The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
iviarcn 2000
U.S. Departm ent of Labor
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Health and retirement benefits
Earnings and job growth
Earnings distribution
U.S. Department of Labor
Alexis M. Herman, Secretary
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Katharine G. Abraham, Commissioner
The Monthly Labor Review ( usps 987-800) is published
monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor. The Review welcomes articles on the
labor force, labor-management relations, business
conditions, industry productivity, compensation,
occupational safety and health, demographic trends,
and other economic developments. Papers should be
factual and analytical, not polemical in tone.
Potential articles, as well as communications on
editorial matters, should be submitted to:
Editor-in-Chief
Monthly Labor Review
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, dc 20212
Telephone: (202) 691 -5900
E-mail: mlr@bls.gov
Inquiries on subscriptions and circulation,
including address changes, should be sent to:
Superintendent of Documents
Government Printing Office
Washington, dc 20402
Telephone: (202)512-1800
Subscription price per year— $31 domestic; $38.75
foreign. Single copy— $10 domestic; $12.50 foreign.
Make checks payable to the Superintendent of Documents.
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.
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. Periodicals postage paid at
Washington, dc , and at additional mailing addresses.
Unless stated otherwise, articles appearing in this
publication are in the public domain and may be
reprinted without express permission from the Editorin-Chief. Please cite the specific issue of the Monthly
Labor Review as the source.
Information is available to sensory impaired
individuals upon request:
Voice phone: (202) 691-5200
Federal Relay Service: 1-800-877-8339.
P ostmaster: Send address changes to Monthly Labor Review,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, dc 20402-0001.
Cover designed by Melvin B. Moxley
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Regional Offices and Commissioners
Region 1
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Denis McSweeney
JFK Federal Building
Room E-310
Boston, MA 02203
Phone:
Fax:
Region II
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
John Wietinq
Room 808
201 Varick Street
New York, NY 10014-4811
Phone:
Fax:
Region III
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309
Philadelphia, PA 19101-3309
Phone:
Fax:
(215) 596-1154
(215) 596-4263
Janet Rankin
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Room 7T50
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404)331-3415
(404)331-3445
Peter Hebein
9th Floor
Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604-1595
Phone:
Fax:
Region VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
(312) 353-1880
(312) 353-1886
Robert A. Gaddie
Room 221
Federal Building
525 Griffin Street
Dallas, TX 75202-5028
Phone:
Fax:
Region IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory
of the Pacific Islands
(212) 337-2400
(212) 337-2532
Alan Paisner
Phone:
Fax:
Region VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
(617) 565-2327
(617) 565-4182
Region Vili
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Region X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
(214) 767-6970
(214) 767-3720
Stanley W. Suchman (Acting)
1100 Main Street
Suite 600
Kansas City, MO 64105-2112
Phone:
Fax:
(816) 426-2481
(816) 426-6537
Stanley P. Stephenson
71 Stevenson Street
P.O. Box 3766
San Francisco, CA 94119-3766
Phone:
Fax:
(415) 975-4350
(415) 975-4371
MONTHLY LABOR
REVIEW___________________ __
Volume 123, Number 3
March 2000
Articles
Health and retirement benefits: data from two BLS surveys
3
Both household and establishment data have strengths and limitations,
but details of benefit plans are best obtained from establishments
Diane E. Herz, Joseph R. Meisenheimer II, Harriet G. Weinstein
Earnings and employment trends in the 1990s
21
Robust employment growth in high- and low-paying jobs
was not accompanied by large wage gains
Randy E. Ilg and Steven E. Haugen
Transportation by air:
job growth moderates
34
The increasese in jobs and business activities in aviation
slowed in the 1990s, after decades of massive growth
William C. Goodman
Comparing earnings inequality usingtwo major surveys
48
Earnings discrepancies are almost eliminated when the n l s y
and c p s samples are limited to full-time, full-year workers
Mark S. Handcock, Martina Morris, and Annette Bernhardt
Departments
Labor month in review
Précis
Book reviews
Current labor statistics
2
62
63
65
Editor-in-Chief: Deborah P. Klein • Executive Editor: Richard M. Devens, Jr. • Managing Editor: Anna Huffman Hill • Editors: Brian I.
Baker, Bonita L. B oles, Leslie Brown Joyner, Lawrence H. Leith, Mary K. Rieg • Book Reviews: Roger A. Comer, Ernestine Patterson
Leary • Design and Layout: Catherine D. Bowman, Edith W. Peters • Contributors: Steven Haugen, Stanley W. Suchman
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Labor Month in Review
The March Review
Fewer mass layoffs
Higher productivity
P ro je c ts th at in teg rate in fo rm atio n
across survey lines are all too rare. Thus,
we are glad to lead with the analysis by
Diane F. Herz, Joseph R. Meisenheimer
II, and Harriet G. Weinstein of heath care
and retirem ent benefits data from the
Current Population and Employee Ben
efits Surveys. The article, in addition to
delivering information on the incidence
and characteristics of two im portant
classes of benefits, also helps readers
understand the relative strengths and
weaknesses of household and establish
ment surveys.
Randy E. Ilg and Steven E. Haugen ex
amine trends in employment and real earn
ings, both overall and in high-, medium-,
and low-earnings occupational categories.
