,659
977
2,083
1,029
4,147
1,136
3,011
985
2,263
1,073
4,210
1,144
3,066
989
2,196
1,006
4,035
1,057
2,978
1,071
2,188
1,048
4,214
1,118
3,096
979
2,200
1,046
4,272
1,074
3,198
1,009
2,107
1,050
4,063
1,078
2,985
1,025
2,205
989
3,824
1,017
2,807
990
2,199
1,014
4,044
1,029
3,015
1,041
2,145
1,038
3,984
1,072
2,912
1,027
2,190
972
49.8
13.9
35.9
10.6
27.1
12.5
48.9
13.2
35.7
12.3
26.2
12.5
48.2
14.5
33.7
12.4
26.4
13.0
49.0
13.4
35.6
11.6
26.7
12.7
50.1
13.6
36.5
11.8
26.1
12.0
48.4
12.7
35.7
12.8
26.2
12.6
49.9
13.2
36.7
11.6
26.1
12.4
50.6
12.7
37.9
12.0
25.0
12.4
49.1
13.0
36.0
12.4
26.6
11.9
47.6
12.7
35.0
12.3
27.4
12.6
48.9
12.4
36.5
12.6
25.9
12.6
48.7
13.1
35.6
12.6
26.8
11.9
48.1
13.1
35.1
12.9
25.8
13.1
48.9
13.5
35.3
49.6
25.4
12.8
25.7
13.6
3.3
.8
1.8
.9
3.5
.8
1.9
.9
3.6
.8
1.9
.9
3.4
.9
1.9
.9
3.6
.8
1.9
.9
3.6
.9
1.8
.9
3.4
.9
1.9
.8
3.2
.8
1.9
.9
3.4
.9
1.8
.9
3.4
9
1.8
.8
3.3
.9
1.8
.9
3.3
3.3
PERCENT OF UNEMPLOYED
Job le avers..................................................................
R eentrants...................................................................
New entrants ..............................................................
UU. /
PERCENT OF
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
3.6
V8
New e n tra n ts .................................................................
10.
2.0
.9
3.4 \
.9
1.8
.9
.9
Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Jan.
1985
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
66
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1987
1986
Annual average
Weeks of unemployment
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
3,382
2,613
2,217
1,045
1,172
3,355
2,389
2,171
1,023
1,148
3,416
2,530
2,200
1,022
1,178
14.8
7.0
15.0
7.1
15.0
7.0
3,498
2,509
2,305
1,025
1,280
3,448
2,557
2,232
1,045
1,187
3,373
2,505
2,117
1,003
1,114
3,534
2,615
2,332
1,142
1,190
3,536
2,625
2,243
1,078
1,165
3,565
2,650
2,130
982
1,148
3,610
2,671
2,232
1,065
1,167
3,415
2,650
2,299
1,038
1,261
3,399
2,521
2,250
1,058
1,192
3,436
2,407
2,272
1,068
1,204
3,415
2,524
2,373
1,263
3,418
2,563
2,168
950
1,218
15.6
6.8
15.0
6.9
15.0
6.8
15.2
6.9
14.6
6.8
14.7
6.6
14.8
6.8
15.2
7.2
15.1
7.1
15.6
7.1
15.5
7.1
15.2
7.0
1,110
Jan.
Oct.
11. Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
State
Dec.
1985
Dec.
1986
A labam a.........................................................
A la s k a .........................................................
A riz o n a ...........................................................
Arkansas ............................................................
C a lifornia......................................................
8.3
10.2
6.1
8.7
6.3
9.5
11.0
71
87
6.3
Colorado ...........................................................
Connecticut ......................................................
D e law are............................................................
District of C o lum bia.........................................
F lo rid a ................................................................
6.2
4.6
4.6
8.0
5.6
8.0
3.5
3.1
7.9
4.6
Georgia ..............................................................
H aw aii...........................................................
Idaho ................................................
Illin o is ..................................................
Indiana ...............................................................
6.2
5.1
7.8
8.3
7.8
5.7
4.1
9.1
7.0
6.2
Io w a .............................................................
Kansas ............................................................
K e ntucky............................................................
Louisiana........................................................
M ain e ................................................................
8.1
5.1
9.5
11.3
4.9
6.3
5.6
8.7
13.7
4.6
M a ryla n d ...........................................................
M assachusetts.................................................
M ichigan...........................................................
M in n e s o ta ..........................................................
M ississippi..........................................................
M issouri..............................................................
4.4
3.9
7.6
6.8
9.4
6.6
4.7
31
7.6
5.6
11.7
6.0
Dec.
1985
Dec.
1986
ft ?
fi 0
84
3.0
2.5
New J e rs e y .....................................................
5.4
87
fi Q
3.9
9.3
6.4
6.1
Ohio ..................................................................
8.5
71
7.9
4.5
4.0
South C a rolina................................................
6.4
fi 0
5.6
Texas ................................................................
Utah
6.3
5.9
8.7
6.5
V e rm o n t............................................................
V irg in ia ..............................................................
4.6
5.3
4.4
4.9
West V irg inia....................................................
12.5
7.4
12.1
7.1
8.0
9.0
State
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data
published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the
database.
12. Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
Dec. 1985
Nov. 1986
A labam a .................
Alaska ....................
A rizo n a ...................
A rkansa s................
C alifornia................
1,449.5
221.8
1,323.8
814.8
11,259.1
1,473.0
213.6
1,376.2
833.7
11,478.9
C o lo ra d o ................
Connecticut ...........
D elaw are.................
District of Columbia
F lo rid a .....................
1,440.6
1,601.2
300.2
639.2
4,542.4
1,448.0
1,646.1
307.8
645.1
4,685.2
G e o rg ia ...................
H a w aii......................
Id a h o .......................
Illin o is ......................
In d ia n a ....................
2,638.9
430.2
343.0
4,794.4
2,220.6
2,735.3
437.0
339.8
4,876.1
2,307.0
Io w a .........................
Kansas ....................
K e ntucky.................
Louisiana.................
M a in e .......................
1,078.3
978.3
1,271.7
1,600.4
465.8
1,081.8
1,010.9
1,302.3
1,518.4
486.8
M a ryland.................
M assachusetts......
M ichigan..................
M inne sota...............
M ississippi................
M issouri...................
M o n ta n a ..................
1,935.8
2,985.9
3,588.7
1,885.2
857.5
2,131.5
276.7
1,961.6
3,010.5
3,644.4
1,925.8
859.7
2,177.6
277.9
Dec. 1986p
p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
State
1,474.0 N e bra ska..........................................................
210.3 Nevada .............................................................
1,379.7 New Ham pshire..............................................
832.5
11,526.0 New J e rs e y ......................................................
New Mexico ....................................................
1,448.8 New Y o rk ..........................................................
1,654.3 North Carolina ............................
310.4 North Dakota ................
647.0
4,737.9 Ohio ..............................................................
O klaho m a.......................................................
2,746.5 O reg on..............................................................
441.0 Pennsylvania...................................................
336.6 Rhode Isla n d ...................................................
4,872.5
2,307.3 South C a rolina................................................
South D a k o ta ..................................................
1,075.5 Tennessee ...................................................
1,001.0 Texas ......................................................
1,304.0 Utah ..................................................................
1,512.2
486.7 V e rm o n t................................................
V irg in ia ................. ........................................
1,968.ol Washington ......................................................
3,028.6 West V irg inia...................................................
3,635.1 W iscon sin...............................................
1,916.4
859.8 W yom ing...........................................................
2,168.3 Puerto R ic o ......................................................
275.6 Virgin Islands ..................................................
Dec. 1985
Nov. 1986
Dec. 1986p
648.9
453.1
482.8
670.5
474.9
496.8
665.4
475.0
499.6
3,471.9
526.9
7,909.8
2,706.7
251.2
3,582.3
527.1
8,056.6
2,781.3
251.6
3,586.4
528.4
8,074.3
2,785.4
250.9
4,483.7
1,177.1
1,047.1
4,824.9
431.4
4,602.2
1,158.8
1,077.4
4,894.3
437.9
4,605.7
1,162.4
1,072.8
4,888.0
438.2
1,317.5
247.1
1,900.9
6,766.7
638.1
1,353.9
254.1
1,981.8
6,687.2
644.8
1,357.9
251.5
1,991.5
6,694.9
645.5
232.2
2,532.1
1,735.8
600.9
2,001.0
238.4
2,620.2
1,784.3
601.0
2,049.6
241.5
2,626.5
1,779.7
600.6
2,041.3
201.9
702.8
36.8
194.2
716.5
37.1
191.8
727.1
37.3
because of the continual updating of the database.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
13. Employment of workers on nonagricultura! payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
1985
1986
1987
1986
Annual average
Industry
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
99,843
83,161
100,105
83,508
00,283
83,655
100,560
83,786
00,826
83,956
101,068
84,178
01,293
84,368
101,741
84,830
TOTAL ...............................
PRIVATE SECTOR.................
97,614
81,199
00,165
83,430
99,296
82,659
99,429
82,748
99,484
82,785
99,783
83,072
99,918
83,198
GOODS-PRODUCING ................
Mining...................................
24,930
930
585
24,938
792
464
25,101
897
556
25,038
880
541
24,945
852
518
25,038
821
488
24,965
790
461
24,854
772
446
24,869
768
442
24,888
753
431
24,858
743
422
24,865
746
423
24,891
742
420
24,920
740
413
25,054
729
410
4,687
1,251
4,961
1,307
4,901
1,330
4,864
1,320
4,838
1,298
4,972
1,315
4,974
1,314
4,947
1,299
4,980
1,299
5,012
1,306
5,010
1,301
5,001
1,302
4,993
1,307
4,997
1,296
5,139
1,344
19,314
13,130
19,186
13,023
19,303
13,111
19,294
13,097
19,255
13,061
19,245
13,060
19,201
13,025
19,135
12,979
19,121
12,961
19,123
12,971
19,105
12,960
19,118
12,974
19,156
13,020
19,183
13,051
19,186
13,059
11,516
7,660
11,345
7,495
11,466
7,595
11,455
7,579
11,418
7,545
11,415
7,547
11,378
7,519
11,307
7,462
11,294
7,441
11,302
7,458
11,271
7,438
11,266
7,435
11,282
7,452
11,286
7,463
11,272
7,451
700
493
591
813
727
497
595
768
716
494
596
798
716
494
597
795
715
493
594
787
719
494
600
785
719
496
599
780
721
496
597
761
724
498
593
758
729
499
592
751
734
500
594
749
737
500
590
749
743
500
591
751
747
502
593
752
753
505
593
740
305
1,468
283
1,439
300
1,455
299
1,452
293
1,450
291
1,451
288
1,447
286
1,440
285
1,428
272
1,429
270
1,433
272
1,429
271
1,427
270
1,431
266
1,428
2,082
2,137
2,127
2,118
2,111
2,100
2,089
2,079
2,072
2,044
2,039
2,036
2,030
2,033
2,182
2,165
1,986
828
710
2,161
1,976
820
710
Oil and gas extraction ..................
Construction ..........................
General building contractors.......
Manufacturing........................
Production w o rk e rs .......................
Durable goods.......................
Production w o rk e rs .......................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts .........
Furniture and fix tu re s .....................
Stone, clay, and glass products ...
Primary metal in d u strie s................
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products..........................................
Fabricated metal products............
Machinery, except electrica l.........
Electrical and electronic
equipm ent........................... i...........
Transportation equipm ent.............
Motor vehicles and equipment ....
Instruments and related products
Miscellaneous manufacturing
in d u strie s........................................
2,207
1,971
876
723
2,169
1,984
842
717
2,182
1,996
867
724
2,181
1,998
864
725
2,177
1,989
858
726
2,177
1,986
854
723
2,175
1,972
839
721
2,143
1,974
839
717
2,169
1,969
824
713
2,168
1,985
839
713
2,162
1,979
834
713
2,167
1,979
824
713
2,166
1,993
837
710
367
368
370
369
369
369
369
363
364
363
363
365
370
373
369
7,914
5,608
7,798
5,470
7,841
5,528
7,837
5,516
7,839
5,518
7,837
5,516
7,830
5,513
7,823
5,506
7,828
5,517
7,827
5,520
7,821
5,513
7,834
5,522
7,852
5,539
7,874
5,568
7,897
5,588
Food and kindred p ro d u cts ..........
Tobacco m anufactures.................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts .......................
Apparel and other textile
p roducts..........................................
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ............
1,608
65
704
1,641
61
709
1,623
64
702
1,631
63
705
1,632
63
707
1,633
63
703
1,640
62
705
1,648
62
707
1,645
62
710
1,642
59
711
1,644
60
709
1,644
59
711
1,654
61
717
1,657
60
719
1,669
59
718
1,125
683
1,115
690
1,133
687
1,122
687
1,117
688
1,119
689
1,113
689
1,106
690
1,108
687
1,108
685
1,110
691
1,113
694
1,112
694
1,124
697
1,119
697
Printing and publishing..................
Chemicals and allied products.....
Petroleum and coal p roducts.......
Rubber and misc. plastics
p roducts..........................................
Leather and leather products ......
1,435
1,046
178
1,479
1,027
164
1,461
1,034
168
1,467
1,032
167
1,469
1,031
166
1,472
1,028
166
1,474
1,024
166
1,477
1,026
164
1,483
1,025
163
1,481
1,026
163
1,485
1,025
162
1,491
1,023
161
1,493
1,023
160
1,494
1,020
159
1,498
1,025
160
790
166
801
155
802
163
803
162
804
160
800
157
796
154
797
151
792
152
794
152
797
151
805
151
809
151
814
153
817
152
SERVICE-PRODUCING .............
Transportation and public
utilities.................................
75,227
74,195
74,391
74,539
74,745
74,953
74,989
75,236
75,395
75,702
75,961
76,177
76,373
76,687
72,684
5,363
3,129
Nondurable goods..................
Production w o rke rs.........................
5,242
3,006
5,286
3,068
5,286
3,056
5,277
3,048
5,280
3,053
5,266
3,040
5,265
3,037
5,167
3,035
5,288
3,057
5,255
3,063
5,316
3,088
5,316
3,094
5,351
3,117
5,359
3,124
2,218
2,230
2,229
2,227
2,226
2,228
2,132
2,231
2,192
2,228
2,222
2,234
2,235
2,234
2,236
5,863
3,485
2,378
5,859
3,485
2,374
5,864
5,859
5,855
5,874
18,030
2,359
2,951
18,065
2,362
2,952
18,143
2,379
2,963
18,197
18,198
18,364
2,968
2,978
3,006
1,977
1,984
1,994
Communication and public
5,740
3,409
2,331
17,360
2,320
2,779
General merchandise s to re s .......
5,852
3,482
2,371
17,978
2,348
2,932
5,830
3,470
2,360
17,734
2,328
2,880
5,843
3,482
2,361
17,795
2,333
2,891
5,841
3,480
2,361
17,828
2,333
2,901
Automotive dealers and service
.
L o c a l...............................................
17,851
2,342
2,910
68
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
17,911
2,344
2,917
5,829
3,454
2,375
17,944
2,350
2,932
5,849
3,483
2,366
17,992
2,354
2,938
2,375
1,892
5,715
1,954
5,923
1,929
5,831
1,938
5,854
1,939
5,868
1,940
5,859
1,944
5,889
1,945
5,918
1,950
5,931
1,962
5,923
1,970
5,948
6,304
3,159
1,934
1,211
6,123
3,066
1,878
1,179
6,157
3,082
1,889
1,186
6,184
3,095
1,900
1,189
6,228
3,120
1,910
1,198
6,261
3,137
1,918
1,206
6,295
3,159
1,927
1,209
6,334
3,176
1,945
1,213
6,364
3,192
1,952
1,220
6,388
3,202
1,962
1,224
6,409
6,429
6,469
6,491
5,953
2,979
1,830
1,144
23,072
4,809
6,586
22,585
4,660
6,447
22,638
4,687
6,471
22,707
4,698
6,497
22,825
4,750
6,511
22,924
4,755
6,543
23,072
4,792
6,571
23,176
4,835
6,601
23,255
4,848
6,634
23,300
4,883
6,649
23,359
23,451
23,567
23,684
21,974
4,452
6,310
16,415
2,875
3,848
9,692
16,735
2,900
3,937
9,899
16,637
2,918
3,916
9,803
16,681
2,918
3,924
9,839
16,699
2,923
3,927
9,849
16,711
2,914
3,938
9,859
16,720
2,899
3,936
9,885
16,682
2,875
3,927
9,880
16,597
2,866
3,921
9,810
16,628
2,875
3,919
9,834
16,774
2,901
3,932
9,941
16,870
16,890
16,925
16,911
= preliminary
NOTE: See notes on the data for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
p
5,872
3,488
2,384
1,973
Finance, Insurance, and real
.
5,864
3,485
2,379
6,677
3,959
10,015
14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted
Industry
Annual
average
1985
1986
PRIVATE SECTOR
34.9
34.8
CONSTRUCTION......
37.7
37.5
MANUFACTURING ..
40.5
3.3
Overtime h o u rs ........................................
Lumber and wood pro d u c ts ........................
Furniture and fixtu re s...................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts .................
Primary metal in dustries..............................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ..........................
Machinery except electrical .............
Electrical and electronic equipm ent.
Transportation equipm ent.................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent......
Instruments and related products ....
Miscellaneous m anufacturing...........
Jan.
Feb.
35.0
34.9
40.7
3.4
40.8
3.5
40.7
3.4
41.2
3.5
39.9
39.4
41.9
41.5
41.1
41.3
41.3
3.5
40.2
39.6
42.2
41.9
41.6
41.3
41.5
3.6
40.4
40.0
42.7
41.9
41.7
41.5
41.5
40.6
42.6
43.5
41.0
39.4
41.6
41.0
42.4
42.6
41.1
39.6
Overtime h o u rs............................
Food and kindred p roducts............
Tobacco m anufactures....................
Textile mill p ro d u cts.........................
Apparel and other textile products .
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ...............
39.6
3.1
40.0
37.2
39.7
36.4
43.1
39.9
3.3
40.0
37.6
41.2
36.7
43.3
Printing and publishing.............
Chemicals and allied products.
Petroleum and coal products ...
Leather and leather products ..
37.8
41.9
43.0
37.2
Overtime h o u rs .
Durable goods..................................
Nondurable goods...................
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES .
39.5
WHOLESALE TRADE
RETAIL TRADE
29.4
SERVICES ......
32.5
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Mar.
Apr.
May
July
34.8
34.8
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.7
3.4
40.6
3.3
40.6
3.4
41.4
3.5
40.0
39.7
41.9
42.1
41.8
41.5
41.4
3.6
40.2
39.4
41.9
41.9
41.7
41.4
41.3
3.6
40.3
39.1
42.4
41.3
40.5
41.2
41.2
3.4
40.3
39.4
42.3
41.7
41.5
41.1
41.2
3.5
39.9
39.4
42.2
41.6
41.1
41.1
41.6
41.0
42.8
43.6
41.1
41.6
40.9
42.7
43.4
41.2
41.6
41.0
42.7
43.3
41.3
41.8
41.1
42.1
41.9
41.3
41.8
41.0
41.9
41.8
40.9
39.9
3.3
40.1
39.7
3.2
39.8
39.8
3.2
39.9
39.9
3.3
40.2
40.8
36.7
43.6
40.6
36.3
43.5
40.7
36.5
43.5
38.0
42.0
43.7
36.9
38.0
41.9
43.5
38.0
41.8
43.7
38.0
41.9
43.8
39.2
39.4
39.5
38.4
38.5
38.4
29.3
29.3
32.6
32.6
32.5
Aug.
34.7
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
34.7
34.7
34.8
34.6
40.8
3.5
40.8
3.5
40.7
3.5
40.8
3.5
40.8
3.5
40.9
3.6
41.1
3.5
40.1
39.4
42.2
41.3
41.2
41.1
41.4
3.5
40.2
39.9
42.5
41.9
41.5
41.2
41.4
3.6
40.1
40.0
42.5
42.0
41.6
41.5
41.3
3.6
40.3
39.8
42.3
42.3
42.3
41.2
41.4
3.6
40.7
39.6
41.9
42.4
42.5
41.4
41.3
3.5
40.3
39.6
42.1
42.5
42.7
41.1
41.5
3.6
40.5
40.3
42.4
42.7
42.4
41.4
41.7
41.0
42.2
42.4
41.0
41.4
41.1
42.1
42.4
40.8
41.7
41.2
42.6
42.8
41.0
41.7
41.2
42.6
42.7
40.7
41.6
40.9
42.1
42.1
41.1
41.7
41.0
42.3
42.6
41.2
41.6
40.9
42.0
42.3
41.3
42.0
40.8
42.4
42.9
41.4
39.9
3.4
40.2
39.8
3.2
40.0
39.8
3.4
40.0
40.0
3.4
40.3
39.9
3.3
39.7
39.9
3.4
39.8
40.1
3.5
40.0
40.1
3.5
39.9
40.2
3.5
40.0
41.3
36.9
43.0
41.1
36.5
43.2
40.8
36.5
43.1
40.9
36.6
43.2
41.4
36.5
43.5
41.6
36.7
43.0
41.5
36.7
43.0
41.5
36.9
43.2
42.0
37.0
43.2
41.8
37.0
43.6
38.0
41.9
43.6
38.0
42.0
43.4
37.8
41.9
44.0
37.9
41.9
43.5
38.0
42.1
44.3
38.0
42.0
43.4
38.0
42.2
43.7
38.1
42.5
43.8
38.0
42.4
43.8
38.1
42.6
43.8
39.6
39.2
39.2
39.1
39.2
39.1
38.9
39.1
39.3
39.0
38.5
38.5
38.5
38.4
38.3
38.3
38.4
38.2
38.4
38.3
38.3
38.3
29.3
29.2
29.2
29.1
29.2
29.2
29.2
29.1
29.3
28.9
28.9
32.5
32.5
32.5
32.4
32.4
32.4
32.3
32.4
32.5
32.4
32.3
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark adjustment.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
Industry
Industry
Annual
average
1985
$8.57
-
$8.75
MINING.....................................................
11.98
12.45
"
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Jan.p
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
$8.85
8.84
$8.83
8.82
$8.88
8.83
$8.72
8.68
$8.74
8.71
$8.73
8.73
$8.72
8.72
$8.72
8.73
$8.71
8.74
$8.69
8.73
$8.70
8.77
$8.81
8.76
$8.81
8.80
12.24
12.32
12.35
12.43
12.44
12.50
12.46
12.51
12.52
12.51
12.57
12.61
12.65
12.33
12.31
12.31
12.39
12.54
12.62
12.59
12.71
12.57
CONSTRUCTION........................................
12.31
12.42
12.34
12.35
12.22
12.29
MANUFACTURING......................................
9.53
9.73
9.70
9.70
9.72
9.70
9.71
9.70
9.74
9.68
9.73
9.72
9.77
9.84
9.83
10.26
8.43
7.46
10.04
11.94
13.88
9.88
10.27
8.36
7.44
10.06
12.06
14.08
9.84
10.22
8.40
7.46
10.07
11.85
13.83
9.82
10.30
8.42
7.52
10.11
11.92
13.93
9.87
10.28
8.37
7.50
10.10
11.84
13.78
9.86
10.33
8.39
7.52
10.13
11.87
13.78
9.93
10.40
8.34
7.59
10.17
11.94
13.88
10.03
10.37
8.26
7.56
10.18
11.90
13.84
9.98
10.10
8.22
7.17
9.84
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ............................
Primary metal in du s trie s......................................... 11.68
Blast furnaces and basic steel p ro d u c ts .......... 13.34
9.70
Fabricated metal products .....................................