They find that a modest increase in real
median earnings in the 1990s was concen
trated in time in the final 2 years and most
evident in the low-eamings group. The
high-eamings group, while it grew sub
stantially over the decade, had only a slight
increase in its earnings median. The middle
category saw very little change in employ
ment or earnings.
William C. Goodman reports on broad
developments in the air transportation
industry. His analysis points to an in
dustry in w hich, over the long haul,
prices have declined, productivity has
increased, and output and employment
have increased substantially.
Mark S. Handcock, Martina Morris,
and Annette Bernhardt return us to work
ing across surveys. In this case, the article
works with trends in earnings inequality
as measured by different household sur
veys. Researchers have found apparent
discrepancies between a rising trend in
earnings variance— a measure of increas
ing earnings inequality— in the Current
Population Survey and a falling trend in
the variance of earnings in the National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. The
authors find that restricting the sample
to full-tim e, full-year w orkers elim i
nates m uch of the discrepancy.
There were 14,909 layoff events in 1999,
involving a total of 1,572,399 initial claims
for unemployment insurance in the 50
States and the District of Columbia. Af
ter increasing in 1997 and 1998, the num
ber of layoffs and initial claimants re
turned to around 1997 levels.
Manufacturing accounted for 33 per
cent of all mass layoff events in 1999 and
40 percent of initial claims filed. Initial
claims filings were most numerous in
transportation equipment (98,746) and
industrial m achinery and equipm ent
(87,363).
The number of initial claims due to
mass layoffs continued to be higher in
the West (576,654) than in any other re
gion. Layoffs in business services, agri
cultural services, and motion pictures
accounted for 41 percent of the claims in
the West. The fewest mass-layoff initial
claims continued to be reported in the
Northeast region (207,057). For more in
formation, see “Mass Layoffs in Decemb e rl 999” (USDL 00-49).______________
Productivity increased 2.9 percent in
the nonfarm business sector during
1999, about the same as the 2.8 per
cent rise in 1998. O utput in nonfarm
businesses rose 4.7 percent, and hours
of all persons increased 1.7 percent.
U nit labor costs in the sector grew 1.8
percent in 1999, som ew hat less than
their 2.4-percent increase in 1998. This
reflected, in part, an hourly com pen
sation rise of 4.8 percent in 1999, com
pared with a 5.2-percent increase in
1998. For more inform ation, see “P ro
ductivity and C osts” (USDL 00-64).
2 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
Few work stoppages
Seventeen major work stoppages began
in 1999, the lowest number in the 53-year
history of the series. Of the 17 major work
stoppages beginning in 1999,12 were in
the private sector; the rem ainder oc
curred in State and local government, all
in educational services. In the private
sector, seven stoppages occurred in
goods-producing industries, and five
occurred in service-producing industries.
In all, only 73,000 workers were in
volved in these work stoppages. This
was the lowest level in the 53-year-old
series and the first time the level was
below 100,000. In comparison, in 1998,
m ajor work stoppages idled 387,000
w orkers. This series peaked in 1952,
when 2,746,000 workers were involved
in stoppages. A dditional inform ation
is available in “Major Work Stoppages,
1999 (USDL 00-51).
Declining
unemployment
Annual average unemployment rates de
creased in 35 States and the District of
Columbia in 1999. Unemployment de
clined in all four broad regions— North
east, Midwest, South, and West— and
eight of their nine component divisions.
Am ong the States, M aryland and
Oklahoma posted the largest rate de
clines in 1999 (-1.1 points each), followed
by Arkansas (-1 .0 point). Four other
States recorded decreases of more than
three-quarters of a percentage point. (The
District of Columbia’s rate dropped by
2.5 percentage points.)
Among the N ation’s nine geographic
divisions, the Pacific division, along with
the West South C entral division, re
corded the largest rate decrease from 1998
(-0.5 percentage point each). The drop
in the Pacific division’s rate was largely
due to improvements in the California
labor market.
The West region recorded the largest
decline over the year, down 0.5 percent
age point, followed by the Northeast and
South, down 0.3 point each. Unemploy
ment in the Midwest region edged down
0.1 point. Additional information is avail
able in “Metropolitan Area Employment
and Unemployment: January 2000” (USDL
00-71).
□
Health and Retirement Benefits
Health and retirement benefits:
data from two BLS surveys
Both the household-based Current Population Survey
and the establishment-based Employee Benefits Survey
have strengths and limitations with respect to collecting
information on health and retirement benefits: demographic
information is best obtained from household surveys;
details o f benefit plans are best collected from establishments
Diane E. Herz,
Joseph R.
Meisenheimer II,
and
Harriet G. Weinstein
Diane E. Herz and
Joseph R.
Meisenheimer II are
economists in the
Office of Employment
and Unemployment
Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Harriet
G. Weinstein is an
economist in the
Office of Compensa
tion and Working
Conditions, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
mployee benefits are an important aspect
of job quality. In assessing the quality of
different types of jobs, workers, employ
ers, and researchers often consider benefits along
with other characteristics of jobs, such as pay,
job security, job safety, and the type of work in
volved.1 Many employers are concerned about
the cost of benefits, which compose 28 percent
of compensation costs for employers in the pri
vate sector and State and local governments.2 Pub
lic policymakers also frequently focus on employee
benefits. For example, many observers have ex
pressed concern in recent years about the num
ber of Americans who lack health insurance. In
response, policymakers have debated whether
universal health coverage should be a national
goal. Central to that debate are the role employerprovided health insurance plays in the current
health care system and what role it might play in
any proposed new system. Employer-provided
retirement plans also have been the subject of
public policy discussions. As the baby-boom
generation— the huge cohort of Americans born
between 1946 and 1964— approaches retirement
age, concern has arisen about whether Social Se
curity and private pension plans can withstand
the strain of providing retirement income to so
many people.3
Clearly, having accurate information on em
ployee benefits is important for workers, employ
ers, and public policymakers.4 Two bls surveys
provide estimates of participation in employee
benefits plans: the Current Population Survey
E
( cps) and the Employee Benefits Survey ( ebs ).
The cps is a monthly survey of 50,000 house
holds from which information is obtained on em
ployment, unemployment, demographics, earn
ings, and more. The cps is jointly conducted by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of
the Census. The ebs obtains data from establish
ments on the number of participants in a variety
of employee benefits plans and the detailed pro
visions of those plans. The ebs is being incorpo
rated into the National Compensation Survey,
which, when fully integrated, will provide m eas
ures of occupational earnings, trends in compen
sation costs, and participation in, and details of,
benefit plans.5
This article compares information that the cps
and ebs provide on two of the most important
categories of benefits: health and retirem ent
plans. According to the cps, 66 percent of full
time workers in the private sector participated in
a health plan provided by their employer in 1995.
The ebs indicates that 71 percent of full-time pri
vate-sector workers participated in an employerprovided health plan. The gap between the two
surveys is greater in regard to participation in
retirement plans: the cps indicates that 49 per
cent of full-time workers in the private sector par
ticipated in an employer-provided retirement plan
in 1995; the comparable figure from the ebs is
60 percent.
The material that follows is intended as a guide
for researchers, public policymakers, and others
to understand the strengths and limitations of cps
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 3
Health and Retirement Benefits
and ebs data on employee benefits. Among the topics examined
are differences in estimates derived from the two surveys and
possible reasons for inconsistencies between them. The types of
information that each survey provides also are described.
Data on prevalence of benefits
Although the cps is a monthly survey, it does not include ques
tions each month on employee benefits. Rather, supplemen
tary questions on benefits have appeared periodically in the
cps since the early 1970s. cps supplementary surveys on em
ployer-provided benefits were conducted in April 1972, in May
of 1979, 1983, and 1988, and in April 1993.6 There are no
current plans to repeat those surveys, but questions on health
and retirement benefits were included in cps supplements on
workers in contingent and alternative employment arrange
ments conducted in February of 1995, 1997, and 1999. The
supplementary questions were asked of all employed persons
covered in the cps. The employee benefits data from the Feb
ruary 1999 cps are not yet available, so the sections that follow
examine data from the February 1995 and 1997 surveys. The
annual demographic supplement to the cps, conducted each
March, also contains health insurance questions, but the focus
of those questions is coverage from any source, rather than
employer-provided coverage. Hence, the March cps data are
not analyzed in this article.7
The ebs is actually three different surveys. In odd-num
bered years, “medium and large” private-sector establish
ments— those with 100 or more workers— have been surveyed.
In even-num bered years, “sm all” private-sector establish
ments— those with fewer than 100 employees— have been sur
veyed, as have State and local governments. The analysis that
follows combines data from the two private-sector surveys—
1994 for small establishments and 1995 for medium and large
establishments— to produce estimates for the total private sec
tor. Data from the 1994 survey of State and local governments
are combined with data pertaining to the total private sector
to provide measures of the entire economy (excluding Fed
eral employees).
The ebs excludes workers in the Federal Government, agri
cultural workers, self-employed persons, family members who
work without pay in family-owned businesses, workers in pri
vate households, and some workers in religious and not-forprofit organizations. Such workers are included in the cps. In
order to compare cps and ebs data on participation in employerprovided health and retirement plans, it is necessary to ex
clude from the cps tabulations as many workers as possible
who are outside the scope of the ebs . For this reason, the cps
estimates examined in this article generally will include wage
and salary workers in the private, nonagricultural sector and
in State and local governments. Excluded are Federal employ
ees, workers in agriculture, all self-employed persons (regard
less of whether their businesses are incorporated), independ
4 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ent contractors, and unpaid family workers.
The analysis focuses primarily on full-time workers, al
though benefit coverage for part-time workers is discussed
briefly. The two surveys define “full time” and “part time”
differently. In the ebs, respondent establishments use their own
criteria to determine who is considered to be a full- or parttime employee. In the cps, anyone who usually works at least
35 hours per week is considered a full-time worker, and those
who work fewer than 35 hours are part time.
Why two surveys on benefits?
Many readers may ask why it is necessary to have two surveys
that collect information on participation in employee benefit
plans. The reason is that household and establishment surveys
often complem ent each other, because each has different
strengths and lim itations. H ousehold surveys are better
equipped to obtain information on workers’ demographic char
acteristics, such as their age, sex, race, and marital status. This
information typically is not collected in establishment surveys,
because some employers may not keep such records of their
employees or, if employers have such information, it may not
be organized in a way that is easy to report for a survey.8
Establishment survey respondents typically provide more re
liable information than household respondents do on some top
ics, such as the number of hours for which a worker is paid or the
industry of the establishment. Information on the industry in which
workers are employed is collected each month in the cps. For
broad industry categories, the cps employment estimates gener
ally are consistent with those obtained from establishment sources.