10.29
8.37
7.44
10.05
11.93
13.83
9.87
10.27
8.30
7.36
9.96
11.81
13.48
9.85
10.29
8.36
7.31
9.94
11.96
13.81
9.85
10.30
8.33
7.35
9.93
11.99
13.80
9.88
10.28
8.32
7.36
10.00
12.00
13.82
9.84
10.28
8.37
7.39
10.04
12.02
13.86
9.85
10.29
9.47
Transportation equipm ent....................................... 12.72
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................ 13.42
9.16
7.30
Miscellaneous manufacturing.................................
10.57
9.67
12.86
13.52
9.46
7.56
10.50
9.60
12.91
13.66
9.32
7.48
10.53
9.60
12.87
13.59
9.39
7.50
10.58
9.62
12.90
13.66
9.41
7.51
10.55
9.62
12.83
13.54
9.41
7.50
10.55
9.64
12.79
13.47
9.40
7.54
10.55
9.61
12.78
13.41
9.41
7.54
10.57
9.68
12.78
13.40
9.47
7.59
10.57
9.67
12.75
13.36
9.45
7.52
10.58
9.73
12.87
13.50
9.51
7.59
10.56
9.72
12.87
13.49
9.54
7.60
10.59
9.75
12.92
13.52
9.61
/.65
10.66
9.84
13.00
13.63
9.64
7.72
10.66
9.81
12.93
13.62
9.67
7.74
8.71
8.57
11.94
6.71
5.73
Apparel and other textile products........................
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ...................................... 10.82
8.93
8.74
12.77
6.95
5.81
11.14
8.86
8.72
11.89
6.85
5.82
11.02
8.86
8.71
12.38
6.83
5.79
10.99
8.88
8.74
12.76
6.86
5.80
11.03
8.88
8.75
12.84
6.87
8.91
8.74
13.68
6.87
5.79
11.15
8.99
8.75
13.48
6.90
5.76
11.31
8.93
8.65
13.44
6.99
5.79
11.17
8.96
8.65
12.21
7.05
8.95
8.68
12.10
7.04
9.00
8.79
12.62
7.07
9.05
8.89
12.90
7.13
9.07
8.92
13.06
7.12
5.87
5.82
5.83
5.83
5.86
11.05
8.90
8.78
13.38
6.88
5.78
11.12
11.20
11.20
11.17
11.24
11.22
9.71
11.56
14.06
8.54
5.82
9.97
11.97
14.19
8.76
5.90
9.85
11.86
14.26
8.69
5.86
9.86
11.81
14.21
8.69
5.83
9.90
11.78
14.22
8.72
5.86
9.87
11.82
14.16
8.68
5.89
9.91
11.89
14.02
8.75
5.88
9.88
11.94
14.14
8.75
5.88
9.96
12.04
14.16
8.82
5.89
10.00
11.99
14.07
8.81
5.90
10.10
12.03
14.20
8.76
5.93
10.08
12.08
14.18
8.76
5.92
10.11
12.15
14.26
8.81
5.98
10.11
12.19
14.40
8.87
5.98
10.14
12.16
14.29
8.84
6.00
11.40
11.63
11.59
11.64
11.62
11.55
11.54
11.57
11.61
11.61
11.70
11.68
11.75
11.72
11.71
9.37
9.35
9.46
9.44
9.44
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Printing and publishing............................................
Petroleum and coal p roducts.................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics p ro d u c ts .....
Leather and leather p ro d u c ts ................................
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES
5.81
WHOLESALE TRADE..................................
9.16
9.34
9.28
9.36
9.33
9.29
9.29
9.32
9.30
9.32
RETAIL TRADE ..........................................
5.94
6.02
6.03
6.04
6.03
6.01
6.00
5.99
5.97
5.97
6.05
6.04
6.07
6.05
6.09
8.38
8.54
8.49
8.61
8.22
8.31
8.30
8.35
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE...
SERVICES .................................................
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
70
1986
Seasonally adjusted .............................................
PRIVATE SECTOR......................................
1987
1986
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7.94
8.34
8.14
8.28
8.30
8.29
8.31
8.37
8.30
8.33
8.37
' 7.89
8.16
8.12
8.17
8.18
8.12
8.10
8.10
8.04
8.05
8.19
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark revision.
16.
Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
Annual average
1986
1987
Industry
1985
1986
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
June
May
July
Sept.
Aug.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
PRIVATE SECTOR
Seasonally adjusted...........................................
Constant (1977) dollars .......................................
$299.09 $304.50 $302.58 $300.66 $302.93 $301.71 $302.58 $303.98 $304.15 $305.37 $306.59 $305.71 $307.10 $308.17 $305.47
303.80 303.98 304.68 303.46 303.80 303.28 302.93 305.20 303.97 305.36 307.63 305.17 306.40
170.42 170.88 169.32 168.82 171.05 170.94 170.85 170.78 170.97 171.36 171.28 170.69 171.28 171.78
-
MINING.....................................................
519.93
526.64
543.46
522.37
522.41
522.06
519.99
525.00
518.34
529.17
529.60
527.92
522.91
534.66
535.10
CONSTRUCTION........................................
464.09
465.75
459.05
434.72
444.81
462.10
467.31
465.32
471.47
475.78
482.79
479.56
459.54
469.00
470.12
Current d o lla rs ........................................................
Constant (1977) d o lla rs .........................................
385.97
219.93
396.01
222.23
394.79
220.92
390.91
219.49
395.60
223.38
392.85
222.58
394.23
222.60
395.76
222.34
391.55
220.10
393.98
221.09
398.93
222.87
396.58
221.43
400.57
223.41
409.34
228.17
401.06
-
Durable goods ...........................................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...................................
Furniture and fix tu re s ..............................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ............................
Primary metal industries .........................................
Blast furnaces and basic steel p ro d u c ts ..........
Fabricated metal products .....................................
416.12
327.98
282.50
412.30
484.72
548.27
400.61
424.98
336.47
294.62
424.11
499.87
575.33
407.63
425.18
329.51
289.98
414.34
493.66
556.72
407.79
421.89
328.55
284.36
403.56
503.52
578.64
403.85
426.42
333.20
288.12
412.10
504.78
576.84
409.03
423.54
334.46
286.30
425.00
499.20
569.38
403.44
423.54
338.99
288.21
428.71
501.23
576.58
404.84
424.76
342.26
294.67
429.71
499.09
577.41
408.04
417.99
334.40
287.93
427.55
495.67
582.91
398.52
420.04
341.04
298.40
432.00
491.78
569.80
402.62
428.48
342.69
303.81
435.74
501.83
579.49
410.59
424.56
338.99
303.00
431.27
496.10
571.87
407.22
429.73
338.12
300.80
424.45
503.29
580.14
412.10
438.88
336.94
310.43
427.14
513.42
592.68
422.26
429.32
328.75
300.13
420.43
506.94
579.90
412.17
Machinery, except electrical ..................................
Electrical and electronic equipm ent......................
Transportation equipm ent.......................................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................
Instruments and related products .........................
Miscellaneous manufacturing.................................
427.04
384.48
541.87
583.77
375.56
287.62
439.71
396.47
545.26
575.95
388.81
299.38
437.85
394.56
555.13
595.58
383.05
297.70
437.00
389.76
545.69
583.01
384.99
294.75
442.24
395.38
552.12
592.84
389.57
299.65
437.83
392.50
542.71
574.10
385.81
297.75
437.83
393.31
537.18
567.09
382.58
297.08
439.94
394.01
540.59
572.61
385.81
298.58
431.26
391.07
530.37
560.12
382.59
294.49
436.54
395.50
531.68
555.78
384.62
294.78
441.19
401.85
544.40
573.75
388.96
300.56
438.24
397.55
540.54
567.93
390.19
302.48
443.72
403.65
549.10
575.95
398.82
307.53
456.25
413.28
562.90
595.63
407.77
311.12
447.72
401.23
550.82
584.30
400.34
306.50
344.92
342.80
444.17
266.39
208.57
466.34
356.31
349.60
480.15
286.34
213.23
482.36
352.63
347.93
448.25
278.80
213.01
479.37
347.31
339.69
453.11
274.57
207.28
472.57
352.54
344.36
478.50
278.52
211.70
477.60
351.65
346.50
469.94
278.92
211.48
474.05
354.22
352.08
504.43
282.08
210.97
479.27
355.51
350.47
523.94
283.04
213.65
480.57
356.00
350.00
483.93
278.07
209.09
486.33
358.09
352.06
486.53
290.78
211.91
483.66
360.19
349.46
470.09
295.40
215.43
484.96
358.00
347.20
473.11
293.57
214.76
482.72
362.70
353.36
484.61
296.23
216.88
484.78
368.34
360.05
488.91
303.03
218.04
494.56
362.80
355.02
488.44
296.90
216.23
488.07
MANUFACTURING
Nondurable goods.....................................
Food and kindred p roducts....................................
Tobacco m anufactures...........................................
Textile mill p ro d u cts................................................
Apparel and other textile products........................
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ......................................
Printing and publishing............................................
Chemicals and allied products...............................
Petroleum and coal p roducts.................................
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics p roducts...................................................
Leather and leather p ro d u c ts ................................
367.04
484.36
604.58
378.86
502.74
620.10
371.35
495.75
616.03
370.74
492.48
612.45
377.19
494.76
621.41
374.07
495.26
615.96
374.60
499.38
605.66
370.50
502.67
622.16
374.50
502.07
618.79
381.00
501.18
623.30
386.83
505.26
626.22
384.05
506.15
621.08
388.22
517.59
626.01
391.26
522.95
632.16
383.29
518.02
621.62
350.99
216.50
361.79
217.71
359.77
217.41
356.29
209.88
360.14
212.72
356.75
213.81
360.50
215.80
361.38
221.68
357.21
217.93
362.97
216.53
364.42
218.22
362.66
217.86
367.38
222.46
374.31
226.64
365.98
223.80
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
UTILITIES.................................................
450.30
455.90
452.01
456.29
457.83
450.45
450.06
455.86
457.43
457.43
457.47
456.69
461.78
459.42
446.15
WHOLESALE TRADE..................................
351.74
358.66
355.42
355.68
357.34
355.81
356.74
358.82
358.05
358.82
358.87
359.04
363.26
363.44
359.66
RETAIL TRADE..........................................
174.64
175.78
173.06
172.74
174.27
173.69
174.60
176.71
178.50
178.50
176.66
175.16
176.64
178.48
172.35
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL
ESTATE ...................................................
289.02
304.41
SERVICES .................................................
256.43
265.20
296.30
J
263.09
j
304.70
304.61
301.76
301.65
306.34
302.95
304.88
304.67
306.71
313.42
310.73
314.27
264.71
265.03
263.09
262.44
264.06
263.71
264.04
264.54
266.33
269.24
268.92
268.04
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.
17. The Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by
industry
Not seasonally adjusted
Industry
Seasonally adjusted
Jan.
1986
Nov.
1986
PRIVATE SECTOR (In current dollars)............................
167.9
170.9
171.1
171.3
Mining1 .................................................................................
C onstruction........................................................................
M anufacturing.....................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ...................................
Wholesale trade1 ...............................................................
Retail trade .........................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate1 ..............................
S e rvices...............................................................................
180.9
150.0
171.4
169.3
171.1
157.3
175.8
172.7
182.4
153.4
173.2
172.2
174.5
159.0
183.9
177.2
182.3
154.4
174.0
172.2
174.0
158.8
182.6
177.0
183.0
152.6
174.1
172.2
174.1
159.2
184.9
177.8
PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant dollars) ..................
94.0
95.3
95.4
-
Dec.
1986p
’ This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small
relative to the trend-cycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot
be separated with sufficient precision.
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Jan.
1987p
Jan.
1986
Sept.
1986
Oct.
1986
Nov.
1986
Dec.
1986p
Jan.
1987p
167.3
169.6
170.0
170.8
170.6
170.8
149.7
170.7
168.6
157.0
171.7
151.2
172.8
170.8
159.1
174.4
152.6
173.1
170.9
159.1
175.3
154.0
173.2
171.2
159.3
176.6
153.9
173.6
171.1
159.3
175.7
152.3
173.4
171.6
158.9
176.7
93.5
95.0
95.1
95.3
95.0
-
-
-
p = preliminary,
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.
71
»
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
18.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
Indexes of diffusion: industries In which employment increased, data seasonally adjusted
(In p e r c e n t)
Jan.
T im e s p a n a n d y e a r
O v e r 1-m o n th s p a n :
D ec.
N ov.
O c t.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A p r.
M a r.
Feb.
5 2 .4
4 7 .8
5 3 .8
4 9 .2
5 1 .6
4 7 .0
5 6 .2
5 6 .8
5 0 .8
6 1 .9
5 7 .6
5 9 .5
5 9 .7
5 3 .5
45.1
54.1
4 9 .2
4 6 .2
5 4 .6
5 4 .3
5 4 .9
55.1
6 2 .7
6 1 .9
1 9 8 6 ..............................................................................................
1 9 8 7 ..............................................................................................
5 6 .2
”
'
O v e r 3 - m o n th s p a n :
51.1
4 9 .7
4 6 .2
4 6 .2
4 5.1
5 1 .4
4 9 .7
51.1
55.1
5 5 .9
6 1 .4
6 0 .5
58.1
5 4 .3
51.1
4 9 .7
4 8 .4
4 4 .9
4 7 .3
54.1
5 4 .9
6 2 .4
6 5 .7
6 5 .9
O v e r 6 - m o n th s p a n :
1
.......................................................................
4 9 .2
4 7 .8
4 3 .0
4 5 .9
4 4 .3
4 4 .3
4 8 .9
5 0 .8
54.1
5 7 .0
5 7 .0
5 5 .9
1 9 8 6 ..............................................................................................
5 3 .8
5 3 .8
4 7 .6
4 5 .9
4 5 .9
4 8 .6
4 9 .7
5 5 .4
6 3 .0
6 3 .2
4 9 .5
4 8 .9
4 8 .6
1 9 8 6 ..............................................................................................
1 9 8 7 ..............................................................................................
1 9 8 7 ..............................................................................................
'
O v e r 1 2 - m o n th s p a n :
1 9 8 5 .............................................................................................
4 6 .2
4 5 .7
4 6 .8
4 3 .8
4 4 .9
4 7 .3
4 7 .6
4 8 .9
4 7 .3
1 9 8 6 ..............................................................................................
5 0 .3
51.1
5 2 .2
5 2 .4
5 2 .7
5 4 .3
5 3 .0
-
-
1 9 8 7 ..............................................................................................
”
”
D a ta n o t a v a ila b le .
NO TE:
spans.
F ig u re s a re th e p e r c e n t o f in d u s trie s w ith e m p lo y m e n t ris in g . (H a lf o f
t h e u n c h a n g e d c o m p o n e n ts a re c o u n te d a s ris in g .) D a ta a re c e n te re d w ith in th e
19.
"
D a ta f o r t h e 2 m o s t re c e n t m o n th s s h o w n in e a c h s p a n a re p re lim in a ry .
S e e th e “ D e fin itio n s ” in th is s e c tio n . S e e
N o te s o n th e d a ta
f o r a d e s c r ip tio n o f
th e m o s t re c e n t b e n c h m a r k re v is io n .
Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population
( N u m b e rs in th o u s a n d s )
1980
1979
1978
E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1 7 8 ,0 8 0
1 7 9 ,9 1 2
1 8 2 ,2 9 3
1 6 3 ,5 4 1
1 6 6 ,4 6 0
1 6 9 ,3 4 9
1 7 1 ,7 7 5
1 7 3 ,9 3 9
1 7 5 ,8 9 1
1 0 3 ,8 8 2
1 0 6 ,5 5 9
1 0 8 ,5 4 4
1 1 0 ,3 1 5
1 1 1 ,8 7 2
1 1 3 ,2 2 6
1 1 5 ,2 4 1
1 1 7 ,1 6 7
1 1 9 ,5 4 0
6 3 .5
6 4 .0
64.1
6 4 .2
6 4 .3
6 4 .4
6 4 .7
65.1
6 5 .6
9 7 ,6 7 9
1 0 0 ,4 2 1
1 0 0 ,9 0 7
1 0 2 ,0 4 2
1 0 1 ,1 9 4
1 0 2 ,5 1 0
1 0 6 ,7 0 2
1 0 8 ,8 5 6
1 1 1 ,3 0 3
T o ta l ( n u m b e r ) ...........................................................
P e r c e n t o f p o p u la tio n ............................................
5 9 .7
6 0 .3
5 9 .6
5 9 .4
5 8 .2
5 8 .3
5 9 .9
6 0 .5
61.1
R e s id e n t A rm e d F o r c e s .....................................
1 ,6 31
1 ,5 9 7
1 ,6 0 4
1 ,6 4 5
1 ,6 6 8
1 ,6 7 6
1 ,6 9 7
1 ,7 0 6
1 ,7 0 6
9 6 ,0 4 8
9 8 ,8 2 4
9 9 ,3 0 3
1 0 0 ,3 9 7
9 9 ,5 2 6
1 0 0 ,8 3 4
1 0 5 ,0 0 5
1 0 7 ,1 5 0
1 0 9 ,5 9 7
3 ,3 8 7
3 ,3 4 7
3 ,3 6 4
3 ,3 6 8
3 ,4 0 1
3 ,3 8 3
3 ,3 2 1
3 ,1 7 9
3 ,1 6 3
9 2 ,6 6 1
9 5 ,4 7 7
9 5 ,9 3 8
9 7 ,0 3 0
9 6 ,1 2 5
9 7 ,4 5 0
1 0 1 ,6 8 5
1 0 3 ,9 7 1
1 0 6 ,4 3 4
T o ta l ( n u m b e r ) ..........................................................
6 ,2 0 2
6 ,1 3 7
7 ,6 3 7
8 ,2 7 3
1 0 ,6 7 8
1 0 ,7 1 7
8 ,5 3 9
8 ,3 1 2
8 ,2 3 7
P e r c e n t o f la b o r f o r c e ..........................................
6 .0
5 .8
7 .0
7 .5
9 .5
9 .5
7 .4
7.1
6 .9
6 1 ,4 6 0
6 2 ,0 6 7
6 2 ,6 6 5
6 2 ,8 3 9
6 2 ,7 4 4
6 2 ,7 5 2
N o n in s titu tio n a l p o p u la t io n ................................................
L a b o r fo r c e :
T o ta l ( n u m b e r ) ...................................................................
P e r c e n t o f p o p u la t io n ....................................................
E m p lo y e d :
C iv ilia n
T o ta l .........................................................................
A g r ic u lt u r e ..........................................................
N o n a g ric u ltu r a l in d u s t r ie s ...........................
U n e m p lo y e d :
N o t in la b o r fo r c e (n u m b e r) ..........................................
20.
5 9 ,6 5 9
5 9 ,9 0 0
6 0 ,8 0 6
Annual data: Employment levels by industry
( N u m b e rs in th o u s a n d s )
In d u s try
G o o d s - p r o d u c in g ..................................... ...............................................
M a n u f a c tu r in g .....................................................................................
S e r v ic e - p r o d u c in g ....................................................................................
T ra n s p o rta tio n a n d p u b lic u t i l i t i e s ..............................................
1984
9 0 ,2 0 0
9 4 ,4 9 6
1979
1980
1981
1982
8 6 ,6 9 7
8 9 ,8 2 3
9 0 ,4 0 6
9 1 ,1 5 6
8 9 ,5 6 6
7 1 ,0 2 6
7 3 ,8 7 6
7 4 ,1 6 6
7 5 ,1 2 6
7 3 ,7 2 9
7 4 ,3 3 0
7 8 ,4 7 2
2 4 ,7 2 7
1985
1986
9 7 ,6 1 4
1 0 0 ,1 6 5
8 1 ,1 9 9
8 3 ,4 3 0
2 4 ,9 3 0
2 4 ,9 3 8
2 5 ,5 8 5
2 6 ,4 6 1
2 5 ,4 9 7
2 3 ,8 1 3
851
958
2 5 ,6 5 8
1 ,0 2 7
2 3 ,3 3 4
1 ,1 3 9
1 ,1 2 8
952
966
930
792
4 ,2 2 9
4 ,4 6 3
4 ,3 4 6
4 ,1 8 8
3 ,9 0 5
3 ,9 4 8
4 ,3 8 3
4 ,6 8 7
4 ,9 6 1
2 0 ,5 0 5
2 1 ,0 4 0
2 0 ,2 8 5
2 0 ,1 7 0
1 8,7 81
1 8 ,4 3 4
1 9 ,3 7 8
1 9 ,3 1 4
1 9 ,1 8 6
6 1 ,1 1 3
6 3 ,3 6 3
6 4 ,7 4 8
6 5 ,6 5 9
6 5 ,7 5 3
6 6 ,8 6 6
6 9 ,7 6 9
7 2 ,6 8 4
7 5 ,2 2 7
4 ,9 5 4
5 ,1 5 9
5 ,2 4 2
5 ,2 8 6
4 ,9 2 3
5 ,1 3 6
5 ,1 4 6
5 ,1 6 5
5 ,0 8 2
4 ,9 6 9
5 ,2 0 4
5 ,2 7 5
5 ,3 5 8
5 ,2 7 8
5 ,2 6 8
5 ,5 5 5
5 ,7 4 0
5 ,8 5 2
1 6 ,5 4 5
1 7 ,3 6 0
1 7 ,9 7 8
1 4 ,5 7 3
1 4 ,9 8 9
1 5 ,0 3 5
1 5 ,1 8 9
1 5 ,1 7 9
1 5 ,6 1 3
F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , a n d re a l e s t a t e .........................................
4 ,7 2 4
4 ,9 7 5
5 ,1 6 0
5 ,2 9 8
5 ,3 4 1
5 ,4 6 8
5 ,6 8 9
5 ,9 5 3
6 ,3 0 4
S e r v ic e s ...................................................................................................
1 6 ,2 5 2
1 7 ,1 1 2
1 7 ,8 9 0
1 8 ,6 1 9
1 9 ,0 3 6
1 9 ,6 9 4
2 0 ,7 9 7
2 1 ,9 7 4
2 3 ,0 7 2
1 5 ,8 6 9
1 6 ,0 2 4
1 6 ,4 1 5
1 6 ,7 3 5
L o c a l ................................................ ...............................................
NOTE:
72
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1983
1978
S e e “ N o te s o n th e d a ta ”
1 5 ,6 7 2
1 5 ,9 4 7
1 6,2 41
1 6,0 31
1 5 ,8 3 7
2 ,7 5 3
2 ,7 7 3
2 ,8 6 6
2 ,7 7 2
2 ,7 3 9
2 ,7 7 4
2 ,8 0 7
2 ,8 7 5
2 ,9 0 0
3 ,4 7 4
3 ,5 4 1
3 ,6 1 0
3 ,6 4 0
3 ,6 4 0
3 ,6 6 2
3 ,7 3 4
3 ,8 4 8
3 ,9 3 7
9 ,4 4 6
9 ,6 3 3
9 ,7 6 5
9 ,6 1 9
9 ,4 5 8
9 ,4 3 4
9 ,4 8 2
9 ,6 9 2
9 ,8 9 9
f o r a d e s c r ip tio n o f th e m o s t
r e c e n t b e n c h m a r k re v is io n .
21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricuitural
payrolls, by industry
Industry
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
35.8
5.69
203.70
35.7
6.16
219.91
35.3
6.66
235.10
35.2
7.25
255.20
34.8
7.68
267.26
35.0
8.02
280.70
35.2
. 8.32
292.86
34.9
8.57
299.09
34.8
8.75
304.50
43.4
7.67
332.88
43.0
8.49
365.07
43.3
9.17
397.06
43.7
10.04
438.75
42.7
10.77
459.88
42.5
11.28
479.40
43.3
11.63
503.58
43.4
11.98
519.93
42.3
12.45
526.64
36.8
8.66
318.69
37.0
9.27
342.99
37.0
9.94
367.78
36.9
10.82
399.26
36.7
11.63
426.82
37.1
11.94
442.97
37.8
12.13
458.51
37.7
12.31
464.09
37.5
12.42
465.75
40.4
6.17
249.27
40.2
6.70
269.34
39.7
7.27
288.62
39.8
7.99
318.00
38.9
8.49
330.26
40.1
8.83
354.08
40.7
9.19
374.03
40.5
9.53
385.97
40.7
9.73
396.01
40.0
7.57
302.80
39.9
8.16
325.58
39.6
8.87
351.25
39.4
9.70
382.18
39.0
10.32
402.48
39.0
10.79
420.81
39.4
11.12
438.13
39.5
11.40
450.30
39.2
11.63
455.90
38.8
5.88
228.14
38.8
6.39
247.93
38.5
6.96
267.96
38.5
7.56
291.06
38.3
8.09
309.85
38.5
8.55
329.18
38.5
8.89
342.27
38.4
9.16
351.74
38.4
9.34
358.66
31.0
4.20
130.20
30.6
4.53
138.62
30.2
4.88
147.38
30.1
5.25
158.03
29.9
5.48
163.85
29.8
5.74
171.05
29.8
5.85
174.33
29.4
5.94
174.64
29.2
6.02
175.78
36.4
4.89
178.00
36.2
5.27
190.77
36.2
5.79
209.60
36.3
6.31
229.05
36.2
6.78
245.44
36.2
7.29
263.90
36.5
7.63
278.50
36.4
7.94
289.02
36.5
8.34
304.41
32.8
4.99
163.67
32.7
5.36
175.27
32.6
5.85
190.71
32.6
6.41
208.97
32.6
6.92
225.59
32.7
7.31
239.04
32.6
7.59
247.43
32.5
7.89
256.43
32.5
8.16
265.20
Private sector
Average weekly h o u rs .................................................................
Average hourly earnings (In d o lla rs ).........................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars) .......................................
Mining
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Construction
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Manufacturing
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d ollars)..................................
Transportation and public utilities
Average weekly h o u rs ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Wholesale trade
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Retail trade
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Finance, Insurance, and real estate
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
Services
Average weekly h o u rs ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
22.
March 1987
•
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
(June 1981 = 100)
Percent change
1986
1985
1984
Series
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Sept.
Dec.
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
Mar.
June
133.0
133.8
0.6
3.6
Dec. 1986
C ivilian w o rkers 2 ..........................................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers .................................................................
Blue-collar w o rkers....................................................................
Service occupations..................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
G oods-producing.........................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
Service-producing.......................................................................
Services.....................................................................................
Health services......................................................................
Hospitals.................................................................................
Public administration 3 .............................................................
Nonmanufacturing.......................................................................
Private in d u stry w o rk e r s .........................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers...............................................................
Professional specialty and technical o ccup ations..........
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations
Sales occupations.................................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
c le ric a l...................................................................................
Blue-collar w o rkers.................................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair o ccup ation.........
Machine operators, assemblers, and in spectors............
Transportation and material moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers ....
Service occupations...............................................................
Workers, by industry division:
G oods-producing......................................................................
C o nstruction............................................................................
M anufacturing..........................................................................
D u rab les.................................................................................
Nondurables...........................................................................
Service-producing ............ .......................................................
Transportation and public utilities........................................
Transportation........................................................................
Public u tilitie s .........................................................................
Wholesale and retail trade .................................................
Wholesale t ra d e ....................................................................
Retail trade ............................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ....................................
S e rv ic e .....................................................................................
Health se rvice s......................................................................
H o sp ita ls...............................................................................
123.9
125.5
126.4
128.4
129.2
130.6
131.5
125.5
120.9
126.8
127.3
122.2
127.8
128.3
123.1
128.0
130.7
124.4
130.9
131.6
124.9
131.8
133.1
126.2
133.1
134.2
126.8
133.7
136.0
127.8
135.4
136.9
128.4
136.6
.7
.5
.9
4.0
2.8
3.6
121.4
122.0
125.5
130.9
128.6
124.8
123.2
123.9
126.9
131.9
130.1
126.2
123.9
124.6
127.9
132.6
130.3
127.2
124.9
125.5
130.7
136.4
134.2
129.7
125.5
126.0
131.5
137.1
134.8
130.6
126.9
127.7
132.9
138.8
136.8
131.9
128.1
128.7
133.7
139.4
138.0
132.8
128.8
129.3
135.6
142.4
140.6
134.6
129.5
130.1
136.5
143.6
“
141.6
135.4
.5
.6
.7
.8
1.1
1.1
.7
.6
3.2
3.3
3.8
4.7
4.7
“
5.0
3.7
122.7
124.2
125.2
126.8
127.5
128.9
129.9
130.8
131.6
.6
3.2
123.9
“
-
125.8
-
127.1
“
“
128.8
-
129.8
-
131.3
“
-
132.5
_
133.5
”
134.3
“
-
.6
.7
.8
-.1
3.5
3.6
4.1
“
120.6
125.7
121.9
126.3
122.8
126.5
124.0
128.8
124.4
“
129.5
125.7
"
130.9
126.3
“
131.1
127.2
“
132.3
127.8
133.5
.7
.5
.5
.6
.3
.6
.9
3.6
2.7
2.9
2.7
2.7
2.1
3.1
121.2
122.0
123.9
-
123.0
123.9
125.2
-
123.8
124.6
126.4
-
125.3
126.0
129.4
“
-
126.7
127.7
130.8
-
128.6
129.3
132.7
-
129.2
130.1
“
133.5
“
“
“
.5
.2
.6
.5
.7
.6
.1
-.4
.7
.5
1.0
.3
.8
1.0
1.3
1.2
3.1
2.8
3.3
2.8
4.0
3.2
2.2
2.2
2.0
2.6
2.2
3.1
4.3
4.9
”
-
-
-
124.6
125.5
128.7
“
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
127.8
128.7
131.6
“
“
Nonmanufacturing ..................................................................
123.1
124.4
125.6
127.6
128.4
129.7
130.6
131.7
132.4
.5
3.1
State and local gove rnm ent w o rkers ..................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers...............................................................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs .................................................................
Workers, by industry division:
S e rvice s...................................................................................
Hospitals and other services4 ...........................................
Health se rv ic e s ...................................................................
Schools .................................................................................
Elementary and secondary.............................................
Public administration3 .............................................................
130.1
131.7
132.0
136.5
137.5
138.9
139.7
143.6
144.7
.8
5.2
131.1
125.9
132.5
128.1
132.9
128.5
137.6
131.9
138.6
132.7
140.0
134.7
140.5
136.3
145.0
138.5
146.0
139.5
.7
.7
5.3
5.1
131.3
129.2
132.0
133.5
128.6
132.8
131.1
133.2
131.5
137.9
134.1
139.1
135.2
140.4
136.8
141.5
143.0
136.8
140.8
137.9
141.7
143.2
138.0
145.5
139.4
147.6
149.4
140.6
146.6
141.1
148.4
150.3
141.6
.8
1.2
.7
.5
.6
.7
5.4
4.4
4.1
5.8
5.8
5.0
-
-
-
-
-
133.4
134.4
130.1
133.7
134.6
130.3
139.1
140.9
134.2
140.3
142.0
134.8
1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index
consists of wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consist of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
74
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Consist of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
- Data not available.
activities.
23.
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
(June 1981 = 100)
1984
1985
1986
Percent change
Series
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
Dec. 1986
Civilian w o rke rs 1..........................................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rk e rs .................................................................
Blue-collar w o rkers....................................................................
Service occupations..................................................................
121.7
123.1
124.2
126.3
127.0
128.3
129.3
130.7
131.5
0.6
3.5
123.5
118.2
124.3
125.2
119.3
124.8
126.4
120.5
125.3
128.8
122.0
128.0
129.8
122.3
128.6
131.2
123.4
129.8
132.4
124.1
130.0
134.1
125.0
131.7
135.0
125.6
132.8
.7
.5
.8
4.0
2.7
3.3
Workers, by industry division
G oods-producing.........................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
Service-producing.......................................................................
S e rvice s...................................................................................
Health se rvice s......................................................................
Hospitals.................................................................................
Public administration 2 ..........................................................
Nonm anufacturing................................................... .................
118.8
119.5
123.4
128.9
125.7
122.6
120.3
121.0
124.7
129.7
127.0
123.9
121.5
122.3
125.8
130.5
127.2
125.0
122.5
123.2
128.6
134.2
131.4
127.6
123.1
123.8
129.4
134.8
132.0
128.4
124.4
125.3
130.7
136.4
133.8
129.6
125.6
126.5
131.5
137.0
134.6
130.4
126.3
127.2
133.4
139.9
137.5
132.2
127.0
127.9
134.2
141.1
_
138.1
133.0
.6
.6
.6
.9
1.2
1.2
.4
.6
3.2
3.3
3.7
4.7
4.8
Private Industry w o r k e r s ......................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rke rs ............................................................
Professional specialty and technical occup ations......
Executive, administrative, and managerial
occu p a tio n s......................................................................
Sales occupations.............................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
c le ric a l...............................................................................
Blue-collar w o rke rs ..............................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair
occupations.....................................................................
Machine operators, assemblers, and in spectors........
Transportation and material moving occupations.......
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and
la b o re rs.............................................................................
Service o ccup ations...........................................................
4.6
3.6
120.6
122.0
123.3
124.9
125.6
126.8
127.9
128.8
129.5
.5
3.1
122.3
127.3
124.0
127.7
125.5
128.7
127.3
131.2
128.3
131.5
129.6
132.7
131.1
134.0
132.0
135.4
132.7
136.4
.5
.7
3.4
3.7
122.2
111.6
123.8
116.3
126.5
117.4
127.7
119.3
128.4
122.5
130.5
122.4
132.1
124.3
132.4
125.2
133.5
124.9
.8
-.2
4.0
2.0
122.9
124.7
125.6
127.1
127.9
129.6
130.8
131.7
132.7
.8
3.8
118.0
119.1
120.3
121.7
122.0
123.1
123.7
124.5
125.1
.5
2.5
119.4
117.9
114.0
120.8
118.9
114.5
122.0
120.1
115.7
123.7
121.1
117.7
123.8
121.6
117.8
125.3
122.6
118.0
125.7
123.6
118.9
126.7
124.1
119.8
127.4
124.9
120.1
.6
.6
.3
2.9
2.7
2.0
115.9
123.7
116.7
123.8
118.5
124.4
118.6
126.3
119.8
126.6
120.0
128.0
120.3
128.0
120.9
128.9
121.4
130.1
.4
.9
1.3
2.8
Workers, by industry division:
G oods-producing...................................................................
Construction .........................................................................
M anufacturing.......................................................................
D u rab les.............................................................................
Nondurables.......................................................................
Service-producing..................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ..................................
Transportation..................................................................
Public utilities....................................................................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ..............................................
Wholesale trade ............................................................
Retail tra d e ......................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ..............................
S e rvices..............................................................................
Health s e rv ic e s ................................................................
H o spitals..........................................................................
118.7
114.4
119.5
119.1
120.2
122.1
120.7
118.1
122.9
116.2
115.8
129.5
-
120.2
115.5
121.0
120.6
121.6
123.4
121.7
121.4
116.6
122.3
122.0
122.6
124.8
122.8
-
122.3
117.3
123.2
122.7
124.0
127.0
124.8
122.7
127.7
120.8
124.1
133.9
_
122.9
117.9
123.8
123.4
124.6
127.8
125.2
_
_
124.2
118.3
125.3
124.8
126.1
129.0
126.3
_
_
125.4
119.8
126.5
125.8
127.9
129.9
126.6
_
126.1
120.5
127.2
126.4
128.5
130.9
127.3
_
_
126.8
120.8
127.9
127.2
129.3
131.6
127.5
_
_
123.7
128.3
121.9
126.5
134.1
_
124.5
129.7
122.5
126.6
136.2
125.8
131.2
123.7
128.0
136.9
_
126.5
131.8
124.4
129.0
138.2
_
126.9
133.1
124.5
130.0
139.5
_
.6
.2
.6
.6
.6
.5
.2
-.3
.7
.3
1.0
.1
.8
.9
1.5
1.5
3.2
2.5
3.3
3.1
3.8
3.0
1.6
1.3
2.5
2.6
3.7
2.1
2.8
4.0
5.1
Nonmanufacturing................................................................
121.2
122.6
130.4
.5
3.0
State and local government workers................................
Workers, by occupational group
White-collar w o rke rs ............................................................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs ..............................................................
Workers, by industry division
Services ................................................................................
Hospitals and other services 3 .......................................
Health services ................................................................
S ch o o ls...............................................................................
Elementary and s econ dary..........................................
Public administration 2 .........................................................
-
-
118.8
123.7
116.9
122.0
129.9
_
-
123.9
125.9
126.6
127.7
128.7
129.7
-
127.1
128.4
128.7
133.2
134.2
135.5
136.0
140.4
141.4
.7
5.4
128.0
122.5
129.3
124.2
129.6
124.5
134.3
127.9
135.3
128.4
136.6
130.4
137.0
131.9
141.8
134.5
142.8
135.1
.7
.4
5.5
5.2
128.1
125.9
128.7
130.2
125.7
129.4
127.7
129.7
128.0
130.2
131.1
127.2
134.5
130.2
135.6
130.9
136.8
132.4
137.1
133.3
142.1
135.8
143.3
137.3
.8
1.1
.5
.7
.5
.4
5.7
4.9
4.1
5.9
5.7
4.6
-
129.9
130.8
127.0
1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
121.1
126.8
118.9
121.7
131.0
_
-
135.8
137.5
131.4
_
137.0
138.5
132.0
_
138.0
139.4
133.8
_
138.2
139.4
134.6
_
144.1
145.7
137.5
_
145.1
146.4
138.1
3 Includes, for example, library, social and health services,
- Data not available.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
24.
March 1987
•
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size
(June 1981=100)
Series
Dec.
Mar.
Sept.
June
Percent change
1986
1985
1984
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
12
3
months
ended
Dec.
months
ended
Dec. 1986
COMPENSATION
Workers, by bargaining status1
G oods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
N onm anufacturing.....................................................................
N o nunion.......................................................................................
G oods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
N onm anufacturing....................................................................
124.8
123.6
126.7
124.2
125.3
125.5
123.9
128.0
124.2
126.6
126.5
124.6
129.5
125.0
127.8
127.1
125.2
130.2
125.5
128.6
128.4
126.4
131.6
127.0
129.7
128.7
126.7
131.9
126.9
130.4
129.4
127.3
132.8
127.5
131.2
129.8
127.5
133.4
127.9
131.5
0.3
.5
.3
2.5
1.9
2.3
121.9
119.6
123.3
123.8
122.4
124.7
123.6
123.9
125.0
123.5
125.8
124.8
125.1
126.8
124.4
128.3
125.7
127.3
127.5
125.1
129.0
126.3
128.1
129.0
126.7
130.4
128.1
129.5
130.2
128.2
131.4
129.7
130.4
131.2
129.1
132.5
130.4
131.6
132.1
130.0
133.4
131.4
132.5
.7
.7
.7
.7
3.6
3.9
3.4
4.0
3.4
125.1
124.2
128.8
126.5
124.2
129.1
129.9
127.2
124.6
129.8
131.6
128.7
125.9
130.8
133.3
129.6
126.2
131.6
134.2
130.7
127.3
132.1
135.2
131.4
128.1
132.8
.7
.5
4.1
3.3
.5
2.3
.6
.6
3.2
3.2
120.8
122.4
Workers, by region 1
N ortheast.......................................................................................
South .............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..............................................
W e s t...............................................................................................
.2
.2
.8
124.9
126.8
126.4
125.2
122.7
127.9
123.2
119.8
124.7
121.4
125.7
122.5
127.3
123.9
128.1
123.9
129.5
125.5
130.5
126.4
131.4
127.2
132.2
127.9
121.7
123.0
121.3
125.7
121.7
124.1
122.2
127.1
122.8
124.1
125.3
124.7
122.7
127.8
123.3
125.9
125.6
123.4
129.0
124.2
126.9
126.1
124.1
129.3
124.6
127.4
126.9
124.5
130.5
125.0
128.5
127.2
124.8
130.9
125.5
128.7
125.2
122.3
126.9
123.7
125.9
125.9
123.0
127.7
124.4
126.6
127.3
124.5
128.9
126.1
127.8
128.5
126.1
129.9
127.7
128.9
129.4
127.0
130.8
128.5
129.8
130.3
127.8
131.7
129.5
130.6
.6
.7
.8
.6
126.8
124.8
122.5
126.6
128.1
125.4
122.9
127.1
129.2
126.8
124.2
128.1
131.3
127.8
124.4
128.9
132.3
128.8
125.3
129.3
133.1
129.4
126.2
130.1
.5
.7
125.5
121.9
122.0
126.3
127.4
123.6
128.5
124.5
129.4
125.0
130.2
125.6
123.8
122.2
120.8
122.0
Workers, by area size 1
Metropolitan a re a s .......................................................................
Other a re a s ...................................................................................
2.1
1.8
123.9
122.9
125.6
123.2
124.5
2.8
.6
WAGES AND SALARIES
Workers, by bargaining status 1
Union .............................................................................................
G oods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
M anufacturing............................................................................
N onm anufacturing.....................................................................
120.9
119.3
123.5
119.5
N o nunion.......................................................................................
G oods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing ............................................................................
N onm anufacturing.....................................................................
120.4
118.1
122.8
122.1
120.2
119.5
120.7
123.1
121.5
122.3
122.1
121.6
120.0
124.2
120.4
123.4
121.4
124.4
122.8
123.6
Workers, by region 1
N ortheast.......................................................................................
South ..............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..............................................
W e s t................................................................................................
Workers, by area size1
Metropolitan a re a s .......................................................................
Other a re a s ...................................................................................
121.9
120.2
118.7
122.5
121.0
118.3
123.0
122.3
119.6
124.0
122.4
119.6
1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and
industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the
76
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
124.6
123.4
121.1
125.1
123.8
120.6
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w Technical
Employment Cost Index,” May 1982.
Note,
“ Estimation
2.0
.2
.2
1.7
2.4
.3
.4
1.8
2.2
.2
.7
3.5
3.9
3.1
4.1
3.2
.6
3.9
3.2
2.7
2.4
.6
.6
3.1
3.0
.5
procedures
for
the
25. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, private
industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
Annual average
Measure
Quarterly average
1984
1984
1985
1986
1985
IV
I
II
III
IV
F
IIP
NIP
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation ’ adjustments,2 settlements
covering 5,000 workers or more:
First year of contract...........................................
Annual rate over life of contract.........................
3.6
2.8
2.6
2.7
3.7
2.0
3.6
2.7
3.5
3.4
2.0
3.0
2.0
1.4
0.6
1.2
0.7
1.6
0.7
1.2
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000
workers or more:
First year of contract...........................................
Annual rate over life of contract.........................
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.7
2.3
1.5
3.3
3.2
2.5
2.8
2.0
3.1
2.1
1.9
.8
1.5
1.3
2.0
.8
1.5
3.7
.8
3.3
.7
.7
.3
.7
.1
.8
.2
1.2
.2
.5
.1
.6
.0
.7
.2
.5
.1
2.0
.9
1.8
.7
.2
.2
.6
.1
.5
.1
.5
.4
.2
.1
.4
.2
.6
.0
.5
.0
Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustment3 .........................
From settlements reached in period ...................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier
periods.................................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses.............
1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in
compensation or wages.
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
p = preliminary.
26. Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, major collective bargaining settlements in private
industry situations covering 1,000 workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
Average for four quarters endingMeasure
1984
1985
IV
I
II
1986
III
IV
IP
IIP
NIP
Specified total compensation adjustments, settlements covering 5,000
workers or more, all industries:
First year of contract...........................................................................
Annual rate over life of contract..........................................................
3.6
2.8
3.4
2.6
3.4
2.7
3.1
2.7
2.6
2.7
2.3
2.5
1.4
2.0
0.9
1.4
2.4
2.9
2.1
2.4
1.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
1.3
2.8
2.4
2.3
2.4
2.4
1.5
2.8
2.4
1.9
2.7
2.5
1.8
3.0
2.3
1.6
2.7
2.7
2.5
2.8
2.0
1.6
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.6
1.8
1.5
2.2
2.5
2.1
1.2
2.2
.8
1.7
2.0
1.6
2.3
2.1
2.9
1.5
1.0
3.3
2.1
2.0
2.5
1.4
.9
3.2
2.0
1.9
2.2
1.5
1.0
3.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.4
2.4
.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.6
.8
.8
.9
1.8
2.1
1.5
.1
.7
-.4
1.4
2.0
.9
-.1
1.1
-2.0
.3
1.1
-.1
2.5
5.5
2.0
2.9
4.8
2.6
2.6
5.1
2.4
2.8
4.0
2.7
2.7
4.3
2.5
2.9
3.8
2.8
3.2
4.0
3.0
3.3
3.9
3.2
3.3
3.6
3.3
3.3
3.6
3.3
2.8
3.5
2.7
3.0
3.6
2.8
2.6
3.4
2.4
2.8
3.3
2.6
2.1
2.7
1.9
2.3
2.5
2.2
.5
4.0
.4
1.0
1.4
1.0
.9
4.6
.8
1.4
1.7
1.4
1.1
9.2
1.0
1.7
4.6
1.7
1.6
2.3
1.1
2.4
2.5
1.2
2.6
2.3
1.4
2.4
2.6
1.6
2.6
Specified wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or
more:
All industries
First year of contract.........................................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Annual rate over life of contract.......................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Manufacturing
First year of contract.........................................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Annual rate over life of contract.......................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Nonmanufacturing
First year of contract .........................................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Annual rate over life of contract.....................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ...................................................
Construction
First year of contract .....................................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.....................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .............................................
Annual rate over life of contract...................................................
Contracts with COLA clauses.........................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ......................................
1 Data do not meet publication standards.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p
= preliminary.
1.0
(1)
O
1.5
(1)
(’)
1.7
O
(1)
(')
(1)
2.1
O
(’)
2.2
(')
(1)
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987
•
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation and Industrial Relations Data
2 7 . Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
______
Average for four quarters ending-1986
1985
Effective wage adjustment
I
II
III
IV
P
IP
IIP
For all workers:'
Tota l......................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period ................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period.......................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses...........................................
3.6
.7
2.2
.7
3.5
.9
1.9
.7
3.5
.9
1.8
.8
3.3
.7
1.8
.7
3.1
.6
1.7
.8
2.9
.5
1.8
.7
2.3
.5
1.6
.2
For workers receiving changes:
To ta l......................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period .................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period .......................
From cost-of-living-adjustments clauses...........................................
4.5
2.9
4.2
2.3
4.2
2.9
3.9
2.3
4.3
2.8
3.7
2.8
4.1
3.4
3.7
2.2
4.0
2.9
3.Ò
2.5
3.8
2.5
3.4
2.0
3.1
1.7
3.8
1.0
1 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
p
= preliminary.
28. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, State and
local government collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
Annual average
First 6 months
1986P
Measure
1984
1985
5.2
5.4
4.2
5.1
6.7
6.4
4.8
5.1
4.6
5.4
6.1
6.0
5.0
1.9
3.1
(4)
5.7
4.1
1.6
(4)
1.8
.6
1.2
(4)
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments,2 settlements covering 5,000 workers or more:
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or more:
Effective adjustments:
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
4 Less than 0.05 percent.
p = preliminary.
1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in
compensation or wages.
29. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
Annual totals
1985
Measure
1985
Dec.
May
Apr.
Jan.
June
Julyp
Sept."
Aug.
Oct.P
Nov.p
Dec.p
Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period....
In effect during period
Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in
thousands).....................
In effect during period (in
thousands).....................
Days idle:
Number (in thousands)..........
Percent of estimated working
time1 .....................................