For more detailed industry groups, however, cps respondents may
find it difficult to provide precise information on their employ
ers’ activities, products, or services.9
Establishments also furnish more reliable information than
households do on the details of employer-provided benefit
plans and the employers’ costs for providing those benefits.
Individuals may not have sufficient knowledge of their health
or retirement plans to describe the types of plans or their pro
visions accurately. Response errors may be even more likely
when proxy responses are allowed, as they are in the cps. In
the cps, one person in a sampled household typically answers
questions about himself or herself (self-responses) and every
one else in the household (proxy responses). Self-responses
are thought to be more reliable than proxy responses, because
people naturally can provide more precise information about
themselves than about other people in the household, even if
those others are close family members.10 A variety of presurvey
testing procedures can help to identify and prevent problems
that cps respondents, whether providing self- or proxy re
sponses, might have in answering questions. Even with such
testing, however, the cps often cannot provide information on
benefit plans that is as precise as ebs data. The ebs is more
likely to obtain accurate information about benefit plans be-
| C o m p a r i n g t h e c p s a n d ebs: w h a t i n f o r m a t i o n d o e s e a c h s u r v e y p r o v i d e ?
T y p e o f in fo rm a tio n
W h ich s u rv e y
p r o v id e s m o r e
re lia b le d a t a ?
EBS
CPS
G e n e r a l in fo rm a tio n
Demographic inform ation.............................................................................................
Industry inform ation......................................................................................................
Occupational inform ation.............................................................................................
Union m em bership.........................................................................................................
Establishment s i z e .........................................................................................................
Full- and part-time s ta tu s..............................................................................................
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes2
Yes
Only CPS provides
Both have strengths1
Both have strengths1
Each defines differently
EBS
Each defines differently
H e a lth b e n e f its
Participation in employer-provided p la n ...................................................................
Employee eligibility, regardless of participation......................................................
Health coverage from sources other than one’s own em p lo y er..............................
Employee premiums, deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance.........................
Type of health plan (fee for service, PPO, HMO)........................................................
Specific types of health services covered by p la n ....................................................
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes3
Yes4
No
No
No
EBS
Only CPS provides
Only CPS provides
Only EBS provides
Only EBS provides
Only EBS provides
R e tire m e n t b e n e f its
Participation in employer-provided p la n ...................................................................
Employee eligibility, regardless of participation......................................................
Type of retirement plan (defined benefit or defined contribution)........................
Defined-benefit plan form ula.......................................................................................
Specific type of defined-contribution p la n ................................................................
Age and service requirements for normal- and early-retirement eligibility..........
Eligibility and benefit levels for disability retirem ent.............................................
Employer contributions to defined-contribution p la n s ............................................
Coordination o f defined-benefit plan payments with Social S ecu rity ...................
Vesting schedules...........................................................................................................
Survivor benefits............................................................................................................
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes5
No
Yes6
No
No
Yes5
No
No
No
EBS
Only CPS provides
EBS
Only EBS provides
EBS
Only EBS provides
Only EBS provides
EBS
Only EBS provides
Only ebs provides
Only EBS provides
1 The ebs classifies industries and occupations somewhat more accu
rately, but because the cps has a much larger sample size, it is able to pro
vide more industry and occupational detail.
3 The May 1988, April 1993, and February 1995 and 1997 cps supple
ments included questions on eligibility to participate in employer-pro
vided health plans, but the May 1979 and 1983 cps supplements did not.
2 The February 1995 and 1997 CPS supplements did not include any
questions on establishment size or firm size. The cps supplement con
ducted in May 1972 included questions on establishment size— that is,
the number o f people who work at the same location as respondents to the
cps sample work. The cps supplements conducted in May 1979, 1983,
and 1988 and April 1993 also included questions on establishment size.
In addition, those supplements included questions on whether the em
ployer operated at more than one location and, if so, how many people
worked at all locations. Survey researchers have long considered responses
to these questions to have poor accuracy, because many respondents to
the cps and other household surveys are unlikely to know how many people
work for the employers o f household members.
4 The May 1988, April 1993, and February 1995 and 1997 CPS supple
ments included questions on health coverage from sources other than one’s
own employer, but the May 1979 and 1983 cps supplements did not.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5
The May 1988 and April 1993 cps supplements included questions
on the type o f retirement plan and the em ployer’s contribution to the plan,
but the February 1995 and 1997 cps supplements did not.
6
The April 1993 cps supplement included questions on specific types
o f defined-contribution plans, but the February 1995 and 1997 cps supple
ments did not.
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 5
Health and Retirement Benefits
cause the data are obtained from plan brochures that establish
ments provide to bls data collectors.11 (See exhibit 1 for a
summary of the data provided by the CPS and ebs .) Estimates
of health benefits coverage from both surveys are discussed
next, followed by an examination of retirement coverage.