323.9
78
7.6
24.0
11.2
6.1
28.6
198.0
46.7
113.3
37.9
44.3
8.7
2.7
144.8
85.2
107.7
67.1
37.1
584.1
38.0
12.0
28.4
38.6
17.6
41.2
205.9
66.3
7,079.0
661.9
170.0
309.5
367.5
297.3
303.6
3,684.3
894.5
1,612.1
1,208.5
1,411.9
941.4
668.6
.03
.03
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.17
.04
.07
.06
.06
.04
.04
1 Agricultural and government employees
working time: private household, forestry,
explanation of the measurement of idleness
found in '“ Total economy’ measure of strike
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8.2
are included in the total employed and total
and fishery employees are excluded. An
as a percentage of the total time worked is
idleness,” M onthly Labor Review, October
1968, pp. 54-56.
- Data not available,
p = preliminary
30. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
Annual
average
1985
1986
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
328.4
381.9
327.4
380.8
328.4
381.9
327.5
380.8
326.0
379.1
325.3
378.3
326.3
379.5
327.9
381.4
328.0
381.4
328.6
382.1
330.2
384.1
330.5
384.4
330.8
384.7
331.1
385.1
302.0
309.8
296.8
317.0
263.4
258.0
325.7
361.1
398.8
294.4
451.7
294.2
346.6
229.5
311.8
319.7
305.3
325.8
275.1
258.4
328.7
373.6
411.1
287.8
478.2
301.9
360.1
239.7
305.6
313.2
299.3
321.9
269.9
256.9
323.9
361.3
402.2
290.3
448.8
297.3
352.1
236.2
307.9
315.6
302.5
322.0
271.5
257.2
334.4
365.7
405.1
292.1
459.7
298.0
353.1
237.5
307.7
315.3
301.5
322.5
268.4
257.3
320.7
375.1
408.6
291.4
485.3
299.5
354.2
238.3
307.8
315.4
301.2
322.7
267.7
256.8
319.2
375.7
408.4
290.2
488.0
299.3
355.5
238.8
308.5
316.1
301.5
322.5
264.2
256.8
329.5
376.1
411.4
288.5
487.4
300.2
357.0
239.5
309.4
317.0
302.1
323.8
263.4
257.1
336.5
374.6
411.2
287.2
481.9
301.4
358.8
239.4
309.5
317.1
301.6
326.1
265.1
257.2
327.8
374.1
411.5
287.0
480.0
301.7
360.2
240.1
312.2
320.1
305.5
326.3
274.9
258.4
330.3
373.7
412.4
287.3
478.3
301.8
360.8
240.4
314.6
322.7
308.9
328.2
283.0
258.3
332.1
374.0
413.1
287.8
476.9
303.2
361.8
240.1
315.1
323.2
309.0
328.5
284.7
258.5
329.1
373.7
413.7
285.6
475.7
303.8
363.3
240.4
315.6
323.7
309.5
328.4
284.9
260.0
328.6
374.4
413.4
284.6
477.5
304.7
364.0
240.6
316.4
324.6
309.9
328.5
286.3
261.2
327.8
373.9
412.4
285.4
476.9
303.9
365.8
240.5
317.0
325.2
310.2
329.5
287.3
262.2
328.5
372.2
411.8
286.0
470.2
305.2
367.1
240.8
Housing ..........................................................................................
Shelter ........................................................................................
Renters’ costs (12/82 = 100)..................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters' costs ..............................................................
Homeowners' costs (12/82 = 100)...........................................
Owners' equivalent rent (12/82 = 100) .................................
Household insurance (1 2 /8 2 -1 0 0 )......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities...................................
Fuel and other utilities................................................................
Fuels .........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity....................................................
Other utilities and public services............................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies............................................................
Housekeeping services............................................................
349.9
382.0
115.4
264.6
398.4
113.1
113.2
112.4
368.9
421.1
269.6
393.6
488.1
619.5
452.7
240.7
247.2
200.1
313.6
338.9
360.2
402.9
121.9
280.0
416.2
119.4
119.4
119.2
373.8
430.9
269.7
384.7
463.1
501.5
446.7
253.1
250.4
201.1
319.5
346.6
355.8
392.3
118.3
272.4
398.1
116.3
116.3
115.0
373.7
426.2
273.3
393.3
483.6
657.3
439.9
245.8
248.8
200.1
317.7
343.2
356.8
393.8
118.8
273.4
401.1
116.7
116.7
115.7
379.1
432.6
277.1
394.6
484.7
650.3
442.6
247.3
248.8
199.8
318.3
343.9
356.5
394.8
119.0
273.7
404.1
117.0
117.0
117.4
379.6
432.8
277.8
390.0
476.3
591.2
444.5
247.9
249.0
199.7
318.6
344.5
357.0
397.0
119.6
275.0
405.5
117.9
117.9
118.0
367.5
422.4
266.1
385.5
467.6
549.9
442.3
249.0
249.8
201.0
317.9
345.1
358.0
400.1
120.9
277.9
410.8
118.7
118.7
118.3
367.6
424.6
264.5
381.8
459.6
518.3
439.2
251.3
249.6
200.4
318.5
345.4
358.5
400.9
121.1
278.4
411.3
118.9
118.9
118.8
367.1
425.5
262.9
382.5
460.6
496.8
444.6
251.5
249.9
200.8
318.3
345.8
361.2
401.6
121.6
279.4
415.2
119.0
119.0
118.9
366.6
427.4
260.7
393.8
477.0
486.6
466.0
255.2
250.2
200.8
319.6
346.1
361.5
403.5
122.5
281.2
420.1
119.4
119.4
119.9
369.2
430.1
262.7
389.4
469.2
459.4
462.3
255.6
250.5
201.2
319.5
346.6
362.4 363.7
405.2 407.6
122.9 123.6
281.7 283.2
425.7 429.1
119.9 120.7
119.9 120.7
119.9 120.2
376.4 376.2
434.2 437.0
271.3 268.7
389.5 388.3
469.0 467.2
447.3 453.5
464.5 461.1
255.9 255.6
250.5 251.5
200.9 202.2
319.8 320.1
347.4 . 347.8
363.0
409.5
124.0
284.6
427.3
121.3
121.3
120.6
379.0
437.5
273.0
379.1
450.3
451.9
441.4
257.1
251.6
202.2
319.8
348.5
361.7
410.2
124.3
285.6
425.5
121.5
121.5
121.1
377.1
433.7
272.9
371.1
437.8
452.0
426.7
255.4
251.2
201.4
320.4
348.5
362.1
410.4
124.2
286.0
418.2
121.6
121.6
121.6
380.0
433.1
278.3
371.0
438.1
460.6
425.3
254.9
252.4
202.5
322.9
349.3
Apparel and upkeep......................................................................
Apparel commodities..................................................................
Men’s and boys’ apparel..........................................................
Women’s and girls’ apparel .....................................................
Infants' and toddlers' apparel..................................................
Footwear...................................................................................
Other apparel commodities......................................................
Apparel services..........................................................................
206.0
191.6
197.9
169.5
299.7
212.1
215.5
320.9
207.8
192.0
200.0
168.0
312.7
211.2
217.9
334.6
209.0
194.2
202.0
172.6
304.1
213.1
214.6
326.9
205.0
189.5
198.6
164.4
313.9
209.1
215.5
329.8
204.1
188.5
196.8
163.4
311.6
207.9
216.1
330.7
206.3
190.8
198.3
167.6
313.1
210.1
214.6
331.5
207.3
191.7
199.7
168.0
316.6
211.4
215.3
332.9
206.4
190.7
200.2
164.9
318.5
211.5
215.4
333.6
204.5
188.4
198.1
161.3
319.7
210.0
215.8
334.3
203.2
187.0
195.8
159.8
307.5
209.1
218.1
334.6
207.0
191.2
197.8
167.2
310.6
209.6
221.6
334.7
212.1
196.6
203.2
175.7
309.7
212.0
221.1
336.7
213.2
197.6
204.3
176.4
312.0
215.1
219.8
338.3
213.1
197.4
205.3
175.0
307.0
215.1
221.1
339.0
210.9
194.9
202.3
171.7
312.7
214.0
220.0
339.5
Transportation ...............................................................................
Private transportation..................................................................
New vehicles............................................................................
New cars................................................................................
Used cars .................................................................................
Motor fuel .................................................................................
Gasoline.................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services....................................
Public transportation...................................................................
319.9
314.2
214.9
215.2
379.7
373.8
373.3
351.4
287.6
202.6
312.8
402.8
307.5
299.5
224.1
224.4
363.2
292.1
291.4
363.1
303.9
201.6
333.9
426.4
324.0
317.8
219.2
219.4
375.6
377.5
376.8
357.5
295.2
202.1
322.7
412.9
323.9
317.3
219.7
219.9
374.1
373.3
372.5
357.9
297.7
203.4
325.5
419.6
319.2
312.2
220.2
220.4
370.7
351.5
350.8
358.9
299.2
202.9
327.6
422.2
309.6
302.1
220.1
220.3
367.2
308.5
307.7
359.3
301.5
203.6
330.3
421.2
303.3
295.3
221.0
221.2
364.8
279.5
278.6
360.6
301.6
202.2
330.9
422.2
305.7
297.8
222.8
223.0
363.6
289.3
288.7
361.3
301.3
202.4
330.4
423.7
308.6
300.8
224.0
224.2
362.5
299.4
299.1
362.1
303.0
201.5
332.8
425.4
304.7
296.5
224.5
224.7
360.3
280.2
279.8
363.4
304.5
201.6
334.6
428.0
301.3
292.8
224.5
224.7
358.0
265.9
265.3
364.3
304.5
201.8
334.6
428.0
302.2
293.7
224.2
224.5
359.5
271.1
270.6
365.0
302.3
200.3
332.3
428.5
302.6
294.1
226.7
227.1
360.6
263.2
262.6
365.7
307.6
198.9
339.3
428.7
304.3
295.8
230.2
230.7
361.0
260.9
260.2
368.4
311.6
200.0
344.1
431.7
304.8
295.9
231.7
232.2
356.6
261.9
261.2
370.7
312.0
200.4
344.5
437.5
Medical c a re ..................................................................................
Medical care commodities..........................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Professional services...............................................................
Other medical care services....................................................
403.1
256.7
435.1
367.3
517.0
433.5
273.6
468.6
390.9
562.6
414.7
262.9
448.0
377.1
533.6
418.2
264.5
451.9
378.9
540.3
422.3
267.4
456.2
381.6
546.4
425.8
269.4
460.1
385.0
550.8
428.0
271.3
462.3
386.9
553.5
429.7
272.3
464.2
388.3
555.9
432.0
273.3
466.8
390.3
559.2
434.8
275.4
469.8
391.7
564.2
437.5
276.0
473.0
393.3
569.4
439.7
276.7
475.7
396.1
571.9
442.3
277.5
478.8
398.0
576.4
444.6
278.2
481.5
399.8
580.3
446.8
280.8
483.4
401.0
583.0
Entertainment................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services...............................................................
265.0
260.6
271.8
274.1
265.9
286.3
268.3
262.5
277.1
270.8
264.7
279.9
272.0
265.2
282.1
271.9
265.0
282.2
272.3
264.8
283.5
272.9
265.3
284.2
273.9
266.1
285.5
274.4
265.8
287.0
274.7
266.1
287.3
275.3
265.9
289.2
276.5
266.7
290.8
277.4
267.6
291.8
277.4
267.4
292.2
Other goods and services .............................................................
Tobacco products.......................................................................
Personal care..............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances.............................
Personal care services .............................................................
Personal and educational expenses...........................................
School books and supplies......................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................
326.6
328.5
281.9
278.5
286.0
397.1
350.8
407.7
346.4
351.0
291.3
287.9
295.4
428.8
380.3
440.1
336.5
337.4
286.3
282.5
290.6
415.5
364.7
427.0
339.1
342.7
288.1
285.3
291.8
416.8
371.0
427.6
340.3
344.7
289.1
286.0
293.0
417.7
373.8
428.1
341.1
345.6
290.3
287.3
294.0
417.9
374.3
428.3
341.8
346.5
290.5
287.7
294.1
418.9
374.4
429.5
342.1
346.5
290.9
287.9
294.7
419.5
374.5
430.2
342.6
347.1
291.0
287.0
295.7
420.4
375.7
431.0
344.9
354.3
291.1
287.1
295.8
421.2
375.9
431.9
346.4
356.2
292.3
289.1
296.2
422.9
376.9
433.7
353.3
356.8
292.0
288.2
296.5
445.2
389.4
457.8
354.6
357.2
293.1
289.9
297.1
447.6
392.3
460.2
354.9
357.3
293.4
289.6
297.9
448.2
392.5
460.8
355.2
357.6
293.6
289.6
298.2
448.8
392.6
461.6
1985
1986
All ite m s...........................................................................................
All items (1957-59 = 100).................................................................
322.2
374.7
Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food............................................................................................
Food at home ..........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs...............................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables............................................................
Other foods at home.............................................................
Sugar and sweets...............................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared foods..........................................................
Food away from home ............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS:
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
79
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
30. Continued— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
1985
Annual
average
1986
1985
1986
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
All item s...........................................................................................
Commodities..................................................................................
Food and beverages ...................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ...................................
Apparel commodities.............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ..................
Durables....................................................................................
322.2
286.7
302.0
328.4
283.9
311.8
327.4
289.9
305.6
327.5
287.4
307.7
326.0
283.7
307.8
325.3
281.2
308.5
326.3
282.1
309.4
327.9
282.8
309.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
265.2
192.0
307.3
270.2
286.8
194.2
339.1
271.4
278.6
188.5
329.5
270.5
268.9
190.8
313.6
269.7
262.0
191.7
302.6
269.2
263.3
190.7
305.2
269.6
264.7
188.4
308.4
269.9
328.6
281.9
314.6
258.1
191.2
296.9
269.0
330.5
283.6
315.6
-
328.0
281.9
312.2
259.8
187.0
301.7
269.6
330.2
283.5
315.1
282.1
191.6
333.3
270.7
328.4
290.1
307.9
284.9
189.5
338.7
271.4
261.5
196.6
299.5
269.3
260.4
197.6
297.2
270.5
330.8
284.0
316.4
260.0
197.4
296.7
271.8
331.1
284.2
317.0
260.0
194.9
298.0
271.7
Services..........................................................................................
Rent of shelter (1 2 /8 2 -1 0 0 )..................................................
Household services less rent of shelter (1 2 /8 2 -1 0 0 )........
Transportation services..............................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Other services ............................................................................
381.5
113.9
111.2
337.0
435.1
314.1
400.5
120.2
112.8
356.3
468.6
331.8
389.5
117.0
110.8
346.1
448.0
322.9
391.7
117.4
111.4
349.0
451.9
324.8
393.3
117.7
111.8
351.0
456.2
326.1
394.9
118.5
111.6
352.4
460.1
326.6
396.8
119.4
111.6
353.2
462.3
327.6
397.9
119.7
112.3
353.4
464.2
328.2
401.0
119.9
115.2
355.3
466.8
329.2
402.3
120.5
114.9
357.1
469.8
330.1
403.7
120.9
115.3
357.3
473.0
330.8
405.5
121.7
114.9
356.2
475.7
337.9
406.1
122.2
112.9
360.5
478.8
339.5
406.1
122.4
111.0
364.4
481.5
340.3
406.6
122.5
110.8
366.2
483.4
340.8
Special indexes:
All items less fo o d ......................................................................
All items less shelter..................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs ..............................................
All items less medical care.........................................................
Commodities less fo o d ...............................................................
Nondurables less food ...............................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables................................................................................
Services less rent of shelter.......................................................
Services less medical c a re .........................................................
Energy.........................................................................................
All items less energy ..................................................................
All items less food and energy ..................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ...................................................................
Services less energy...................................................................
323.3
303.9
109.7
317.7
272.5
277.2
319.2
293.2
113.5
373.3
426.5
314.8
314.4
259.7
409.9
375.9
328.6
306.7
111.2
322.6
263.4
262.2
297.1
289.6
118.7
390.6
370.3
327.0
327.1
263.2
322.4
397.1
328.9
307.9
111.3
322.6
275.7
282.0
325.1
297.4
115.4
380.8
426.5
320.5
320.7
262.2
417.9
385.8
329.5
308.8
111.6
323.4
274.7
280.4
324.9
297.7
116.2
382.7
424.7
321.8
321.6
261.8
413.2
387.9
328.5
307.4
111.2
322.2
270.9
274.5
316.8
294.3
116.8
384.0
408.9
322.3
322.3
261.6
386.5
389.4
326.6
305.2
110.5
320.5
265.2
265.6
302.7
289.5
117.1
385.4
381.3
323.3
323.6
262.0
343.0
391.5
325.7
303.6
110.1
319.7
261.2
259.2
292.9
286.3
117.4
387.2
361.8
324.4
324.8
262.1
313.3
393.8
326.7
304.7
110.4
320.6
262.1
260.5
295,2
287.4
117.8
388.3
367.6
325.0
325.3
262.2
319.3
394.5
328.6
306.5
111.1
322.2
263.0
261.8
298.1
288.2
119.2
391.3
380.6
325.5
325.9
262.0
327.1
395.9
328.0
306.1
111.0
322.1
260.2
257.3
292.2
287.1
119.5
392.5
366.5
326.9
326.9
262.0
306.6
397.7
328.1
306.4
111.2
322.6
259.0
255.6
287.9
287.4
119.8
393.6
358.6
328.3
327.9
262.9
292.4
399.0
330.0
307.9
111.7
324.2
261.1
258.9
290.2
289.4
120.2
395.4
360.6
330.0
329.9
264.5
297.7
401.4
330.2
307.8
111.7
324.4
260.9
257.8
288.1
289.0
120.1
395.7
348.6
331.4
331.6
265.5
290.6
403.7
330.4
308.0
111.8
324.5
261.2
257.4
287.7
289.2
120.0
395.4
341.7
332.3
332.5
266.1
288.5
405.0
330.6
308.3
111.9
324.8
261.2
257.5
288.9
289.5
120.2
395.8
342.4
332.6
332.8
265.8
290.5
405.7
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1967-$1.00................................................................................
1957-59 = $1.00...........................................................................
31.0
26.7
30.5
26.2
30.5
26.3
30.5
26.2
30.5
26.3
30.7
26.4
30.7
26.4
30.6
26.4
30.5
26.2
30.5
26.2
30.4
26.2
30.3
26.0
30.3
26.0
30.2
26.0
30.2
26.0
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR URBAN WAGE EARNERS
AND CLERICAL WORKERS:
All Items .........................................................................................
All items (1957-59=100).................................................................
318.5
370.4
323.4
376.1
323.4
376.1
324.3
377.1
323.2
375.8
321.4
373.7
320.4
372.6
321.4
373.7
323.0
375.6
322.9
375.5
323.4
376.1
324.9
377.8
325.0
378.0
325.4
378.4
325.7
378.8
Food and beverages .....................................................................
Food............................................................................................
Food at home ...........................................................................
Cereals and bakery products.................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs................................................
Dairy products........................................................................
Fruits and vegetables.............................................................
Other foods at home.............................................................
Sugar and sweets...............................................................
Fats and o ils ........................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages......................................................
Other prepared foods..........................................................
Food away from home ............................................................
Alcoholic beverages....................................................................
301.8
309.3
295.3
315.4
262.7
256.9
320.3
361.5
398.3
293.9
453.2
295.7
349.7
232.6
311.6
319.2
303.7
324.2
274.4
257.1
323.8
373.5
410.5
287.2
478.1
303.2
363.4
242.5
305.4
312.8
297.9
320.4
269.2
255.7
319.3
361.6
401.8
289.6
450.4
298.7
355.2
239.1
307.7
315.1
300.9
320.4
270.7
256.0
329.7
366.1
404.7
291.6
461.0
299.4
356.2
240.1
307.5
314.9
300.1
320.9
267.7
256.0
316.0
375.2
408.1
290.8
485.5
300.9
357.3
240.9
307.6
315.0
299.7
321.1
267.2
255.5
314.6
375.6
407.8
289.7
487.4
300.7
358.6
241.4
308.3
315.6
299.9
320.9
263.5
255.5
325.0
376.0
410.9
287.8
487.0
301.6
360.2
242.3
309.0
316.4
300.4
322.1
262.6
255.8
331.6
374.3
410.6
286.6
481.2
302.7
362.0
242.2
309.3
316.6
300.0
324.5
264.2
255.9
323.5
373.9
410.9
286.4
479.5
303.0
363.5
242.9
312.0
319.5
303.9
324.6
274.0
257.0
325.6
373.4
411.9
286.6
477.6
303.1
364.2
243.4
314.5
322.3
307.3
326.7
282.2
256.9
327.2
373.9
412.6
287.1
476.9
304.5
365.2
243.0
315.0
322.8
307.5
326.8
284.0
257.1
324.2
373.5
413.0
285.1
475.5
305.2
366.6
243.4
315.4
323.3
307.9
326.8
284.4
258.6
322.9
374.4
412.8
284.1
477.7
305.9
367.3
243.5
316.2
324.2
308.4
327.0
285.8
259.9
322.2
373.9
411.9
284.5
477.1
305.3
369.2
243.4
316.8
324.8
308.7
328.0
286.6
260.9
323.4
372.2
411.2
285.5
470.3
306.6
370.5
243.9
Housing ..........................................................................................
Shelter .........................................................................................
Renters’ costs (12/84—100)..................................................
Rent, residential.....................................................................
Other renters' costs ..............................................................
Homeowners' costs (12/84=100)...........................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (12/84 = 100) .................................
Household insurance (1 2 /8 4 -1 0 0 )......................................
Maintenance and repairs..........................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities...................................
Fuel and other utilities................................................................
Fuels .........................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ...............................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ....................................................
Other utilities and public services ............................................
Household furnishings and operations.......................................
Housefurnishings......................................................................
Housekeeping supplies.............................................................
Housekeeping services.............................................................
343.3
370.4
263.7
397.9
103.1
103.0
103.2
364.1
415.0
261.1
394.7
487.5
622.0
451.6
241.6
243.4
197.6
310.7
340.2
353.2
390.7
279.1
416.0
108.8
108.8
109.4
369.4
425.3
262.5
385.4
462.7
504.5
445.6
253.8
246.5
198.4
317.1
348.2
349.1
380.4
271.5
397.5
105.9
105.9
105.7
368.5
420.1
264.2
394.3
483.1
659.9
438.8
246.7
245.2
197.8
315.0
345.0
350.1
381.8
272.5
400.8
106.3
106.3
106.3
373.2
426.2
267.2
395.6
484.1
652.7
441.4
248.3
245.1
197.3
315.8
345.6
349.7
382.9
272.8
403.5
106.6
106.6
107.8
374.0
426.5
268.1
390.9
475.7
593.6
443.2
248.8
245.3
197.2
316.4
346.3
350.1
385.0
274.1
405.4
107.4
107.3
108.2
364.7
416.6
261.1
386.3
467.1
552.8
441.2
249.9
246.0
198.5
315.5
346.6
351.1
388.1
277.0
411.6
108.1
108.1
108.5
364.6
419.2
259.4
382.6
459.1
521.5
438.0
252.1
246.0
198.1
316.3
347.1
351.6
388.8
277.5
411.3
108.3
108.3
109.0
363.8
420.0
258.0
383.0
459.7
499.9
443.0
252.2
246.1
198.4
315.7
347.4
354.3
389.4
278.5
415.5
108.4
108.4
109.1
363.2
422.6
255.7
394.9
477.3
489.9
465.7
255.8
246.2
198.2
316.8
347.8
354.5
391.5
280.3
420.4
108.8
108.8
110.1
366.7
425.2
259.0
390.3
469.1
462.9
461.4
256.3
246.5
198.4
317.1
348.4
355.4
392.9
280.8
426.1
109.3
109.2
110.1
371.5
428.6
263.5
390.6
469.3
450.7
464.1
256.6
246.6
198.3
317.3
349.1
356.6
395.2
282.2
428.9
110.0
110.0
110.4
370.6
430.7
261.1
389.1
467.1
456.6
460.3
256.2
247.5
199.4
317.9
349.5
355.6
397.1
283.6
426.7
110.5
110.5
110.8
373.1
431.1
264.3
379.3
449.2
454.8
439.6
257.8
247.5
199.3
317.8
350.1
354.3
397.8
284.6
424.8
110.7
110.7
111.3
372.4
428.2
265.0
371.3
437.1
455.0
425.3
255.8
247.2
198.5
318.4
350.1
354.8
398.1
285.1
417.3
110.8
110.8
111.7
374.6
428.1
268.0
371.1
437.3
463.5
423.8
255.3
248.5
199.7
320.6
350.8
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
205.0
206.5
208.1
204.1
203.1
205.2
206.1
205.1
203.0
201.8
205.9
211.0
211.9
211.5
209.6
See footnotes at end of table.
80
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
30. Continued— Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: U.S. city average, by expenditure category and commodity or
service group; and CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, all items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
1986
1985
Annual
Series
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
191.5
199.7
169.4
329.4
211.8
206.1
332.0
194.1
202.2
174.5
317.3
213.6
202.4
324.4
189.4
198.8
166.1
332.7
209.9
203.5
327.2
188.2
196.8
165.2
328.6
208.4
204.2
328.1
190.4
198.0
169.0
329.6
210.7
203.5
329.0
191.2
199.3
169.3
331.3
212.1
204.1
330.2
190.1
200.0
165.9
334.3
212.0
203.8
330.9
187.7
198.0
162.0
335.6
210.6
204.5
331.9
186.3
195.4
160.8
323.7
209.6
206.5
332.2
190.8
197.1
169.3
328.6
209.9
209.5
332.3
196.2
202.3
178.1
326.2
212.0
209.0
334.2
197.1
203.6
178.1
329.2
215.3
207.9
335.6
196.6
204.6
176.2
323.8
215.6
208.9
336.2
194.5
202.1
173.1
329.3
214.9
207.8
336.6
321.6
317.4
214.2
214.5
379.7
375.4
375.0
352.6
287.7
204.7
312.3
391.7
307.6
301.5
223.3
223.6
363.2
293.1
292.5
364.7
302.2
203.9
330.9
416.3
325.3
320.8
218.6
218.8
375.6
379.6
378.9
359.0
294.7
204.3
321.3
400.2
325.1
320.2
219.0
219.2
374.1
375.3
374.6
359.4
296.9
205.6
323.7
408.6
320.1
314.8
219.4
219.7
370.7
353.0
352.3
360.4
298.4
205.4
325.7
412.6
310.3
304.5
219.4
219.5
367.2
309.6
308.8
360.9
300.6
206.0
328.3
412.0
303.5
297.4
220.2
220.4
364.8
280.1
279.1
362.2
300.4
204.6
328.5
413.0
305.9 308.7
299.9 302.8
222.0 223.2
222.3 223.4
363.6 362.5
290.3 300.6
289.6 300.3
362.8 363.6
299.8 301.2
204.9 203.9
327.7 329.6
413.8 .415.1
304.6
298.3
223.7
223.9
360.3
280.9
280.5
365.0
302.4
203.8
331.2
418.0
300.9
294.4
223.6
223.9
358.0
266.7
266.1
365.7
302.2
204.0
330.9
418.4
301.8
295.3
223.3
223.7
359.5
271.9
271.4
366.6
299.7
202.7
328.1
418.8
302.2
295.7
225.7
226.3
360.6
264.0
263.4
367.2
305.2
201.1
335.4
418.9
304.0
297.5
229.4
230.0
361.0
262.0
261.3
369.7
309.5
202.3
340.7
421.1
304.2
297.5
230.7
231.4
356.6
263.2
262.5
372.3
309.9
202.8
341.0
425.8
Medical c a re ..................................................................................
Medical care commodities..........................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Professional services...............................................................
Other medical care services....................................................
401.2
256.3
432.7
367.7
513.9
431.0
272.8
465.7
391.4
559.0
412.6
262.3
445.4
377.6
530.4
416.0
264.1
449.2
379.3
536.9
420.0
267.0
453.5
382.2
543.0
423.5
268.8
457.3
385.6
547.3
425.7
270.7
459.5
387.4
550.0
427.3
271.7
461.3
388.8
552.3
429.6
272.5
464.0
390.8
555.8
432.4
274.6
466.9
392.3
560.7
435.0
275.2
470.1
394.0
565.8
437.1
275.8
472.6
396.6
568.1
439.7
276.6
475.6
398.4
572.7
441.7
277.0
478.2
400.2
576.2
443.9
279.8
480.1
401.5
579.0
Entertainment................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ........................................................
Entertainment services...............................................................
260.1
254.2
271.6
268.7
259.5
286.0
263.0
255.7
276.8
265.4
257.8
280.0
266.5
258.3
282.0
266.5
258.3
282.1
266.9
258.4
283.0
267.3
258.7
283.6
268.4
259.8
284.8
269.0
259.6
286.5
269.2
259.8
286.7
270.0
259.8
288.9
271.1
260.6
290.7
272.1
261.7
291.6
272.3
261.7
292.0
Other goods and services .............................................................
Tobacco products.......................................................................
Personal care..............................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances.............................
Personal care services .............................................................
Personal and educational expenses...........................................
School books and supplies......................................................
Personal and educational services..........................................
322.7
328.1
279.6
279.0
280.5
399.3
355.7
410.1
341.7
350.7
289.0
288.6
289.8
430.7
384.8
442.0
331.9
337.1
284.0
283.3
285.2
417.4
369.4
429.1
334.9
342.4
285.9
285.9
286.4
418.9
375.6
429.7
336.1
344.4
286.8
286.7
287.4
419.9
378.4
430.3
337.0
345.2
288.0
288.1
288.4
420.1
379.0
430.5
337.6
346.0
288.2
288.4
288.4
421.2
379.1
431.8
338.0
346.0
288.6
288.6
289.0
422.0
379.1
432.8
338.4
346.7
288.6
287.6
290.0
422.9
380.2
433.6
341.2
354.0
288.8
287.8
290.2
423.8
380.5
434.6
342.6
355.9
289.9
289.7
290.5
425.1
381.4
436.0
347.5
356.5
289.5
288.7
290.8
446.1
393.9
458.7
348.8
356.8
290.8
290.5
291.6
448.7
396.7
461.3
349.2
356.9
291.2
290.5
292.4
449.4
396.9
462.1
349.5
357.2
291.3
290.3
292.7
450.0
397.1
462.8
All ite m s...........................................................................................
Commodities..................................................................................
Food and beverages ...................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages......................................
Nondurables less food and beverages ...................................
Apparel commodities..............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ..................
Durables....................................................................................
318.5
286.5
301.8
323.4
283.1
311.6
323.4
289.7
305.4
324.3
289.8
307.7
323.2
287.0
307.5
321.4
283.1
307.6
320.4
280.4
308.3
321.4
281.3
309.0
323.0
282.0
309.3
322.9
281.1
312.0
323.4
281.1
314.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
283.8
191.3
334.2
265.2
265.6
191.5
306.7
264.0
288.7
194.1
340.1
265.7
286.9
189.4
339.6
265.6
280.1
188.2
330.1
264.6
269.6
190.4
313.2
263.7
262.0
191.2
301.6
263.3
263.6
190.1
304.5
263.5
265.2
187.7
308.0
263.6
260.1
186.3
301.0
263.2
258.1
190.8
295.9
262.6
324.9
282.6
315.0
261.5
196.2
298.4
263.0
325.0
282.6
315.4
260.2
197.1
296.0
264.0
325.4
283.1
316.2
259.7
196.6
295.6
265.3
325.7
283.3
316.8
259.9
194.5
296.9
265.0
Services..........................................................................................
Rent of shelter (12/84—100).....................................................
Household services less rent of shelter (12/84=100)..............
Transportation services..............................................................
Medical care services.................................................................
Other services .............................................................................
377.3
103.2
102.6
332.2
432.7
310.1
395.7
109.0
103.9
350.1
465.7
326.9
385.1
106.1
102.0
340.5
445.4
318.3
387.2
106.4
102.6
343.3
449.2
320.4
388.8
106.7
103.0
345.4
453.5
321.6
390.5
107.4
102.8
347.0
457.3
322.1
392.2
108.3
102.7
347.5
459.5
322.9
393.2
108.5
103.4
347.3
461.3
323.6
396.4
108.7
106.4
348.9
464.0
324.6
397.7
109.2
106.0
350.6
466.9
325.6
399.0
109.6
106.4
350.7
470.1
326.0
400.4
110.3
106.0
349.2
472.6
332.2
401.0
110.8
103.8
353.8
475.6
333.8
401.0
111.0
102.0
357.9
478.2
334.7
401.5
Special indexes:
All items less food ......................................................................
All items less shelter..................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/84=100).......................
All items less medical care.........................................................
Commodities less fo o d ...............................................................
Nondurables less food ...............................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...........................................
Nondurables................................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (12/8 4=1 0 0 )................................
Services less medical ca re .........................................................
Energy..........................................................................................
All items less energy ..................................................................
All items less food and energy ..................................................
Commodities less food and energy............................................
Energy commodities ...................................................................
Services less energy...................................................................
319.4
303.4
101.8
314.3
272.8
279.0
320.3
293.9
102.6
369.0
426.3
309.9
308.7
256.8
410.9
371.1
323.0
305.1
102.8
318.0
262.9
262.7
296.9
289.8
107.1
385.9
367.5
321.2
320.3
259.8
322.9
391.9
324.6
307.2
103.2
318.9
275.9
283.9
326.3
298.2
104.2
376.2
426.8
315.3
314.6
259.2
418.9
380.8
325.1
307.9
103.5
319.6
275.0
282.3
325.9
298.4
104.9
378.2
424.7
316.5
315.4
258.8
414.1
382.9
323.8
306.4
103.0
318.3
270.9
276.1
317.5
295.0
105.5
379.5
408.1
316.9
316.1
258.5
387.3
384.5
321.5
303.8
102.3
316.2
264.9
266.4
302.6
289.8
105.7
381.0
379.0
317.8
317.2
258.7
343.3
386.5
320.2
302.1
101.8
315.2
260.7
259.4
292.2
286.3
105.9
382.7
358.4
318.8
318.3
258.8
312.9
388.8
321.2
303.0
102.1
316.1
261.6
260.9
294.9
287.5
106.2
383.6
364.6
319.2
318.6
258.8
319.8
389.4
323.2
304.8
102.7
317.7
262.6
262.4
298.0
288.4
107.6
386.8
378.1
319.7
319.1
258.5
328.1
390.8
322.3
304.3
102.6
317.4
259.6
257.7
291.8
287.2
107.8
387.9
363.1
321.1
320.1
258.5
307.2
392.6
322.2
304.6
102.7
317.8
258.3
255.8
287.3
287.5
108.1
389.0
354.8
322.4
321.0
259.3
292.9
393.7
323.9
305.9
103.2
319.3
260.3
259.1
289.6
289.5
108.3
390.3
356.9
323.9
322.7
260.9
298.2
395.7
324.0
305.7
103.2
319.3
260.0
257.8
287.4
289.0
108.2
390.6
344.8
325.3
324.4
261.7
290.9
398.2
324.2
305.9
103.2
319.6
260.3
257.4
287.0
289.2
108.1
390.4
338.5
326.3
325.4
262.4
289.1
399.6
324.4
306.3
103.4
319.8
260.4
257.6
288.2
289.6
108.3
390.7
339.2
326.5
325.6
262.1
291.1
400.2
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1967- $1.00................................................................................
1957-59 = $1.00...........................................................................
31.4
27.0
30.9
26.6
30.9
26.6
30.8
26.5
30.9
31.1
26.8
31.2
26.8
31.1
26.8
31.0
26.6
31.0
26.6
30.9
26.6
30.8
26.5
30.8
26.5
30.7
26.4
30.7
26.4
1985
1986
Apparel commodities..................................................................
Men’s and boys’ apparel..........................................................
Women’s and girls’ apparel .....................................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ apparel..................................................
Footwear...................................................................................
Other apparel commodities......................................................
Apparel services.........................................................................
191.3
198.2
171.3
311.7
212.5
203.1
318.5
Transportation ...............................................................................
Private transportation..................................................................
New vehicles............................................................................
New ca rs................................................................................
Used c a rs .................................................................................
Motor fuel .................................................................................
Gasoline.................................................................................
Maintenance and repair............................................................
Other private transportation.....................................................
Other private transportation commodities.............................
Other private transportation services....................................
Public transportation...................................................................
-
26.6
111.1
101.8
359.5
480.1
335.1
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The revised CPI data for January and February
will appear in the April R e v ie w .
81
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
31. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1967 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Urban Wage Earners
All Urban Consumers
Area1
Pricing Other
sche index
base
dule2
Dec.
Anchorage, Alaska
(10/67 - 100) .....................
Baltimore, Md..........................
Boston, Mass..........................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind...........
Denver-Boulder, Colo..............
Miami, Fla. (11/77 = 100).....
Milwaukee, Wis........................
Northeast, Pa..........................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash..............
St. Louis, Mo.-lll.......................
San Diego, Calif.......................
Seattle-Everett, Wash.............
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va........
Jan.
Aug.
1986
1985
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Dec.
Jan.
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
330.8
331.1
323.4
324.3
323.4
324.9
325.0
325.4
325.7
-
327.4
328.4
328.6
330.2
330.5
M
M
-
325.9
323.1
326.3
323.1
331.4
323.2
333.9
321.1
328.7
324.3
331.3
325.3
331.0
324.7
312.6
313.1
312.9
313.4
316.2
312.8
318.3
310.5
313.4
313.6
316.1
314.7
315.8
314.0
M
-
326.1
326.8
330.9
334.6
336.2
333.8
332.9
320.1
320.9
323.5
326.8
328.3
326.3
325.3
M
M
-
329.1
325.2
313.5
322.5
315.8
323.0
317.2
324.4
317.5
326.7
318.7
326.1
318.6
325.4
320.1
326.6
U.S. city average...................
Chicago, III.-Northwestern
Ind...........................................
Detroit, Mich............................
Los Angeles-Long Beach,
Anaheim, Calif........................
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern
N.J..........................................
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J...............
1986
1985
320.8
319.7
323.1
320.3
325.9
323.1
326.6
325.8
327.8
324.7
327.5
324.1
-
287.1
332.0
327.1
333.2
364.4
174.6
333.9
311.6
321.3
322.4
381.9
327.0
331.1
-
286.2
334.0
328.2
333.0
362.9
174.3
332.9
311.3
318.0
325.7
385.9
326.3
332.3
-
287.8
333.4
329.3
335.5
361.2
175.8
330.7
313.5
318.0
323.8
387.5
325.9
334.0
“
-
-
280.2
331.1
324.5
326.0
359.1
175.7
353.0
310.6
311.0
319.1
344.7
313.5
332.6
-
277.9
330.9
325.2
324.7
357.2
174.5
351.7
310.2
306.3
320.7
347.4
312.3
334.6
-
279.7
330.4
325.9
327.6
355.2
176.1
349.4
311.9
306.1
319.0
349.0
311.7
335.9
355.3
-
-
335.3
309.8
348.8
344.5
298.5
336.8
321.8
_
-
338.9
307.5
352.7
346.2
301.5
332.9
323.9
_
-
339.9
309.4
352.1
345.9
302.2
334.0
323.7
_
-
342.2
311.4
351.8
342.8
305.4
331.0
324.7
332.6
295.9
327.5
338.3
305.8
334.1
311.7
_
-
335.4
292.5
329.9
339.1
308.3
330.5
311.9
_
-
335.9
294.2
329.3
338.5
308.8
331.7
311.3
_
-
337.8
296.1
328.9
335.0
312.7
328.5
312.4
-
1 10/67
1
1
1
1
1 11/77
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
_
Alanta, Ga...............................
Buffalo, N.Y.............................
Cleveland, O h io .....................
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex..............
Honolulu, Hawaii....................
Houston, Tex...........................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas ......
Mlnneapolis-St. Paul,
Minn.-Wis................................
Pittsburgh, Pa..........................
San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.
2
2
2
-
340.4
331.5
336.4
-
340.3
330.1
345.5
-
340.9
331.8
347.7
-
342.4
333.0
343.6
336.0
312.8
331.3
-
334.5
309.2
339.0
-
334.6
310.6
341.1
-
335.9
311.8
337.0
Region3
Northeast.............................
North Central.......................
South...................................
West ....................................
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
174.3
176.0
176.3
177.2
-
175.0
176.2
176.4
179.0
-
176.4
176.5
177.5
180.4
-
177.2
177.1
177.9
179.6
172.1
172.6
176.0
175.2
-
172.2
172.2
175.3
176.4
-
173.5
172.4
176.3
177.8
-
174.3
173.0
176.5
177.0
Population size class3
A-1 .......................................
A-2 .......................................
B ...........................................
C ..........................................
D ..........................................
2
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
174.2
178.4
177.2
174.9
174.7
-
176.6
179.1
176.6
175.0
173.8
-
177.6
179.9
178.3
175.9
174.5
-
177.7
180.0
178.7
176.5
175.4
170.2
175.4
174.6
175.3
176.0
-
171.8
175.3
173.5
174.8
174.5
-
172.5
176.0
175.1
175.7
175.1
-
172.8
176.1
175.5
176.2
175.9
Region/population size class
cross classification3
Class A:
Northeast ..........................
North Central....................
South .................................
W est..................................
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
11/77
171.2
179.4
176.5
179.3
-
-
174.2
180.3
177.6
184.2
-
174.7
181.0
177.9
182.6
167.7
174.5
176.5
175.0
-
-
173.1
180.7
176.7
182.0
168.8
175.0
176.1
176.9
-
169.7
174.5
176.9
179.0
-
170.3
175.3
177.0
177.5
Class B:
Northeast ..........................
North Central....................
South.................................
W est..................................
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
176.7
174.2
178.0
178.4
-
174.7
172.5
178.6
178.1
-
178.0
174.0
180.0
179.2
-
178.3
176.1
179.9
178.9
173.5
170.5
174.7
178.9
-
171.8
168.1
174.6
178.3
“
174.6
169.5
175.7
179.3
-
175.1
171.5
175.6
179.0
See footnotes at end of table.
82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-
-
-
-
-
*
-
-
-
31.
Continued— Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1967=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Urban Wage Earners
All Urban Consumers
Area1
Pricing
sche
dule2
Other
index
base
1986
1985
Dec.
Jan.
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
Oct.
Dec.
Dec.
186.3
171.9
176.4
172.9
188.8
168.2
176.7
167.8
179.8
171.6
176.6
176.3
177.7
174.2
176.1
177.7
Class C:
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
184.1
171.5
175.3
169.1
2
2
2
2
12/77
12/77
12/77
12/77
178.1
172.6
174.5
176.2
_
_
_
182.8
171.2
174.8
173.0
183.8
172.3
175.8
173.1
_
_
_
_
-
Class D:
_
_
_
176.8
171.4
174.3
174.9
178.1
171.7
175.4
175.3
_
_
-
1986
1985
_
-
Jan.
Aug.
Sept.
187.2
167.7
175.3
171.1
-
176.2
172.4
175.0
176.3
-
-
-
Oct.
188.1
168.7
176.3
171.2
177.2
172.7
175.9
176.7
Nov.
-
-
The revised CPI data for January and February
will appear in the April R e v ie w .
Annual data: Consumer Price Index all items and major groups
Series
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
195.4
7.7
217.4
11.3
246.8
13.5
272.4
10.4
289.1
6.1
298.4
3.2
311.1
4.3
322.2
3.6
328.4
1.9
206.3
9.7
228.5
10.8
248.0
8.5
267.3
7.8
278.2
4.1
284.4
2.2
295.1
3.8
302.0
2.3
311.8
3.2
202.8
8.7
227.6
12.2
263.3
15.7
293.5
11.5
314.7
7.2
323.1
2.7
336.5
4.1
349.9
4.0
360.2
2.9
159.6
3.5
166.6
4.4
178.4
7.1
186.9
4.8
191.8
2.6
196.5
2.5
200.2
1.9
206.0
2.9
207.8
.9
185.5
4.7
212.0
14.3
249.7
17.8
280.0
12.1
291.5
4.1
298.4
2.4
311.7
4.5
319.9
2.6
307.5
-3.9
219.4
8.4
239.7
9.3
265.9
10.9
294.5
10.8
328.7
11.6
357.3
8.7
379.5
6.2
403.1
6.2
433.5
7.5
176.6
5.3
188.5
6.7
205.3
8.9
221.4
7.8
235.8
6.5
246.0
4.3
255.1
3.7
265.0
3.9
274.1
3.4
183.3
6.4
196.7
7.3
214.5
9.0
235.7
9.9
259.9
10.3
288.3
10.9
307.7
6.7
326.6
6.1
346.4
6.1
195.3
7.6
217.7
11.5
247.0
13.5
272.3
10.2
288.6
6.0
297.4
3.0
307.6
3.4
318.5
3.5
323.4
1.5
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
Food and beverages:
Housing:
Apparel and upkeep:
Transportation:
Medical care:
Entertainment:
Other goods and services:
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers:
All items:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
190.5
168.4
176.7
171.1
178.9
172.7
177.0
177.6
A-2 - 1,250,000 to 4,000,000.
B - 385,000 to 1,250,000
C
- 75,000 to 385,000.
D
- Less than 75,000.
Population size class A is the aggregation of population size classes A-1
and A-2.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI pro
gram. Because each local index is a small subset of the national index, it
has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more
sampling and other measurement error than the national index. As a result,
local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although
their long-term trends are quite similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI
for use in escalator clauses.
1 Area is generally the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA),
exclusive of farms. L.A.-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif, is a combination of
two SMSA’s, and N.Y., N.Y.-Northeastern N.J. and Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind. are the more extensive Standard Consolidated Areas. Area defini
tions are those established by the Office of Management and Budget in
1973, except for Denver-Boulder, Colo, which does not include Douglas
County. Definitions do not include revisions made since 1973.
2 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas;
most other goods and services priced as indicated:.
M - Every month.
1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December.
3 Regions are defined as the four Census regions.
The population size classes are aggregations of areas which have urban
population as defined:
A-1 - More than 4,000,000.
32.
Dec.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
33.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1967 = 100)
1986
Annual average
Grouping
1985
Finished goods ............................................
Finished consumer goods .........................
Finished consumer fo o d s ........................
Finished consumer goods excluding
foods .........................................................
Nondurable goods less food ..............
Durable goods .......................................
Capital equ ipm ent.......................................