Health benefits
cps data
on health insurance. The cps employee benefits sur
veys, conducted in April 1972, May of 1979,1983, and 1988,
and April 1993, included questions on workers’ health insur
ance coverage. No analysis of the health insurance data from
the 1972 survey was published, and an electronic data file is
no longer available for research, so trends that can be reviewed
are those in health benefit coverage from 1979 forward.12 The
May 1979 and 1983 cps supplements simply asked respond
ents whether they were included in a health insurance plan on
their present job. From that information, researchers calcu
lated plan participation rates (also called coverage rates). By
April 1993, the supplement had expanded to include questions
on eligibility for insurance, insurance coverage from sources
other than one’s own employer, and reasons eligible employ
ees did not participate in a health insurance plan offered by
their employer.13
Information on health insurance coverage also was collected
in the February 1995, 1997, and 1999 cps supplements on
workers in contingent and alternative work arrangements. Al
though employee benefits were not the primary subject of these
supplements, questions on health and retirement benefits were
included to provide information about the quality of jobs held
by workers in all types of employment arrangements, includ
ing those in traditional arrangements, contingent or “tempo
rary” arrangements, and alternative arrangements— such as
independent contractors, employees of temporary help firms,
and on-call workers. As mentioned previously, the employee
benefits data from the February 1999 cps are not yet available,
so only data from the February 1995 and 1997 surveys will be
examined.
Respondents to the foregoing February cps supplementary
questions were asked if employed members of their house
hold had health insurance from any source. Respondents who
replied affirmatively were asked if the employees received the
health insurance from their own employer (including a tempo
rary-help agency or a contract company). If they did, they were
asked if their employer paid for all, part, or none of the cover
age.14 Those who reported that they did not receive coverage
from their employer were asked to name the source of their
health insurance. This question gave respondents a second
chance to report coverage from their employer, as well as to
report coverage from a spouse’s or other family m em ber’s in
surance, from other current or previous jobs, from medicare
or medicaid, from insurance the worker purchased privately,
or from some other source.
6 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
For workers who had no health insurance or who partici
pated in a plan from a source other than their own employer,
survey respondents were asked if the employer offered a plan
and whether the worker was eligible to participate in it. If the
worker had been eligible, the respondent was asked why the
worker did not participate in the employer-sponsored plan.
Despite the different wording of questions between the cps
employee benefit supplements and the cps contingent-worker
supplements, the surveys found similar results. Two-thirds of
wage and salary workers (public and private sector combined)
had health insurance from their own employer in May 1979,
1983, and 1988. The proportion declined to 61 percent by April
1993. Rates of coverage computed using data from the Febru
ary 1995 and 1997 cps supplements were about the same— 60
percent in both periods.
Full-time workers are much more likely than part-time work
ers to participate in an employer-provided health insurance
plan. In February 1995 and 1997, about 70 percent of full
time wage and salary workers were enrolled in a plan offered
by their employer, compared with only 16 percent of part-time
workers. The proportion of full-time workers participating in
employer-provided health plans fell between 1979 and 1993
and was essentially unchanged after that. Rates of coverage
for part-time workers changed little throughout the 1979-97
period, as the following tabulation of the percent of wage and
salary workers participating in an employer-sponsored health
plan shows:
Total
1979
1983
1988
1993
1995
1997
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
66
66
65
61
60
60
Full time Part time
75
75
74
71
70
70
16
17
15
16
16
16
Because the cps collects information from employees rather
than employers, it is possible to obtain information on health
insurance that employees receive from sources other than their
own employer, such as others’ health plans. As shown in table
1, in February 1997, 79 percent of full-time, private-sector,
nonagricultural wage and salary workers were eligible to re
ceive health insurance from their employers. Another 15 per
cent were not eligible for coverage, and the remaining 7 per
cent did not provide information on eligibility.15 Eligibility
rates were much lower for part-time workers: twenty-eight
percent were eligible to participate in their em ployer’s health
plan in February 1997.
Of the 58.7 million full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural
wage and salary workers who were eligible to receive health
insurance coverage from their employer in February 1997,84
percent elected to do so. Another 8 percent of eligible workers
chose to receive coverage through a plan of a spouse or an
other family member. Less than 2 percent received coverage
from another source, such as an individually purchased plan.
About 6 percent were not covered by any health insurance,
despite being eligible to receive coverage from their employer.
The primary reason reported for not being in the em ployer’s
plan was that it was too expensive.
Eleven million full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural
wage and salary workers were not eligible to participate in
their em ployer’s health insurance plan. About 39 percent of
these workers participated in a health plan from some other
source. The remaining 61 percent, 6.7 million workers, had no
health insurance coverage at all. (See table 1.)
The February 1997 cps supplement found that, among full
time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage and salary workers,
employed men and women were about equally likely to be
eligible for employer-provided health insurance. As shown in
table 1, just under 8 in 10 in each group had the option of such
coverage at the time of the survey. Among those who were
eligible, men were more likely than women to accept cover
age from their employers— 87 percent compared with 80 per
cent. Women were more likely than men to be covered by their
spouse’s or another family m em ber’s insurance. Among work
ers who were not eligible for health insurance from their em
ployers, men were more likely than women to have no cover
age at all. (See table 1.)
Health insurance eligibility and coverage increase with age.