293.7
291.8
271.2
84
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
296.0
293.8
275.0
291.9
288.4
272.0
288.0
283.4
271.6
287.2
281.9
271.9
288.9
284.1
274.8
289.3
284.5
275.1
287.6
282.3
280.4
288.1
283.0
284.0
287.5
282.7
282.2
290.5
284.9
282.9
290.7
285.0
283.0
289.9
284.2
282.9
291.8
328.0
243.9
304.3
284.6
315.4
243.7
304.3
282.2
309.8
245.7
305.6
284.0
313.0
245.5
305.7
284.4
313.5
245.9
306.1
278.3
302.6
246.2
306.4
277.5
301.6
245.8
306.2
278.1
304.8
242.7
304.2
281.0
301.9
253.6
310.1
281.1
302.1
253.5
310.5
279.9
300.5
252.9
310.1
318.7
-
317.4
313.5
309.5
307.1
306.7
306.8
304.8
304.5
306.1
304.9
304.9
305.0
299.5
258.8
285.9
320.2
291.5
-
-
297.1
252.8
283.8
313.4
293.1
296.5
249.2
282.4
313.1
293.6
296.4
246.7
282.5
313.6
293.7
295.5
244.8
279.3
313.7
294.1
295.4
248.7
278.2
313.2
294.1
295.1
247.9
277.8
312.9
294.1
295.6
251.7
277.7
313.0
294.6
296.0
255.5
277.1
313.6
294.9
296.2
254.3
277.3
314.5
295.1
296.5
253.2
277.7
315.4
294.9
296.5
253.2
278.1
315.0
295.0
296.2
253.0
277.9
313.8
295.2
316.2
540.8
311.2
286.6
316.5
500.8
310.9
286.4
317.0
453.4
312.3
286.8
318.3
428.5
312.8
287.2
318.3
424.2
313.6
287.1
317.8
426.7
314.0
287.3
317.9
401.1
314.6
287.2
317.6
395.0
316.2
287.1
317.9
409.1
317.8
287.9
317.3
395.1
318.4
287.5
317.6
393.2
319.6
287.9
317.0
396.2
319.7
288.3
301.0
231.7
450.6
289.0
227.2
422.7
281.1
224.4
403.9
273.7
220.3
389.4
279.4
229.9
386.9
276.9
227.1
384.8
277.7
234.4
370.8
276.3
238.1
358.3
275.5
231.9
369.6
276.7
233.7
369.8
278.4
235.9
369.7
274.8
232.8
365.1
296.3
629.3
272.2
264.0
272.5
291.2
554.1
272.1
263.9
272.5
289.9
517.2
273.1
264.9
273.9
291.2
534.1
274.0
266.1
274.0
291.6
536.4
274.3
266.3
274.3
287.4
461.6
276.4
268.9
275.0
286.8
456.2
277.2
270.0
274.8
286.6
477.2
275.4
268.4
273.1
290.5
454.9
279.7
272.2
278.8
290.7
452.9
280.0
272.4
279.1
289.7
446.8
279.5
271.9
278.5
306.1
235.0
459.2
1 Crude nonfood materials except fuel.
-
_
Mar.
“
Crude m aterials fo r fu rth e r processing ...
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs .........................
Nonfood materials1......................................
Crude energy m aterials...................................
Crude materials less energy .........................
Crude nonfood materials less e n e rg y..........
-
Feb.
298.3
339.6
243.5
303.9
315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2
Intermediate materials less foods and
fe e d s .................................................................
Intermediate foods and fe e d s ........................
Intermediate energy goods ............................
Intermediate goods less energy ...................
Intermediate materials less foods and
e n e rg y..............................................................
_
Jan.
297.3
339.3
241.5
300.5
Interm ediate m aterials, supplies, and
c o m p o n e n ts .................................................
Materials and components for
manufacturing ............................................
Materials for food m anufacturing..........
Materials for nondurable manufacturing
Materials for durable m anufacturing.....
Components for m anufacturing.............
Materials and components for
construction................................................
Processed fuels and lubricants................
C ontainers....................................................
S upplies........................................................
Special groupings
Finished goods, excluding fo o d s ..................
Finished energy goods ...................................
Finished goods less energy ...........................
Finished consumer goods less e n e rg y........
Finished goods less food and energy .........
Finished consumer goods less food and
e n e rg y...............................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and
e n e rg y ..............................................................
1986
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
“
299.0
720.9
269.2
261.3
268.7
-
-
300.7
700.9
272.7
264.8
272.1
252.1
-
255.5
256.0
256.0
257.3
257.5
257.7
258.7
258.4
256.9
262.4
262.7
262.0
246.2
-
250.5
251.1
251.2
252.0
252.3
252.5
253.9
253.8
253.6
254.4
254.9
254.2
-
323.6
232.6
520.0
303.4
319.7
228.9
482.0
303.0
315.5
227.8
437.0
303.3
313.0
227.0
413.3
303.1
312.4
229.3
409.1
303.0
312.5
229.0
411.1
302.9
310.4
230.3
386.6
303.3
309.9
232.1
380.7
303.5
311.5
233.3
393.8
304.0
310.4
229.8
380.5
303.9
310.4
230.9
378.7
304.2
310.5
231.7
381.3
304.0
-
304.3
304.2
304.5
304.3
304.0
303.8
304.1
304.2
304.7
304.9
305.1
304.8
732.8
229.8
245.8
662.9
226.5
246.5
614.5
224.7
247.9
577.0
221.9
249.1
570.6
229.2
249.3
563.9
227.3
250.1
528.8
232.8
250.0
520.4
232.4
235.9
544.1
228.5
239.2
539.2
230.5
242.3
535.3
232.7
244.5
519.5
230.9
246.9
325.0
232.8
528.3
304.0
305.2
748.1
233.2
249.7
-
-
-
_
-
“
-
Data not available.
34.
Producer Price indexes, by durability of product
(1967 = 100)
1986
Annual average
Grouping
1985
1986
_
Total durable g o o d s ........................................
Total nondurable g o o d s ..................................
297.3
317.2
Total m anufactures..........................................
D u rab le...........................................................
N ondurable....................................................
304.3
298.1
310.5
-
Total raw or slightly processed goods ........
D u rab le...........................................................
N o ndurable....................................................
327.9
252.2
332.4
-
-
.
-
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
298.1
316.8
298.4
308.4
298.6
300.7
299.7
296.0
299.6
297.9
299.7
297.7
300.0
294.5
299.9
294.2
299.2
295.6
302.3
294.2
302.5
294.6
302.1
294.0
304.8
299.0
310.6
301.1
299.3
302.9
297.3
299.4
294.9
296.1
300.5
291.2
296.7
300.4
292.6
296.9
300.5
293.0
295.2
300.9
289.1
295.5
300.8
289.7
296.2
300.1
292.0
297.0
303.2
290.2
297.2
303.4
290.5
297.2
302.9
290.9
326.0
248.2
330.6
316.3
251.2
320.2
310.3
252.4
313.6
303.0
253.1
305.8
306.2
252.1
309.3
304.2
251.2
307.2
303.2
249.6
306.2
300.4
252.0
303.0
299.2
253.2
301.7
298.8
252.0
301.4
299.9
254.3
302.4
296.3
254.7
298.4
Data not available.
35.
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1967 = 100)
Index
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
181.7
180.7
184.6
195.9
194.9
199.2
217.7
217.9
216.5
247.0
248.9
239.8
269.8
271.3
264.3
280.7
281.0
279.4
285.2
284.6
287.2
291.1
290.3
294.0
293.7
291.8
300.5
201.5
215.6
243.2
280.3
306.0
310.4
312.3
320.0
318.7
299.5
315.2
548.9
311.2
284.2
306.1
235.0
459.2
909.6
Finished goods:
Capital equipment ...............................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components:
T o ta l...........................................................................
Materials and components for
Materials and components for construction ....
Processed fuels and lubricants .........................
S u pplies.................................................................
195.4
203.4
282.5
188.3
188.7
208.7
224.7
295.3
202.8
198.5
234.4
247.4
364.8
226.8
218.2
265.7
268.3
503.0
254.5
244.5
286.1
287.6
595.4
276.1
263.8
289.8
293.7
591.7
285.6
272.1
293.4
301.8
564.8
286.6
277.1
301.8
310.3
566.2
302.3
283.4
209.2
192.1
245.0
372.1
234.4
216.2
272.3
426.8
274.3
247.9
330.0
507.6
304.6
259.2
401.0
615.0
329.0
257.4
482.3
751.2
319.5
247.8
473.9
886.1
323.6
252.2
477.4
931.5
330.8
259.5
484.5
931.3
Crude materials for further processing:
Foodstuffs and fe e d s tu ffs ..................................
Nonfood materials except fuel ..........................
Fuel ........................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
85
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
36. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(June 1977 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Category
1974
SITC
ALL COMMODITIES ( 9 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................
0
01
Food ( 3 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ................................................................................................
Meat ( 3 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................................................................................
Fish ( 3 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................................................................................
Grain and grain preparations (3/80 = 100) ...................................................
Vegetables and fruit (3/83 = 100) ...................................................................
Feedstuffs for animals (3/83 = 10 0 )................................................................
Misc. food products (3/83 = 1 0 0 )....................................................................
03
04
05
08
09
Beverages (9/83 = 1 0 0 )....................................................................................
Tobacco and tobacco products ( 6 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
Crude materials (6/83 =
101.5
99.3
98.1
106.2
108.9
99.8
102.7
116.2
106.9
104.9
109.6
108.7
98.7
107.4
126.9
98.8
103.5
105.6
98.0
96.5
104.4
98.7
92.9
114.7
82.4
108.4
Organic chemicals (12/83 —1 0 0 )....................................................................
Fertilizers, manufactured ( 3 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ............................................................
Intermediate manufactured products ( 9 /8 1 - 1 0 0 ) ....................................
Apparel ( 9 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and apparatus.........
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches and
clocks ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ........................................................................................
8
82.6
126.9
75.7
108.1
87.1
118.9
83.4
107.7
82.1
115.3
88.5
106.0
89.5
114.7
106.2
79.1
125.8
85.5
104.7
99.7
77.2
122.0
111.2
59.0
131.4
90.2
106.6
110.6
109.2
99.9
104.0
99.5
100.1
105.3
99.6
101.8
98.6
100.9
98.4
95.6
101.9
95.1
96.5
103.0
95.9
102.2
99.5
97.5
93.3
129.0
64.2
107.1
124.5
93.8
103.6
169.4
80.1
92.5
139.9
63.9
106.0
128.1
92.7
97.7
165.5
78.7
95.8
138.9
66.9
106.0
128.7
98.8
168.0
83.4
95.6
148.9
65.8
106.1
128.7
109.7
98.6
166.1
80.5
92.3
138.0
64.5
105.3
129.7
120.7
74.7
164.3
84.6
96.3
95.8
91.9
86.7
85.7
129.8
133.2
164.5
176.4
145.7
159.0
147.9
156.7
142.0
152.9
144.5
164.8
114.5
128.8
101.4
108.7
90.8
95.4
84.4
95.3
76.5
80.8
101.4
99.7
97.0
93.8
92.5
96.8
96.5
87.9
97.1
97.1
89.8
96.6
95.4
90.0
88.6
95.4
89.3
84.0
88.0
96.9
97.7
94.7
94.8
96.5
93.5
108.3
98.3
97.4
97.4
101.0
101.3
81.2
147.5
154.7
96.1
92.9
104.5
102.0
83.5
146.7
150.2
95.9
94.2
103.1
80.8
148.9
160.0
96.8
90.4
105.1
100.4
79.0
148.5
159.5
96.5
82.5
105.0
99.4
82.5
150.2
155.0
95.5
79.7
105.4
99.2
79.2
149.0
151.6
95.3
79.6
105.2
99.2
75.9
148.3
149.6
95.9
79.8
105.4
99.1
78.5
148.7
148.2
98.2
78.2
104.4
100.3
77.8
151.0
152.2
98.4
80.2
105.3
82.5
150.0
158.7
99.4
79.1
105.5
100.2
138.5
158.4
152.3
150.8
148.6
101.4
133.0
139.4
156.9
152.8
151.2
149.0
101.5
132.3
131.2
187.7
141.5
167.5
153.4
151.9
150.2
101.4
134.3
114.6
131.8
191.7
142.3
165.3
155.0
153.4
152.4
100.9
133.3
114.9
133.1
195.5
142.9
167.4
155.7
155.1
152.0
130.2
183.1
140.1
160.6
153.7
151.7
149.3
99.8
134.4
113.8
131.0
189.6
133.3
116.1
133.9
196.6
143.1
167.1
156.0
156.3
152.4
99.9
134.1
115.3
133.8
199.3
143.3
167.5
156.2
158.4
152.2
99.4
134.5
113.8
135.0
200.7
144.0
169.1
155.5
159.0
152.3
99.9
136.5
115.1
135.5
203.3
144.1
169.2
154.7
158.9
153.3
99.2
137.0
114.2
136.4
205.6
144.4
169.5
155.0
160.4
154.4
98.8
137.8
114.2
136.5
206.0
99.3
103.4
171.7
99.5
104.7
175.5
100.4
104.7
178.3
100.3
105.0
178.7
100.3
105.3
178.8
102.6
182.1
103.4
183.8
104.1
183.8
100.2 101.0
77
78
79
90.5
96.6
5
51
56
69
7
71
72
73
74
75
76
93.6
95.1
97.6
4
42
67
90.2
106.1
112.2 111.5
102.6 101.8 102.2
Sept.
99.2
99.1
68
96.7
100.1
3
“
120.2
68.6
June
97.0
99.7
100.2
125.6
147.7
98.5
-
92.4
119.5
72.8
Mar.
96.7
99.7
104.1
123.8
61
62
64
94.0
104.7
103.6
90.3
Dec.
96.5
99.7
106.0
129.4
6
95.8
103.9
101.0
Sept.
109.4
163.0
93.2
Animal and vegetables oils, fats, and waxes.................................
Chemicals (3/83 —1 0 0 )......................................................................................
97.5
71.0
106.4
128.7
100.5
102.4
165.6
89.2
Mineral fuels.............................................................................
Fixed vegetable oils and fats ( 6 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ...................................................
June
97.5
104.0
125.4
114.2
106.7
163.2
92.4
103.3
131.1
112.5
120.5
146.6
Other manufactured articles .......................................................
110.6
101.2
125.6
83.5
109.5
Mar.
1986
96.8
126.2
71.2
106.3
125.7
96.1
105.8
167.9
82.0
23
24
25
26
27
28
Power generating machinery and equipment (1 2 /7 8 -1 0 0 ) ......................
Machinery specialized for particular industries (9 /7 8 -1 0 0 ) ......................
Metalworking machinery (6 /7 8 —100) ............................................................
General industrial machines and parts n.e.s. 9 / 7 8 - 1 0 0 ) ..........................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment ....................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing equ ipm ent........
Electrical machinery and equipm ent...............................................................
Road vehicles and parts ( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ............................................................
Other transport equipment, excl. military and commercial aviation ........
Dec.
June
10 0 )............................................................................
Raw hides and skins (6/80 = 100) ..................................................................
Oilseeds and oleaginous fruit (9/77 = 1 0 0 )...................................................
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaimed) ( 9 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ................
W o o d ....................................................................................................................
Pulp and waste paper (6/8 3 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................................
Textile fib e rs ........................................................................................................
Crude fertilizers and m inerals..........................................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap ................................................................
Machinery and transport equipment, excluding military
and commercial aircraft (12/78 = 100) ........................................................
Sept.
Mar.
100.2
1 101.6 101.9 102.8 101.3
11 102.3 102.9 103.3 103.7
12 101.6 101.8 102.7 101.1
2 112.5 118.3 105.2 101.4
21 145.6 154.7 153.7 133.6
22 93.9 104.3 79.9 74.8
Beverages and tobacco (6/83 — 10 0 ).............................................................
Leather and furskins ( 9 /7 9 - 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................
Rubber manufactures .......................................................................................
Paper and paperboard products ( 6 /7 8 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................................
Iron and steel (3/82 —100) ..............................................................................
Nonferrous metals (9/81 — 100) ......................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s. (3/82 —100) .......................................................
1985
1984
122.1
110.2 112.6
100.6
100.4
120.8
121.0
100.0
101.6
93.1
77.4
101.2 102.2
84.2
150.4
165.3
79.4
105.6
101.9
171.8
102.1
172.0
100.7
103.9
175.8
132.0
131.3
132.7
130.3
128.0
129.1
127.5
128.5
131.6
132.9
132.7
Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s....................................................
84
98.5
97.9
95.2
94.1
92.4
93.1
93.1
92.4
95.6
95.6
97.6
Gold, non-monetary ( 6 /8 3 - 1 0 0 ) ....................................................................
971
95.8
93.5
81.7
79.5
69.1
75.4
77.4
77.5
81.8
82.2
97.5
-
Data not available.
86
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
37.
U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(June 1977=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Category
ALL COMMODITIES (9/82 =
1974
SITC
10 0 ).......................................................................................
M e a t.......................................................................................
Dairy products and eggs (6/81 = 10 0) .........................................................
F is h ..........................................................................................
Bakery goods, pasta products, grain and grain preparations
(9/77 = 100) .......................................................................................................
Fruits and ve g e ta b le s .......................................................................................
Sugar, sugar preparations, and honey (3/82 = 1 0 0 )....................................
Coffee, tea, c o c o a .............................................................................................
Beverages and tobacco ............................................................
Beverages ...........................................................................................................
Crude materials........................................................................
Dec.
1985
Mar.
June
1986
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
95.7
93.5
93.0
92.9
94.2
88.5
83.2
83.9
86.0
98.5
130.4
98.3
132.9
96.8
118.2
97.9
129.4
94.9
102.8
03
98.1
132.3
98.4
133.9
99.1
129.7
131.2
100.5
132.7
113.4
122.7
106.7
139.3
104.7
118.5
107.1
144.8
109.1
126.9
109.4
149.6
105.3
134.4
111.5
157.1
04
05
06
07
132.8
117.2
118.5
58.4
131.8
127.1
118.4
57.0
132.3
129.4
120.2
123.1
54.4
146.9
119.4
124.6
85.9
149.2
119.4
56.0
141.9
131.3
111.9
64.6
69.2
154.0
127.1
123.9
71.8
155.3
125.5
124.3
61.0
1
11
2
156.5
152.8
156.2
154.2
157.1
154.3
158.0
156.0
162.1
159.1
163.2
161.8
165.5
163.9
165.8
165.5
168.0
168.2
91.5
68.9
91.2
73.2
99.4
75.8
95.3
75.5
106.3
79.9
98.1
76.9
109.4
98.5
78.5
107.2
92.8
95.6
104.4
100.4
98.2
104.8
95.4
104.7
1 0 0 ).....................................................................
Food (9/77 =
1984
0
01
02
122.6
120.6
136.3
121.6
Crude rubber (Inc. synthetic & reclaimed) ( 3 /8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................
Wood (9/81 = 100) .............................................................................................
Pulp and waste paper (12/81 = 1 0 0 ) ................. ............................................
Crude fertilizers and crude minerals (1 2 /8 3 -1 0 0 ) .....................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap (3 /8 4 —1 0 0 ).........................................
Crude vegetable and animal materials, n.e.s.................................................
23
24
25
27
28
29
98.9
83.8
104.0
93.2
98.6
95.6
106.4
94.0
77.6
100.7
84.0
100.3
90.4
104.3
93.6
76.4
106.9
80.4
101.7
87.6
104.9
76.8
102.7
89.5
102.5
90.1
102.5
94.2
78.8
104.3
74.9
101.5
94.5
103.6
Fuels and related products ( 6 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................
3
33
85.2
85.2
82.9
83.8
80.9
81.6
79.8
80.3
79.1
80.1
55.3
54.7
37.5
36.1
33.6
32.1
38.4
37.9
4
42
114.9
115.3
89.9
89.5
76.7
75.9
57.6
56.2
50.6
48.9
41.4
39.3
39.3
37.4
35.5
33.5
51.6
50.0
5
54
56
59
97.1
94.6
92.9
97.5
95.7
91.6
94.2
96.1
94.9
95.1
82.0
95.6
94.5
95.3
80.8
96.9
94.2
96.7
78.5
97.8
94.6
102.9
79.2
99.9
93.3
104.9
79.7
100.3
110.0 110.1
77.4
79.7
101.0 102.8
93.4
93.2
6
133.1
135.3
139.5
121.3
157.6
130.4
154.2
132.4
133.3
138.6
157.2
127.5
151.7
81.9
117.4
82.3
117.8
133.6
137.0
137.3
123.4
157.8
126.5
157.6
119.1
83.7
119.5
133.4
141.3
138.1
124.0
156.5
128.1
162.2
118.3
80.4
69
136.8
140.4
140.5
126.1
157.5
132.9
159.4
123.7
87.3
119.3
134.0
141.6
136.5
130.8
157.1
131.2
164.2
117.3
79.4
124.4
135.6
143.0
137.7
134.3
157.1
132.9
169.6
118.1
78.9
127.8
138.8
147.4
138.1
137.4
157.5
135.1
178.2
119.0
83.5
129.1
139.4
143.3
138.1
142.7
164.8
135.3
180.2
118.5
81.6
129.1
7
72
73
74
102.9
98.0
89.9
91.3
111.5
105.0
103.8
115.3
115.4
107.7
109.0
120.1
120.1 121.1
110.7
115.7
112.8 113.9
75
76
77
78
Petroleum and petroleum products (6 /8 2 —100) ..........................................
Fats and oils (9 /8 3 = 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................
Vegetable oils (9/83 = 1 0 0 )..............................................................................
Chemicals (9 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products (3 /8 4 -1 0 0 ) .................................
Manufactured fertilizers ( 3 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s. ( 9 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) .................................
Intermediate manufactured products (12/77 =
100) .................................
Leather and fu rs k in s .........................................................................................
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s..............................................................................
Cork and wood manufactures .....................
Paper and paperboard products .....................................................................
T extiles...............................................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s........................................................
Iron and steel ( 9 /7 8 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................................................
Nonferrous metals (12/81 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s........................................................................
Machinery and transport equipment (6/81 = 100)..........................
Machinery specialized for particular industries ( 9 / 7 8 - 1 0 0 ) .....................
Metalworking machinery (3 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................
General industrial machinery and parts, n.e.s. (6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) ......................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment
(3 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing apparatus
(3/80 = 1 0 0 )......................................................
Electrical machinery and equipment (12/81 =10 0) .............................
Road vehicles and parts (6/81 = 1 0 0 )..............................................
Mise, manufactured articles ( 3 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................
Plumbing, heating, and lighting fixtures (6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................
Furniture and parts (6 /8 0 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................
Clothing (9 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................................
F oo tw ear...............................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
apparatus ( 1 2 /7 9 = 1 0 0 ).....................................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
clocks ( 3 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................................................
Mise, manufactured articles, n.e.s. (6 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ............................
Gold, non-monetary (6/82 = 100)...............................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
61
62
63
64
65
66
68
67
121.2
121.0 120.1
101.6 102.6
101.6
102.1
121.6
100.0
86.0
100.2
118.1
96.2
86.3
89.2
97.0
90.5
91.1
103.5
101.4
94.2
94.3
107.2
104.9
98.1
98.0
92.2
89.6
89.4
90.3
93.7
96.9
101.3
102.5
102.4
91.3
86.4
111.3
90.0
82.1
111.5
88.8
83.9
112.1
88.3
81.4
112.7
88.6
83.1
117.8
89.4
84.5
123.4
91.6
87.5
127.1
93.7
89.5
129.8
92.6
92.0
133.2
8 100.0
111.6
103.3
100.8
112.1
81
82
84
85
142.5
138.5
142.5
97.0
113.9
137.4
136.7
137.4
98.0
114.1
136.7
133.9
136.7
99.6
117.8
142.1
134.5
142.1
115.0
142.7
134.5
142.7
147.0
133.4
147.0
104.8
123.5
142.2
135.3
142.2
109.5
125.5
145.8
137.8
145.8
109.6
125.5
146.9
139.1
146.9
87
92.9
89.2
92.3
98.8
102.4
106.4
112.5
118.3
119.1
88
91.3
96.3
88.9
91.2
89.5
95.2
91.1
96.4
94.5
97.9
99.3
89
102.1
103.2
103.4
106.9
112.3
111.0
971
103.6
90.1
98.3
101.1
101.0
106.7
107.3
126.9
123.3
120.1
107.7
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
38.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category
(September 1983 = 100 unless otherwise indicated)
Category
Percentage
of 1980
trade
value
16.294
30.696
21.327
9.368
30.186
7.483
7.467
3.965
3.501
39.
1986
1985
1984
83.0
99.1
101.4
93.3
105.6
105.7
100.8
99.3
102.3
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
81.5
97.6
99.6
92.6
106.2
106.7
100.9
99.1
102.7
80.9
97.2
99.5
91.6
106.6
108.0
101.1
99.2
103.0
76.?
96.5
98.7
91.1
106.6
108.1
101.9
100.4
103.3
77.5
95.9
97.9
91.0
106.6
109.2
101.4
99.5
103.3
66.0
93.3
93.7
92.5
107.7
101.8
110.8
104.5
102.1
68.4
94.8
95.4
93.2
108.3
107.2
106.9
105.7
102.7
108.5
75.5
96.0
97.5
92.5
107.4
109.5
103.7
74.7
94.9
96.1
91.9
107.5
110.4
104.5
105.5
101.8
Dec.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
111.8
U.S. import price indexes by end-use category
(December 1982=100)
Category
Percentage
Of 1980
trade
value
7.477
31.108
19.205
9.391
9.814
13.164
11.750
14.250
5.507
8.743
1986
1985
1984
101.8
85.7
101.1
100.7
101.6
97.8
105.2
101.1
98.5
104.6
102.1
84.4
96.3
95.0
97.7
94.8
105.4
99.5
97.0
103.0
100.4
82.1
95.8
93.9
97.8
96.3
105.9
99.4
97.0
102.5
99.0
80.9
95.4
93.5
97.4
97.6
106.4
101.0
98.9
103.9
106.0
80.5
93.9
91.8
96.2
115.8
55.4
94.5
91.1
98.1
111.4
102.4
100.7
104.7
115.6
104.5
103.4
106.0
100.0
102.8
Dec.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
108.2
36.8
94.0
89.7
98.7
106.7
119.0
106.5
106.5
106.6
112.3
32.6
95.3
89.5
101.4
109.4
121.0
110.1
111.2
108.6
40. U.S. export price Indexes by Standard industrial Classification
Dec.
Manufacturing:
103.3
Mar.
99.5
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
97.9
104.9
103.6
100.7
100.4
90.4
139.9
111.1
158.8
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
153.0
1 SIC - based classification.
88
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1986
1985
1984
Industry group
99.9
105.2
97.1
100.3
101.3
87.9
140.4
111.3
160.4
154.9
June
99.5
99.5
106.5
94.7
99.6
102.7
87.5
140.5
112.4
161.8
156.6
Sept.
96.7
98.3
107.1
93.2
99.7
102.0
88.1
140.6
111.9
162.6
156.2
Dec.
98.1
101.2
Mar.
97.0
June
95.2
97.6
101.2
102.1
110.1
167.4
105.7
110.4
108.7
95.9
82.2
89.9
140.7
113.7
169.4
161.5
162.3
101.5
109.2
95.7
98.9
93.5
89.8
140.6
164.1
165.1
109.7
101.5
98.3
83.1
89.8
140.3
112.3
167.1
156.7
159.7
161.2
112.6
Dec.
95.0
108.4
92.1
99.2
99.1
87.9
140.5
111.2
Sept.
106.1
96.2
83.1
90.7
140.5
112.6
109.2
38.3
94.9
89.7
100.3
110.8
110.6
123.5
111.7
109.2
41.
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industriai Classification 1
1984
Industry group
1985
Dec.
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products (6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................
Textile mill products ( 9 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ).................................................
Apparel and related products (6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .................................
Lumber and wood products, except furniture
(6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................................
Furniture and fixtures ( 6 /8 0 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
Paper and allied products ( 6 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................
Chemicals and allied products (9 /8 2 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products
( 1 2 / 8 0 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................................................
Leather and leather products .......................................................
Primary metal products (6/81 = 10 0) ...........................................
Fabricated metal products ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ....................................
Machinery, except electrical (3 /8 0 —1 0 0 )...................................
Electrical machinery ( 9 /8 4 - 1 0 0 ) .................................................
Transportation equipment (6 /8 1 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................
Scientific instruments; optical goods; clocks
(1 2 /7 9 = 1 0 0 ).................................................................................
Miscellaneous manufactured commodities
( 9 /8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................................................
Mar.
122.6
118.8
June
1986
Sept.
115.0
Dec.
114.2
100.4
133.9
134.4
117.5
97.7
138.7
93.3
115.8
98.2
137.4
95.8
96.6
142.3
84.3
97.5
144.0
82.6
Mar.
115.1
June
Sept.
Dec.
117.7
104.7
133.4
115.6
106.4
135.1
118.0
107.1
137.8
122.4
108.0
139.3
122.1
101.2
124.8
103.5
139.4
127.9
105.4
142.2
103.8
127.9
105.6
150.3
102.4
102.8
101.0
135.6
133.0
116.3
93.9
141.5
95.3
120.6
96.1
139.8
93.9
94.1
98.6
112.9
96.9
139.1
84.1
99.0
91.8
95.1
113.1
96.7
138.9
84.1
99.1
93.4
95.8
114.2
96.6
94.5
114.8
95.8
119.6
100.9
145.8
82.0
104.9
105.5
97.0
123.9
128.0
130.4
114.2
103.6
133.2
93.2
90.7
91.7
94.6
98.8
103.9
109.1
113.8
114.0
96.4
95.1
95.1
96.6
98.7
99.9
101.7
106.9
108.1
104.7
138.2
120.0
95.6
145.5
98.2
98.0
144.2
87.8
100.0
101.8
101.0
137.6
98.6
102.6
100.0
102.1
100.6
101.9
147.7
84.9
110.3
112.5
144.6
82.4
108.5
109.0
100.2
102.6
102.1
148.7
84.0
111.1
1 SIC - based classification.
42.
Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
(1977=100)
Annual
average
Quarterly Indexes
Item
1984
1985
1986
1985
Business:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per h o u r...........
Real compensation per hour ...
Unit labor c o s ts .........................
Unit nonlabor p aym ents..........
Implicit price d e fla to r................
106.4
175.3
98.8
164.8
159.7
163.0
105.6
167.1
97.9
158.3
156.7
157.7
105.5
169.0
98.1
160.2
157.0
159.0
105.5
170.6
98.2
161.7
157.7
160.3
105.7
172.3
98.4
163.1
158.3
161.4
106.4
174.5
98.6
164.0
160.0
162.6
107.3
176.4
99.0
164.4
161.4
163.4
106.4
178.0
99.0
167.3
159.6
164.6
107.3
179.1
99.2
167.0
162.2
165.3
107.4
180.4
100.2
168.0
161.9
165.8
107.3
181.7
100.4
169.3
163.4
167.2
104.8
174.6
98.4
166.7
160.6
164.6
104.6
166.9
97.8
159.5
156.4
158.4
104.4
168.7
97.9
161.5
157.2
160.0
104.3
170.4
98.1
163.3
157.9
161.4
104.4
172.1
98.3
164.8
158.9
162.7
104.9
174.0
98.3
165.9
160.8
164.1
105.4
175.4
98.5
166.3
163.0
165.2
104.5
177.0
98.4
169.3
160.3
166.2
105.6
178.3
98.8
168.8
163.9
167.1
105.7
179.3
99.7
169.6
163.7
167.5
105.7
180.4
99.6
170.7
165.9
169.0
106.8
172.3
97.0
165.8
161.2
179.1
133.1
163.0
161.8
105.9
164.8
96.5
160.1
155.7
173.1
138.5
161.0
157.5
105.5
166.6
96.7
162.6
157.9
176.4
130.3
160.3
158.7
105.8
168.3
96.9
163.8
159.1
177.5
130.5
161.0
159.8
106.0
169.9
97.0
164.9
160.3
178.5
129.3
161.3
160.6
106.5
171.6
96.9
165.8
161.1
179.8
130.2
162.5
161.6
107.8
173.1
97.2
165.0
160.5
178.3
141.7
165.5
162.2
107.0
174.5
97.0
167.2
163.0
179.8
131.2
162.8
162.9
106.9
175.4
97.1
168.3
164.0
181.1
131.7
163.8
164.0
106.8
176.1
97.8
168.6
164.8
179.9
132.3
163.2
164.3
106.9
176.8
97.7
169.8
165.4
182.6
135.8
166.2
165.7
121.7
176.7
99.5
145.1
115.7
166.8
97.7
144.2
117.8
169.1
98.1
143.5
118.2
171.5
98.7
145.1
119.3
173.8
99.2
145.7
121.7
175.6
99.2
144.3
123.0
178.1
122.9
179.3
99.7
145.8
123.7
180.2
99.8
145.7
124.7
181.4
100.8
145.5
125.8
182.5
Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per h o u r...........
Real compensation per h o u r ...
Unit labor c o s ts .........................
Unit nonlabor p aym ents..........
Implicit price d e fla to r................
Nonflnanclal corporations:
Output per hour of all employees
Compensation per h o u r................
Real compensation per h o u r .......
Total unit c o s ts ...............................
Unit labor costs ...........................
Unit nonlabor c o s ts .....................
Unit p ro fits .......................................
Unit nonlabor p a ym ents...............
Implicit price d e fla to r.....................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per h o u r...........
Real compensation per h o u r ...
Unit labor c o s ts .........................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100.0
144.8
100.8
145.1
89
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
43.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Productivity Data
Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1973
1974
1976
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
P r iv a t e b u s in e s s
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital s e rv ic e s ......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services ......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................
99.2
94.2
97.4
106.6
100.6
100.3
105.8
99.5
99.8
99.7
107.9
92.4
97.7
108.9
95.2
105.4
105.0
103.8
104.5
98.8
108.4
108.0
108.2
99.7
107.5
113.1
109.4
105.3
108.2
117.8
111.5
108.8
105.2
121.7
110.7
115.7
98.5
97.3
98.1
94.4
100.8
99.2
99.0
99.1
107.9
98.7
93.4
96.9
106.6
99.6
91.1
96.7
108.4
99.1
85.1
94.1
104.8
102.4
87.3
97.0
110.0
104.3
90.9
99.6
118.9
96.6
91.9
95.0
95.1
95.8
97.0
96.2
101.3
105.1
104.0
104.7
98.9
108.8
109.0
108.9
108.0
114.1
108.8
119.0
100.1
105.6
109.4
105.7
123.2
111.4
116.5
107.4
126.1
113.5
117.4
114.0
130.8
119.4
114.7
90.6
97.1
96.2
96.8
93.1
101.5
101.4
99.7
101.0
103.6
89.2
99.8
104.8
105.9
81.8
99.2
98.4
112.0
101.7
106.0
101.4
91.2
98.7
103.2
116.6
94.4
110.7
116.0
95.9
96.7
96.1
100.9
104.4
103.7
104.2
99.4
106.5
108.4
107.0
101.7
101.7
113.1
104.5
101.1
92.9
120.3
99.2
129.4
92.9
80.2
95.9
105.3
99.1
93.0
93.8
98.8
95.6
91.2
98.4
97.2
98.0
94.5
100.8
102.0
101.2
90.8
78.7
86.3
86.7
96.9
88.3
93.8
91.1
97.2
92.4
95.5
95.0
96.1
97.2
96.5
101.2
89.2
96.4
106.0
99.6
92.9
94.3
99.2
96.0
91.1
86.8
96.3
87.6
93.3
91.0
62.2
102.5
71.9
52.5
80.8
98.6
85.2
78.6
93.4
111.4
97.9
96.3
84.4
51.2
73.0
60.7
97.3
79.7
92.2
82.0
103.1
86.4
98.4
83.8
67.3
102.4
78.2
55.3
82.2
54.0
70.7
65.7
88.4
102.0
86.6
103.0
88.3
97.6
109.9
105.4
92.4
106.7
124.4
112.8
112.6
116.7
100.6
118.9
128.7
118.1
114.1
P r iv a t e n o n f a r m b u s in e s s
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rvice s.......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services ......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................
70.7
103.7
80.9
54.4
77.0
52.5
67.3
68.2
102.8
93.7
79.9
89.6
77.7
85.3
101.9
101.2
106.0
110.0 112.2
M a n u f a c t u r in g
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rvice s.......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services ......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u ts .......
Capital per hour of all persons................................
44.
101.2
93.3
91.7
101.2
90.6
98.3
89.5
102.1
108.1
111.2
117.5
105.0
116.2
86.9
105.1
104.7
93.5
120.6
99.7
129.0
99.5
122.9
104.8
123.6
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
100.8
108.5
100.8
99.6
119.1
99.4
119.5
112.5
117.0
99.3
131.5
96.7
132.5
118.7
127.6
100.7
143.7
95.7
142.7
134.6
139.8
100.3
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.6
148.1
103.0
161.5
98.2
156.8
146.3
153.0
105.3
168.1
98.1
159.7
156.3
158.5
/
106.4
175.3
98.8
164.8
159.7
163.0
99.3
118.9
99.2
119.7
110.5
116.5
98.8
131.3
96.6
132.9
118.5
127.8
99.8
143.6
95.7
144.0
133.5
140.3
99.2
154.8
97.2
156.0
136.5
149.2
102.4
161.5
98.2
157.7
148.1
154.3
104.3
167.9
98.0
161.0
156.1
159.3
104.8
174.6
98.4
166.7
160.6
164.6
108.4
100.7
107.8
104.4
106.6
99.8
118.7
99.1
119.0
108.4
115.4
99.1
131.1
96.4
132.3
118.6
127.6
99.6
143.3
95.5
143.8
137.8
141.7
100.4
154.3
96.9
153.8
142.1
149.8
103.5
159.9
97.3
154.5
152.1
153.7
105.6
165.9
96.8
157.0
160.1
158.1
106.8
172.3
97.0
161.2
163.0
161.8
101.5
108.2
100.5
106.6
101.9
105.2
101.4
118.6
99.1
117.0
98.9
111.7
101.4
132.4
97.4
130.6
97.8
103.6
145.2
96.7
140.1
105.9
157.5
98.9
148.7
114.0
138.6
112.0
116.6
168.2
98.1
144.2
136.9
142.1
121.7
176.7
99.5
145.1
134.4
142.0
93.9
77.6
95.4
82.7
76.4
80.5
98.3
92.8
98.7
94.3
93.3
94.0
89.3
58.2
90.8
65.2
60.0
63.4
96.4
71.2
97.1
73.9
69.3
72.3
94.3
78.0
95.9
82.7
74.0
79.7
98.5
92.8
98.8
94.3
93.0
93.8
108.6
100.9
107.7
105.6
107.0
73.4
36.9
75.5
50.2
51.5
50.7
91.1
59.2
92.4
65.0
60.1
63.3
97.5
71.6
97.6
73.4
68.9
71.9
94.6
78.2
96.1
82.6
73.1
79.4
98.4
92.9
98.9
94.3
93.8
94.2
62.2
36.5
74.8
58.7
60.0
59.1
80.8
57.4
89.5
71.0
64.1
69.0
93.4
90.6
76.2
93.6
84.1
67.7
79.3
97.1
92.1
98.1
94.9
93.5
94.5
88.4
57.8
90.2
65.4
59.4
63.2
71.0
35.3
72.3
49.7
46.3
48.5
N o n f in a n c i a l c o r p o r a t io n s :
Output per hour of all em ployees...........................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor costs .........................................................
Unit nonlabor paym e n ts...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................
1980
95.9
70.9
96.7
73.9
72.5
73.4
67.6
33.6
68.9
49.7
46.4
48.5
1973
N o n f a r m b u s in e s s :
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor costs .........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................
1979
1976
1970
B u s in e s s :
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per h o u r ...................................
Unit labor costs .........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................
1978
1974
1960
107.6
106.7
107.3
100.8
100.6
M a n u f a c t u r in g :
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s ................................
Compensation per h o u r............................................
Real compensation per hour ...................................
Unit labor costs .........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................................
Implicit price deflator ................................................
90
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
68.8
93.8
73.7
70.7
72.8
121.0
111.8
131.8
162.4
98.8
145.0
128.5
140.2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
45. Unemployment rates In nine countries, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
1985
A n n u a l a v e ra g e
1986
C o u n try
1985
1986
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
Total labor force basis
U n ite d S t a t e s ................................................
C a n a d a ............................................................
A u s tra lia ..........................................................
J a p a n ................................................................
F ra n c e ..............................................................
G e r m a n y ..........................................................
G re a t B rita in .................................................
Ita ly \ 2 .............................................................
S w e d e n ...........................................................
7.1
10.4
8.2
2.6
10.1
7.7
13.0
5.9
2.8
6.9
-
_
-
-
7.1
10.5
8.4
2.5
7.1
10.2
8.1
2.6
7.0
10.1
7.8
2.9
7.0
9.7
7.9
2.6
10.1
7.8
13.0
5.7
2.9
10.2
7.7
13.2
5.9
2.7
9.9
7.7
12.8
6.2
2.7
10.0
7..6
13.0
6.2
2.8
10.3
7.5
13.1
6.3
2.6
10.4
7.3
7.2
10.6
8.5
2.6
7.2
10.2
8.2
2.7
7.1
10.1
7.9
2.9
7.1
9.7
8.0
2.7
7.1
9.6
6.9
9.7
2.8
10.4
7.9
13.2
5.8
2.9
10.4
7.9
13.4
6.0
2.8
10.1
7.8
13.0
6.3
2.7
10.2
7.8
13.1
6.3
2.8
10.5
7.6
13.3
6.5
2.6
7.0
9.5
6.8
9.6
_
2.8
6.8
_
-
-
6.0
2.6
_
_
-
Civilian labor force basis
U n ite d S t a t e s ................................................
C a n a d a ............................................................
A u s tra lia ..........................................................
J a p a n ................................................................
F ra n c e ..............................................................
G e r m a n y ..........................................................
G re a t B rita in .................................................
I t a l y ....................................................................
S w e d e n ...........................................................
1
2
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.9
13.1
6.0
2.8
7.0
-
“
Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
Major changes in the Italian labor force survey, intro
duced in 1977, resulted in a large increase in persons enu
merated as unemployed. However, many persons reported
that they had not actively sought work in the past 30 days,
and they have been provisionally excluded for comparability
with U.S. concepts. Inclusion of such persons would more
-
6.9
-
10.7
7.5
_
6.1
2.6
-
than double the Italian unemployment rate shown.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, and Great
Britain are calculated by applying annual adjustment factors
to current published data and therefore should be viewed as
less precise indicators of unemployment under U.S. con
cepts than the annual figures.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
46.
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, 10 countries
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status and country
Labor force
Japan ...........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
111,550
12,183
6,997
58,110
23,130
26,740
26,010
21,610
5,720
4,369
113,544
12,399
7,133
58,480
23,290
26,880
26,530
21,680
5,740
4,385
115,461
12,639
7,272
58,820
23,330
27,090
26,960
21,800
5,690
4,418
63.8
64.1
62.2
62.6
57.2
53.2
63.2
48.0
50.0
67.0
63.9
64.8
62.0
62.6
57.1
52.9
62.2
48.0
51.3
64.0
64.1
61.8
62.7
57.1
52.7
61.9
47.4
51.2
66.8
64.0
64.4
61.5
63.1
56.6
52.5
61.9
47.2
52.1
66.7
64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.6
62.7
47.3
52.0
64.8
65.2
61.8
62.3
56.4
53.2
63.6
47.2
51.2
67.2
100,397
11,006
6,416
55,060
25,560
23,190
20,480
4,990
4,218
99,526
10,644
6,415
55,620
21,230
25,130
22,820
20,430
4,930
4,213
100,834
10,734
6,300
56,550
21,170
24,750
22,680
20,470
4,890
4,218
105,005
4,830
4,174
99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,320
25,750
24,100
20,380
4,960
4,226
6,490
56,870
20,980
24,790
23,100
20,390
4,880
4,249
107,150
11,311
6,670
57,260
20,910
24,960
23,420
20,490
4,890
4,293
59.3
57.5
58.1
61.3
54.4
51.5
59.4
45.9
46.3
64.6
59.9
58.7
57.9
61.4
54.0
51.7
59.8
45.9
46.4
65.3
59.2
59.3
58.4
61.3
53.5
51.7
58.9
46.1
46.9
65.6
59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
55.8
45.9
46.5
65.1
57.8
57.0
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
54.6
45.2
45.4
64.7
57.9
56.7
55.4
61.4
51.8
48.6
54.0
44.7
44.5
64.4
59.5
57.4
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
54.6
44.5
44.2
64.7
60.1
58.4
56.6
60.6
50.5
49.0
55.2
44.4
44.0
65.3
6,202
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,370
780
1,350
810
270
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
1,770
830
330
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,730
1,090
2,680
920
510
108
10,678
1,314
495
1,360
1,920
1,580
3,060
10,717
1,448
697
1,560
1,960
1,990
3,330
1,140
830
151
8,539
1,399
642
1,610
2,310
2,090
3,430
1,280
860
136
8,312
1,328
602
1,560
2,420
2,130
3,540
1,310
800
125
5.8
7.4
6.3
7.1
7.5
7.6
7.5
5.8
11.0
9.6
11.9
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.9
10.0
7.5
11.3
9.0
7.2
10.5
8.3
11.8
2.7
8.5
7.4
12.8
10.4
7.9
13.1
4.8
11.3
3.1
5.3
14.5
3.5
9.9
7.8
12.9
5.9
15.0
3.1
104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,670
26,250
25,710
20,910
5,100
4,262
106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,790
26,520
25,870
62.3
61.6
62.7
62.5
57.6
53.4
63.2
48.0
49.0
65.9
63.2
62.7
62.0
62.8
57.5
53.3
63.3
47.7
48.8
63.7
63.4
61.7
62.7
57.5
53.3
63.2
47.8
49.0
92,017
9,651
98,824
10,395
52,720
21,180
24,970
23,840
19,800
4,700
4,093
96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
21,260
25,130
24,040
19,870
4,750
4,109
57.9
56.6
59.2
61.2
54.7
51.6
59.3
46.3
46.5
64.8
6,000
G erm any............................................... •'.....................
110,204
11,958
6,910
56,980
23,150
26,710
25,880
21,450
5,560
4,350
102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,470
26,000
25,620
20,630
5,010
4,203
Employed
Japan ...........................................................................
108,670
11,904
6,810
56,320
22,930
26,650
25,870
21,410
5,500
4,326
99,009
10,500
6,358
53,820
22,300
25,870
25,430
20,530
4,950
4,168
Participation rate
66.1
66.6
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
24,360
20,100
Employment-population ratio
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
Unemployed
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Great B rita in ................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
6,991
849
358
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada .......................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ..........................................................................
F ra n ce .........................................................................
G erm any.....................................................................
N etherlands................................................................
S w eden.......................................................................
92
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
908
405
1,240
1,100
1,120
1,210
900
1,590
740
250
75
870
1,580
760
260
94
7.1
6.1
Unemployment rate
8.1
5.6
2.0
5.0
3.5
6.3
3.6
5.0
1.8
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.4
3.4
6.2
3.7
5.2
2.2
88
2.1
6.0
3.0
5.C
3.9
5.3
2.1
21,210
5,290
4,312
86
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
.£
3.9
6
6.2
2.0
66.8
21,200
2.2
7.5
4.1
.^
4.3
9.3
2.5
10
1,020
630
137
9.7
66.8
11,000
2.8
2.6
6.0
2.8
14.1
47.
Annual Indexes of productivity and related measures, 12 countries
(1977 = 100)
Item and country
1960
1970
62.2
50.3
23 2
32.8
37.2
36.4
40 3
36.5
32.4
54.6
42.3
53.8
80 8
76.8
64 8
60 0
65.5
69.6
71 2
72.7
64.3
81.7
80.7
77.6
52.5
41.5
19.2
41.7
49.2
35.4
50.0
37.4
44.8
55.1
52.6
71.0
100.0
100.0
86.2 100.0
92.1
100.0
95.0
100.0
88.6 90.0 100.0
86.6 96.1
91.0
100.0
78.0
90.5
86.9
100.0
84.4
95.8
92.7
100.0
87.0
99.5
101.0 100.0
92.5
100.3
106.1
100.0
94.7
104.7
96.2
100.0
1973
Output per hour
United S ta te s .............................................................................................