I
In February 1997, about 45 percent of full-time, private-sec
tor, nonagricultural wage and salary workers aged 16 to 19
were eligible for coverage from their employers, and a quar
ter of teens employed full time actually participated in their
employers’ health plan. (Table 2 provides information on plan
participation, but not on eligibility.) Eligibility increased to
65 percent for those aged 20 to 24, and half of the group par
ticipated. Eight in 10 workers aged 25 and older were eligible
for, and 7 in 10 participated in, employer-provided plans. Rates
were somewhat lower for persons aged 65 and older, but near
ly all persons in this group receive hospital and m edical
insurance through medicare, regardless of w hether they are
em ployed.16
ebs estimates
o f employer-provided health insurance. Accord
ing to the ebs, medical care benefits are provided to almost threefourths of the full-time civilian workers in the private sector and
State and local governments. Participation rates are higher among
State and local government workers (87 percent) than those in
the private sector (71 percent). Within the private sector, em
ployees of medium and large establishments are more likely to
participate in a health insurance plan (77 percent) than are those
working in small establishments (66 percent).
cps and ebs data
on health coverage,
ebs
estimates of health
e s tim a te s o f h e a lth c o v e r a g e fo r fu ll- tim e , p r iv a te - s e c to •r, n o n a g r ic u ltu r a l w a g e a n d s a la r y w o rk e rs , b y s o u rc e
o f c o v e r a g e , F e b ru a ry 1997
cps
[Numbers in thousands]
Total
Men
W omen
Total em ployed..................................................................................................
Eligible for employer-provided health p la n ....................................................................
Receive health coverage from any sou rce..................................................................
Receive coverage from em ployer...............................................................................
Receive coverage from spouse’s or other family member’s plan ...........................
Receive coverage from some other s o u rc e .............................................................
Not covered by any health p la n ...................................................................................
74,677
58,700
55,373
49,421
4,930
1,022
3,327
43,615
34,396
32,424
29,997
1,842
585
1,972
31,062
24,304
22,949
19,424
3,088
437
1,355
Not eligible for employer-provided health p la n .............................................................
Receive health coverage from source other than em ployer......................................
Not covered by any health plan ...................................................................................
10,984
4,282
6,702
6,258
2,151
4,108
4,726
2,131
2,594
Eligibility for employer-provided health plan unknow n ................................................
4,993
2,961
2,032
Total employed (percent distribution).............................................................................
Eligible for employer-provided health plan ................................................................
Not eligible for employer-provided health p la n .........................................................
Eligibility for employer-provided health plan unknow n.............................................
100
79
15
7
100
79
14
7
100
78
15
7
Eligible for employer-provided health plan (percent distribution)................................
Receive health coverage from any source..................................................................
Receive coverage from em ployer..............................................................................
Receive coverage from spouse’s or other family member’s p la n ...........................
Receive coverage from some other source...............................................................
Not covered by any health p la n ...................................................................................
100
94
84
8
2
6
100
94
87
5
2
6
100
94
80
13
2
6
Not eligible for employer-provided health plan (percent distribution)..........................
Receive health coverage from source other than em ployer......................................
Not covered by any health p la n ............ ......................................................... ............
100
39
61
100
34
100
45
66
55
C o v e ra g e
S ource :
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 7
Health and Retirement Benefits
insurance participation among full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural workers are 3 to 8 percentage points higher than
estimates derived from the cps. As shown in table 3, this is
true regardless of whether workers are in a union, are em
ployed in goods-producing or service-producing industries,
or are in white-collar, blue-collar, or service occupations.17
Among State and local government employees, the pattern
holds for nonunion workers, with the ebs showing 86-percent
participation and the cps 83 percent. Among government work
ers in unions, however, the cps estimate of 93 percent was
higher than the ebs estimate of 87 percent. One reason for the
generally higher rates from the ebs may be the inclusion in the
ebs participation measure of workers who have not yet satis
fied their em ployers’ length-of-service requirements needed
prior to enrolling in their health insurance plan. In the cps,
such workers may not describe themselves as being covered
by an employer-provided health plan.
Table 3.
cps and ebs estimates of the percent of full-time,
nonagricultural wage and salary workers in the
private sector and in State and local
government receiving employer-provided
health coverage, selected years
State and local
governm ent
Private sector
Worker category
CPS
T o tal.........................
White-collar occupations
Blue-collar occupations ..
Service occupations.......
Goods-producing
industries....................
Service-producing
industries....................
Union
.........................
N onunion.........................
EBS
CPS
EBS
1995
1997
1994-95
1995
1997
1994
66
72
65
38
66
72
65
40
71
76
73
46
87
88
—
—
—
—
—
—
87
87
89
84
73
73
77
—
—
97
63
63
68
—
—
87
84
64
84
64
87
68
93
83
93
83
87
86
Industry and occupation. The ebs and cps both provide infor
mation on participation in employee benefit plans by industry
N ote :
Dash indicates data are not available.
Current Population Survey, February 1995 and 1997; Employee
Benefits Survey, 1994 and 1995.
S ource:
Table 2.
estimates of the percent of full-time, privatesector, nonagricultural wage and salary workers
participating in employer-provided health plans,
by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin,
February 1997
cps
A ge and sex
Total
White
Black
Hispanic
origin
Both sexes
Total, 16 years and o ld e r.......
16 to 19 y e a rs .......................
20 to 24 ye a rs.......................
25 years and o ld e r...............
25 to 34 y e a rs .....................
35 to 44 ye a rs.....................
45 to 54 y e a rs .....................
55 to 64 y e a rs .....................
65 years and o ld e r.............
66
26
50
69
66
70
71
72
55
67
26
51
70
67
71
72
72
55
63
19
46
66
61
68
70
74
50
21
35
54
52
53
56
63
—
—
M en.
Total, 16 years and o ld e r.......
16 to 19 ye a rs.......................
20 to 24 yea rs.......................
25 years and o ld e r...............
25 to 34 ye a rs.....................
35 to 44 ye a rs....................
45 to 54 ye a rs.....................
55 to 64 ye a rs....................
65 years and o ld e r.............
69
27
49
72
68
74
75
74
59
70
28
50
73
68
75
76
75
57
63
22
42
66
62
68
71
73
51
23
31
55
53
54
60
67
—
Women
Total, 16 years and o ld e r.......
16 to 19 years.......................
20 to 24 years.......................
25 years and o ld e r...............
25 to 34 yea rs.....................
35 to 44 yea rs.....................
45 to 54 yea rs.....................
55 to 64 yea rs....................
65 years and o ld e r.............
63
23
51
65
63
65
66
69
50
63
24
51
65
64
65
65
69
51
63
16
51
65
60
68
69
74
49
16
41
52
51
53
50
57
N ote :
Dash indicates fewer than 75,000 workers.
S ource:
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
8 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and occupation. Because the size of the cps sample is consid
erably larger than that of the ebs , researchers using the cps can
calculate estimates for more detailed industries and occupa
tions than is possible by using the ebs .18
cps estimates in table 4 show that participation in an em
ployer-provided health plan was much more common among
full-time State and local government employees (88 percent)
than among private-sector employees (66 percent). Within the
major industry categories in the private sector, workers in min
ing and manufacturing were the most likely to participate in
an employer-provided health plan, with at least 8 in 10 em
ployees enrolled. High coverage in communications and pub
lic utilities (86 percent) drove up the overall rate for the trans
portation and public utilities industry. Workers in agriculture
(34 percent), construction (43 percent), and retail trade (49
percent) were the least likely to participate in an employerprovided health plan. Within retail trade, the participation rate
for full-time workers in eating and drinking places, at 28 per
cent, was especially low. By comparison, 57 percent of full
time workers in other retail industries received health insur
ance from their employer.
In virtually every industry shown in the table, workers in
unions had higher coverage rates than nonunion workers. As
indicated in the following tabulation, ebs estimates show that
union workers have higher participation rates in employerprovided health insurance plans than nonunion workers have,
both in medium and large establishments and in small estab
lishments (the union-nonunion difference in participation rates,
however, is greater in small establishm ents):19
Table 4.
estimates of the percent of full-time wage and salary workers participating in employer-provided health
plans, by industry and union membership status, February 1997
cps
Total em ployed
(thousands)
Industry
Total, 16 years and o ld e r....................................
Private s e c to r..................................................................
A griculture.....................................................................
Nonagricultural industries'...........................................
M ining...........................................................................
C onstruction................................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................
Durable g o o d s ..........................................................
Nondurable g o o d s ...................................................
Transportation and public utilities..............................
Transportation...........................................................
Communications and other public utilities..............
Wholesale tra d e ..........................................................
Retail tra d e ..................................................................
Eating and drinking places.......................................
Other retail tra d e .......................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ..........................
Services.......................................................................
Private ho useholds...................................................
Other s e rv ic e s ..........................................................
Business, auto, and repair services.......................
Personal services, except households.................
Entertainment and recreation................................
Professional se rv ic e s.............................................
H ospitals..................................................................
Health services, except hospitals..........................
Educational service s..............................................
Social services........................................................
Other professional services....................................
Government w orke rs......................................................
Federal...........................................................................
State and local'..............................................................
92,707
76,093
1,414
74,680
571
4,412
18,347
11,244
7,104
5,922
3,486
2,436
4,140
11,792
3,099
8,693
5,625
23,869
344
23,525
5,646
2,207
915
14,728
3,646
4,092
1,594
1,463
3,933
16,613
3,366
13,247
'Estimates shown in this table for union and nonunion workers combined
may differ slightly from estimates shown in other tables for full-time wage and
salary workers because of differences in the way survey responses are
weighted. Questions on union membership are asked of approximately onequarter of the CPS sample each month, whereas most other questions are
asked of the full sample. Estimates in the table were tabulated using quarter-
Medium and large establishments...
Small establishments......................
Percent_____
Union
Nonunion
85
74
94
64
Table 5 shows health plan participation rates estimated from
the cps for full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural workers,
by occupation. Eight in 10 professionals and nearly as many
managers were covered by employer-provided health insur
ance in 1997. Coverage was also relatively high among tech
nicians (73 percent) and workers in administrative support oc
cupations (69 percent). About two-thirds of persons employed
in precision production and operator occupations were cov
ered. Participation was lowest in service occupations (40 per
cent) and in farming and related jobs (35 percent).