Canada ........................................................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................................................
B e lgium ........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk......................................................................................................
F rance..........................................................................................................
G erm any......................................................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................................................
N etherlands................................................................................................
N orw ay.........................................................................................................
S w eden........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m .........................................................................................
93 4
91 3
83 1
78 7
83.2
82.2
84 0
90.9
81.5
94.6
94.8
92.9
1975
1977
1978
1980
1981
1982
1983
1000 101 fi 101 4
1000 101 4 101 9
1000 108 0 122 7
86 1000 106 2 119 3
100.0 101.5 112.3 114.2 114.6 117.3
100.0 105.7 112.0 116.4 123.5 129.3
1000 103 1
100.0 103.0 116.9 121.0 123.4 126.6
86.2 100.0 106.4 113.9 116.9 119.4 126.1
96.8
100.0 101.8 109.3 109.7 112.6 119.2
100.2 100.0 102.8 112.7 113.2 116.5 125.5
94.3
100.0 101.5 101.2 107.9 112.7 121.2
92 9
91 0
87 7
3
94.6
88.5
90 1
91.1
1984
1985
118.3
135.0
118.4
140.2
135.0
139.3
122.3
132.6
126.2
139.1
159.9
_
125.0
135.2
129.7
Output
United S ta te s ..............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk.......................................................................................................
F rance...........................................................................................................
G erm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ................................................................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................................................
N orw ay..........................................................................................................
S w eden.........................................................................................................
United K ingdom ..........................................................................................
78.6
75.1
69.9
78.1
82.0
73.3
96.3
94.6
91.9
95.8
95.9
84.9
92.3
106.0
104.9
106.7
101.6
99.7
103.4
101.8
101.8
102.8
98.2
97.3
100.6
103.2
107.7
124.1
107.2
110.1
106.6
106.6
115.4
106.6
101.3
104.0
91.7
104.8
108.8
129.8
105.9
106.6
105.9
104.9
114.3
106.7
98.4
96.4
137.3
109.1
108.3
106.0
102.4
111.6
105.0
100.1 99.8
100.6 100.1
86.2 86.4
105.6
101.7
148.2
110.7
112.2
107.4
103.5
109.2
105.3
98.8
105.2
88.9
117.9
110.1
112.8
121.0
165.2
115.2
175.8
118.6
108.4
107.4
113.2
122.3
109.0
113.0
115.3
101.3
112.4
92.4
103.7
114.6
95.0
99.5
98.7
108.5
77.5
100.1
110.0
110.8
_
_
Total hours
United S ta te s ...............................................................................................
Canada .........................................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk.......................................................................................................
France...........................................................................................................
G erm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly .............................................................................................................
N etherlands..................................................................................................
N orw ay..........................................................................................................
S w e d e n .........................................................................................................
United K ingdo m ............................................................................
84.4
82.6
82.7
127.0
132.4
97.2
123.8
102.3
138.4
101.0
124.4
131.9
97.3
97.7
107.9
130.1
125.1
105.3
121.7
107.4
131.2
106.4
114.6
122.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
121.8
100.0
115.2
100.0
107.8
100.0
114.4
101.0 100.0
99.6
95.4
100.0
117.6
107.6
100.0
105.1
104.3
100.0
105.7
105.9
100.0
112.7
102.1 100.0
103.1
103.6
110.7
91.4
101.4
98.2
106.7
100.4
101.7
104.4
103.4
98.8
95.7
98.3
97.8
98.7
98.8
96.6
96.5
94.6
99.1
101.7
101.1
105.7
104.6
101.2 102.0
92.9
95.4
101.7
82.1
94.5
85.9
91.0
90.4
93.5
94.6
104.2
78.5
95.7
83.0
87.0
100.2
80.3
86.2
83.5
82.9
83.9
73.3
83.9
79.5
82.8
84.8
73.2
141.0
237.3
137.5
156.0
158.9
206.4
163.2
179.3
140.7
163.7
174.3
226.2
148.4
276.4
144.7
173.5
173.3
222.4
169.1
182.1
144.8
176.6
183.9
246.5
155.3
303.0
152.8
188.3
190.7
237.2
91.7
100.0 106.6 130.6 140.1 148.7
86.0 100.0 105.3 128.1 145.7 165.4
100.0 98.7 98.4 102.0 101.2
100.0 101.5 109.3 113.6 114.4
100.0 108.6 121.0 131.1 142.2
100.0 107.4 131.7 146.3 162.6
100.0 104.5 115.7 121.2 125.2
100.0 111.2 137.0 162.9 192.4
100.0 101.8 108.5 110.4 115.2
100.0 108.1 117.0 130.2 138.6
100.0 108.4 118.6 130.9 136.3
100.0 114.9 163.8 175.1 183.1
144.5
166.7
98.9
116.1
148.6
175.0
124.7
218.3
114.7
145.5
138.1
183.5
142.8
163.2
95.1
121.4
155.5
182.5
124.6
224.5
109.7
154.0
143.8
187.9
144.5
143.7
111.5
81.3
97.5
112.9
113.4
126.8
98.6
106.1
80.4
159.4
142.8
133.9
107.2
75.3
90.1
102.7
89.9
98.1
95.2
98.1
98.7
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.7
83.3
93.4
91.0
94.6
94.5
91.2
91.3
88.9
79.9
132.4
130.6
120.7
130.4
135.9
147.5
125.6
160.2
123.6
128.0
133.6
165.8
145.2
151.5
129.8
144.6
149.6
170.3
134.5
197.1
129.1
142.8
148.1
188.9
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.7
86.2
99.3
_
103.3
77.8
85.7
82.9
_
83.0
84.8
73.3
Compensation per hour
United S ta te s ...............................................................
Canada .............................................................................................
Japan ............................................................................................................
B e lgium .........................................................................................................
D e nm a rk.......................................................................................................
France...........................................................................................................
G erm any.......................................................................................................
Ita ly ...................................................................................
Netherlands..................................................................................................
N orw ay..........................................................................................................
S w eden.........................................................................................................
United K ingdom ..........................................................................................
36.5
27.1
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.1
18.8
8.3
12.5
15.8
14.7
14.8
57.3
46.5
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.6
48.0
26.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
30.8
68.8
59.2
55.1
53.5
56.1
52.3
67.5
43.7
60.5
54.5
54.2
44.8
85.1
78.2
84.2
78.9
81.0
76.7
84.5
70.2
82.2
77.2
77.3
74.7
100.0 108.2
100.0 106.7
100.0 106.6
100.0 107.8
100.0 110.2
100.0 113.5
100.0 107.8
100.0 114.5
100.0 108.4
100.0 110.0
100.0 111.4
100.0 116.7
157.5
167.1
136.6
152.0
162.9
200.8
176.6
191.4
148.3
_
195.5
262.7
164.7
334.0
_
205.2
205.8
257.0
Unit labor costs: National
currency basis:
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ...........................................................................
Japan ....................................................................
B e lgium ...............................................................................
Denmark ...................................................................
F rance..........................................................................
G erm any........................................................................
Ita ly ....................................................................
N etherlands...........................................
N o rw ay...................................................
S w e d e n .............................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................................................
58.7
53.9
38.4
42.0
33.8
41.6
46.6
38.5
29.0
34.8
27.6
70.9
60.6
52.3
58.1
55.4
52.6
67.4
36.0
60.7
46.4
47.7
39.7
58.7
59.0
28.5
30.2
29.5
41.7
25.9
32.5
25.1
21.7
30.1
44.4
70.9
61.7
39.1
42.0
44.4
46.8
42.9
50.6
41.2
34.5
41.1
54.4
22.8
73.7
64.8
66.4
68.0
67.4
63.6
80.3
48.1
74.3
57.6
57.2
48.2
96.0
91.5
85.6
86.7
93.8
77.1
95.4
79.7
77.1
79.2
145.0
166.3
92.7
_
165.1
187.4
124.9
240.1
164.2
152.2
198.1
Unit labor costs: U.S.
dollar basis:
United S ta te s .....................................................
Canada .........................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
B e lgium ......................................................
D e nm a rk.............................................................
F ra n ce ....................................................................................
G erm any..................................................................
N etherlands.......................................................................
N o rw ay.................................................................
S w e d e n ..................................................................
United K ingdom .................................................................
-
73.7
68.8
65.6
62.8
67.2
70.4
70.4
73.1
65.6
53.4
58.7
67.7
100.0 106.6
100.0 98.1
100.0 126.8
100.0 115.7
100.0 118.4
100.0 117.3
100.0 121.0
100.0 115.6
100.0 115.7
100.0 109.7
100.0 107.2
100.8 100.0 126.3
91.7
89.8
86.7
89.3
89.6
99.5
88.7
104.3
92.8
81.4
83.2
130.6
116.4
116.8
134.1
129.0
153.4
147.9
141.4
134.2
126.2
125.3
218.3
140.1
129.1
123.8
109.9
110.3
132.2
124.9
126.3
108.9
120.6
115.4
203.1
148.7
142.3
108.8
89.5
102.3
121.5
119.7
125.4
105.8
114.2
96.9
183.5
145.0
129.4
104.2
_
93.5
102.6
101.6 98.6
112.8 111.1
83.9
100.4
77.7
143.9
101.7
79.1
147.3
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
93
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
March 1987 •
Current Labor Statistics:
Injury and Illness Data
48. Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case1
1980
1979
1978
1977
1984
1983
1982
1981
1985
PRIVATE SECTOR3
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w orkdays.....................................................................................................
8.7
4.0
65.2
8.3
3.8
61.7
7.7
3.5
58.7
11.5
5.1
81.1
11.6
11.7
5.7
83.7
11.9
5.8
82.7
12.3
5.9
82.8
11.9
5.4
80.7
86.0
12.0
6.1
90.8
90.7
11.4
5.7
91.3
11.4
11.2
11.6
6.2
150.5
6.5
163.6
146.4
10.5
5.4
137.3
8.4
4.5
125.1
9.7
5.3
160.2
8.4
4.8
145.3
15.7
6.5
117.0
15.1
6.3
113.1
14.6
14.8
6.3
118.2
15.5
6.9
128.1
15.2
15.5
6.5
113.0
15.1
14.4
6.8
111.2
107.1
112.0
113.0
15.4
6.9
121.3
120.4
16.6
6.7
123.1
16.3
6.3
117.6
14.9
106.0
15.1
5.8
113.1
122.4
14.9
6.4
131.7
14.5
6.3
127.3
115.5
6.6
111.0
16.0
6.9
124.3
15.5
6.7
118.9
14.8
6.4
119.0
15.8
7.1
130.1
15.4
7.0
133.3
13.1
5.1
82.3
13.2
5.6
84.9
13.3
5.9
90.2
22.3
10.4
178.0
22.6
11.1
20.7
178.8
175.9
92.0
17.5
6.9
95.9
17.6
7.1
99.6
16.9
6.9
120.4
16.8
7.8
126.3
133.7
16.2
17.0
7.5
123.6
128.8
11.5
6.4
143.2
15.5
5.9
111.5
16.0
6.4
109.4
15.0
5.7
100.2
15.9
6.3
105.3
16.0
5.7
116.7
110.9
15.6
15.8
10.9
6.0
6.8
11.8
5.9
Construction
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w orkdays.....................................................................................................
General building contractors:
Total c a se s..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Heavy construction contractors:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Special trade contractors:
Total ca se s..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
6.1
16.6
6.2
16.2
6.8
120.4
16.3
Manufacturing
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
7.9
3.6
64.9
9.5
4.3
67.7
Mining
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
8.0
9.4
4.1
63.5
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing3
Total c a se s..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w orkdays.....................................................................................................
7.6
3.4
58.5
9.3
3.8
61.6
6.1
6.0
6.0
115.7
14.1
5.9
15.2
14.7
119.3
118.6
6.6
6.2
6.1
6.2
15.4
6.2
3.7
63.4
6.8
128.9
15.2
6.8
11.5
5.1
82.0
10.2
10.0
10.6
5.4
86.7
4.4
75.0
4.3
73.5
4.7
77.9
10.4
4.6
80.2
18.6
9.5
171.8
17.6
9.0
158.4
16.9
8.3
153.3
18.3
9.2
163.5
19.6
9.9
172.0
18.5
9.3
171.4
16.0
15.1
97.6
91.9
13.9
5.5
85.6
14.1
5.7
83.0
15.3
6.4
101.5
15.0
6.3
100.4
15.0
7.1
128.1
6.1
112.2
6.0
112.0
13.6
122.2
6.6
120.8
13.9
6.7
127.8
15.2
7.1
128.3
14.4
6.7
121.3
101.6
12.4
5.4
12.4
5.4
103.4
115.3
18.5
15.3
6.4
102.5
12.2
Durable goods
Lumber and wood products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total c a se s..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total ca se s..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
Primary metal industries:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
Machinery, except electrical:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Electric and electronic equipment:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w orkdays.....................................................................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays.....................................................................................................
Instruments and related products:
Total c a s e s .........................................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays....................................................................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
94
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
17.2
6.0
6.8
119.4
19.1
7.2
109.0
14.0
4.7
69.9
8.6
3.0
46.7
11.8
5.0
79.3
7.0
2.4
37.4
11.5
4.0
58.7
10.8
16.8
8.0
17.3
8.1
134.7
6.6
6.2
14.1
6.9
13.0
13.1
13.3
6.1
12.6
5.7
113.8
16.3
6.9
112.4
19.9
8.7
124.2
118.4
17.5
7.5
109.9
96.5
16.1
6.7
104.9
14.4
5.4
75.1
14.7
5.9
83.6
13.7
5.5
81.3
12.9
5.1
74.9
10.7
4.2
66.0
9.8
3.6
58.1
10.7
4.1
65.8
7.4
3.1
48.4
6.5
2.7
42.2
6.3
41.4
45.0
9.8
4.6
78.1
9.2
4.0
72.2
8.4
3.6
64.5
68.8
6.5
2.7
39.2
5.6
2.2
2.1
37.0
35.6
37.5
37.9
10.7
4.4
68.3
9.S
4.1
69.9
9.9
4.0
66.3
10.5
4.3
70.2
9.7
4.2
73.2
19.3
8.0
8.0
8.7
3.3
50.3
8.6
8.0
3.4
51.9
3.3
51.8
11.5
5.1
78.0
11.6
10.6
5.5
85.9
4.9
82.4
6.9
7.2
2.6
2.8
37.0
40.0
11.6
11.7
4.7
67.7
4.5
66.4
6.8
2.7
41.8
10.S
4.4
67.9
15.1
6.1
2.6
5.2
6.8
2.8
9.3
4.2
5.4
2.2
110.1
10.8
4.2
69.3
6.4
2.7
45.7
9.0
3.9
71.6
5.2
2.2
48.
Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case1
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
Nondurable goods
F o o d a n d k in d r e d p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
19.5
8.5
130.1
19.4
8.9
132.2
19.9
9.5
141.8
18.7
9.0
136.8
9.1
3.8
66.7
8.7
4.0
58.6
9.3
4.2
64.8
3.8
45.8
3.9
56.8
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
10.2
10.2
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s .....................................................
2.9
57.4
3.4
61.5
9.7
3.4
61.3
9.1
3.3
62.8
3.2
59.2
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s ....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s ................................................................
17.8
16.7
16.7
129.3
16.5
7.9
131.2
16.7
130.7
131.6
138.0
7.2
3.2
44.6
6.5
3.0
42.8
7.7
3.2
51.7
7.3
3.0
51.7
8.0
8.6
8.0
8.1
8.1
T o b a c c o m a n u fa c tu rin g :
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s ....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s .................................................................
8.1
8.2
T e x tile m ill p ro d u c ts :
L o s t w o r k d a y s .................................................................
8.8
7.6
7.4
53.8
51.4
3.0
54.0
7.5
3.0
57.4
6.0
2.1
6.4
2.4
40.6
6.7
2.5
40.9
44.1
10.4
4.7
93.8
4.7
94.6
2.8
2.8
A p p a r e l a n d o th e r t e x tile p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s .....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s .................................................................
6.7
2.0
6.5
2.2
6.5
2.2
6.4
2.2
6.3
2.2
32.4
34.1
34.9
35.0
13.6
5.0
13.5
5.7
103.3
13.5
10.6
10.0
108.4
12.7
5.8
112.3
5.4
103.6
4.9
99.1
4.5
90.3
7.0
2.9
43.8
7.1
3.1
45.1
6.9
3.1
46.5
6.7
3.0
47.4
45.7
2.9
44.6
6.5
2.9
46.0
6.3
2.9
49.2
7.8
3.3
50.9
7.7
3.5
54.9
3.1
50.3
3.0
48.1
5.7
2.5
39.4
5.5
2.5
42.3
5.3
2.4
40.8
5.1
2.3
38.8
7.9
3.4
58.3
7.7
3.6
62.0
7.2
3.5
59.1
6.7
2.9
51.2
5.3
2.5
46.4
5.5
2.4
46.8
5.1
2.4
53.5
5.1
2.4
49.9
13.6
6.4
104.3
13.4
6.3
107.4
10.5
4.7
94.4
10.3
4.6
88.3
36.4
P a p e r a n d a llie d p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s .....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s .................................................................
P rin tin g a n d p u b lis h in g :
T o ta l c a s e s .......................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s .....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s ..................................................................
101.6
6.8
2.7
41.7
6.0
11.6
6.6
2.8
6.6
C h e m ic a ls a n d a llie d p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s ........................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s .....................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s ..................................................................
8.0
3.1
51.4
6.8
6.6
P e tro le u m a n d c o a l p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
8.1
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s ......................................................
3.3
59.2
L o s t w o r k d a y s ..................................................................
R u b b e r a n d m is c e lla n e o u s p la s tic s p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s ......................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s ...................................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y c a s e s ......................................................
L o s t w o r k d a y s ...................................................................
10.2
16.8
7.6
118.1
17.1
17.1
14.6
7.2
117.4
13.0
127.1
15.5
7.4
118.6
12.7
125.5
100.9
101.4
11.5
4.4
68.9
11.7
4.7
72.5
11.5
4.9
76.2
11.7
5.0
82.7
11.5
5.1
82.6
9.9
4.5
86.5
4.4
87.3
9.7
5.3
95.9
10.1
10.0
5.7
102.3
5.9
107.0
9.4
5.5
104.5
9.0
5.3
100.6
8.5
4.9
96.7
4.7
94.9
5.2
105.1
5.0
107.1
7.7
2.9
44.0
7.9
3.2
44.9
3.4
49.0
7.4
3.2
48.7
7.3
3.1
45.3
7.2
3.1
45.5
7.2
3.1
47.8
7.4
3.3
50.5
7.4
3.2
50.7
8.5
3.6
52.5
8.9
3.9
57.5
8.8
8.2
7.4
2.7
40.5
2.8
8.1
8.2
6.0
6.2
L e a th e r a n d le a th e r p ro d u c ts :
T o ta l c a s e s .........................................................................
6.7
2.6
31.7
10.0
Transportation and public utilities
Total c a s e s .........................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................
Lost workdays ..................................................................
Wholesale and retail trade
Total c a s e s ..................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...................................................
Lost w orkdays.............................................................
Wholesale trade:
Total c a s e s ...................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...................................................
Lost w o rkda ys..............................................................
Retail trade:
Total c a s e s ...................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...................................................
Lost w o rkdays..............................................................
Finance, Insurance, and real estate
Total c a se s.......................................................................... .
Lost workday c a s e s ...........................................................
Lost w orkdays......................................................................
2.0
.8
7.5
39.7
2.1
.8
8.0
8.2
8.8
8.6
4.1
59.1
3.9
58.2
7.7
3.6
54.7
7.1
3.4
52.1
7.0
3.2
50.6
7.2
3.5
55.5
7.2
3.5
59.8
7.7
3.1
44.7
7.1
2.9
44.5
7.1
2.9
41.1
7.2
2.9
42.6
7.3
3.0
46.7
7.5
3.2
48.4
7.5
3.1
47.0
2.1
2.0
.9
15.4
10.4
12.5
.9
13.3
2.0
.8
12.2
.8
11.6
.9
13.2
2.0
.9
12.8
1.9
.9
13.6
5.5
5.5
2.4
36.2
5.5
2.5
38.1
5.2
2.3
35.8
5.0
2.3
35.9
4.9
2.3
35.8
5.1
2.4
37.0
5.2
2.5
41.1
1.9
2.0
Services
Total c a s e s .............
Lost workday cases
Lost w orkdays........
1 Total cases include fatalities.
2 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers and were calculated as:
(N/EH) X 200,000, where:
N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2.2
35.4
5.4
2.6
45.4
EH = total hours worked by all employees during calendar year.
= base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per
week, 50 weeks per year.)
Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
200,000
3
BLS International Price Data
Quarterly measures of price change for U.S.
imports and exports under various classifications,
useful for different types of analysis:
• SITC, a United Nations classification for
international comparisons;
• SIC-based, used for industry comparisons;
• End use, for use with National Accounts data.
How to obtain:
Mailing List:
To obtain the quarterly news release, ask
to be put on a mailing list. Call Bureau
of Labor Statistics, Division of Interna
tional Prices (202) 272-5020.
Electronic News Release:
Quickest. Accessible electronically
immediately at release time through BLS
news release service. Write to the Office
of Publications, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Washington D.C. 20212, or call
(202) 523-1913.
Data Diskettes:
Monthly Labor Review:
Articles twice a year provide in-depth
analyses of import and export price
movements and developments in U.S.
trade. Subscription available from
Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington
D.C. 20402, for $16 a year; $4.75 single
copy.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Quarterly import and export price
indexes for 450 Standard Industrial
Trade Classification categories for the
most recent eight quarters. Price: $35
each, $104 for four quarters. For infor
mation, call the Office of Publications,
Bureau of Labor Statistics
(202) 523-1090.
Telephone:
For comparisons of United States,
German, and Japanese export price
indexes call Division of International
Prices (202) 272-5020.
U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1987
1 8 1 -5 1 2 /4 0 0 1 3
FIELD TO FACTORY:
Afro-American Migration 1915-1940
Hundreds of thousands of Afro-Americans left the rural
South between 1915 and 1940 in search of better lives
in urban areas of the North. This movement, called the
Great Migration, changed not only the lives of migrants
but also the very structure of American society. It led to
the emergence of large, predominantly black urban
enclaves in the North. This phenomenon, which set the
scene for modern life in most American cities, is now
the subject of a major exhibition, ‘‘Field to Factory: Afro-
American Migration, 1915-1940” at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History in
Washington, D.C. The exhibition will be on display
through February 1988, after which it will travel to some
20 other locations.
Three major sections of the exhibition treat life in the
South, the journey north and the new Northern urban
world. The photos on this page and on the cover are from
the exhibition.
Segregated waiting room at Carolina Coach Company in
Durham, North Carolina, May 1940. (Photo courstesy Library
of Congress)
Hod carriers (brick-layers’ assistants) at work. (Photo
courtesy Temple University Libriaries, Urban Archives
Center)
Man spraying lacquer on Ford bodies, Briggs Body Com
pany, Detroit, Michigan, 1933. (Photo courtesy Henry Ford
Museum and Greenfield Village, Detroit, Michigan)
Woman in a sewing machine mill in the North. (Photo
courtesy National Archives)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Man pouring hot metal into molds, Ford Motor
Company, River Rouge Plant, Dearborn,
Michigan, 1933. (Photo courtesy Henry Ford
Museum and Greenfield Village, Dearborn,
Michigan)
Women weighing wire coils and recording
weights to establish wage rates at a northern
furniture factory. (Photo courtesy National
Archives)
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, D.C. 20212
Second Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
ISSN 0098-1818
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MLR
l ib r a
l ib r a r y
FED R ^ s
pO BOX
SAINT L
442L
ISSDUE013R
LO UI S
@FedFRASER