Detailed provisions o f health plans. Establishments respond
ing to the e b s are asked to provide brochures that describe the
detailed provisions of their employee benefit plans, e b s data
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent of
em ployed
who are union
members
16
11
3
11
5
17
17
19
14
26
26
27
7
7
2
9
3
6
1
6
3
5
4
8
11
5
19
3
4
42
31
45
Percent of em ployed participating in em ployerprovided health plan
Total
70
66
34
66
83
43
80
81
78
77
70
86
72
49
28
57
73
63
10
64
55
50
59
70
78
59
79
52
77
87
84
88
Union m em ber
88
83
—
84
—
59
92
93
90
89
84
97
—
78
—
80
—
76
—
76
—
—
—
78
82
—
89
—
—
94
97
93
Not a union
m em ber
66
64
34
64
82
39
77
78
76
72
66
82
71
47
27
54
73
62
10
63
54
50
59
69
78
59
77
52
77
82
78
83
sample weights and therefore may differ slightly from estimates shown in other
tables in this article that were tabulated using full-sample weights.
N ote : Dash indicates fewer than 300,000 workers.
S ource: Current Population Survey, February 1997.
on these plans and their provisions are available from a variety
of b l s publications.20 It would be nearly impossible to collect
this type of information in the c p s , because most respondents
would not know the answers to many of the specific questions on
the details of their plans, and they would be unlikely to have
brochures to provide to cps interviewers.
Health care plans offered by employers can be categorized
into three types, based on the method of selecting medical serv
ice providers and paying for care: traditional fee-for-service plans,
preferred provider organizations ( p p o ’ s), and health maintenance
organizations ( h m o ’ s). Despite the growth in alternative health
plans, the traditional fee-for-service plan remains the most com
mon. About 33 percent of full-time workers in 1994-95 partici
pated in a fee-for-service plan, compared with 22 percent in a
ppo and 18 percent in an h m o . Table 6 shows the distribution of
types of plans, by major industry and occupation group. (See
box, p. 10, for a more detailed description of the three types of
health care plans.)
The eb s also provides information on the percentage of workMonthly Labor Review March 2000 9
Health and Retirement Benefits
ers covered by dental, vision, and prescription drug benefits. As
the following tabulation shows, nearly half of full-time civilian
employees in 1994-95 received dental care benefits from their
employer, one-fifth received vision care benefits, and 70 percent
received prescription drug benefits:
Percent
Medical Dental Vision
Total, all civilian workers ...
Private:
Medium and large
establishments............ .
Small establishments.... .
State and local
government.................. .
Drug
73
45
20
70
77
66
57
28
24
10
74
60
87
62
35
86
The extent of coverage differed in each of the three Employee
Benefits Surveys (of medium and large establishments, small
establishments, and State and local government), but, regard
less o f which survey is considered, prescription drug coverage
is the most common benefit and vision care the least common.
The following are other types of ebs information that are
published regularly :
• the kinds of specific medical, surgical, psychiatric, and
dental procedures the plan will cover;
• the amount of any premiums, deductibles, copayments,
or coinsurance that plan participants must pay;
• the m aximum out-of-pocket expenses that plan particiTable 5.
pants may incur for procedures;
• the maximum lifetime benefits the plan will pay for a
participant’s medical expenses;
• the procedures that plan participants must follow to ob
tain second surgical opinions, reimbursement for emer
gency treatment, and so forth.
When the bls National Compensation Survey is fully de
veloped, the sample design, data collection, and processing
procedures used to estimate participation in employee benefit
plans will be linked to measures of employer costs for ben
efits. These cost measures currently are published by the Bu
reau of Labor Statistics in the series titled “Employer Costs
for Employee Compensation.” Employer costs for health ben
efits accounted for 21 percent of the cost of benefits for civil
ian workers in 1999.21
Retirement benefits
CPS data on retirement benefits. The cps questions on partici
pation in retirement plans changed at least slightly each year
they were asked during the 1972-93 period, complicating his
torical comparisons of the estimates. Despite these changes,
the proportion of full-time wage and salary workers in the pri
vate sector who participated in employer-sponsored retirement
plans remained within a narrow range around 50 percent dur
ing the 1972-93 period.
The April 1993 cps included two questions designed pri
marily to determine whether an employee participated in an
estimates of the number and percent of full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage and salary
workers participating in employer-provided health plans, by occupation, February 1997
cps
[Numbers in thousands]
Eligible for employer
health plan
Occupation
Total, 16 years and o ld e r......................................
Managerial and professional specialty.............................
Executive, administrative, and m anagerial.....................
Professional specialty......................................................
Technical, sales, and administrative support...................
Technicians and related s u p p o rt.....................................
Sales occupations...........................................................
Administrative support, including clerical.......................
Service occupations..........................................................
Private household............................................................
Protective s e rvice .............................................................
Other service occupations..............................................
Precision production, craft, and re p a ir.............................
Operators, fabricators, and la bo rers................................
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors...........
Transportation and material m oving...............................
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers...
Farming, forestry, and fishing............................................
N ote :
Dash indicates fewer than 75,000 workers.
10 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Participating in em ployer
health plan
Total
em ployed
74,677
20,867
11,706
9,161
21,914
2,934
8,522
10,458
7,362
266
538
6,558
10,310
13,928
7,145
3,710
3,074
296
Number
Percent
Number
58,700
18,276
10,066
8,210
17,802
2,546
6,469
8,787
4,131
35
337
3,759
7,651
10,706
5,851
2,777
2,078
134
79
88
86
90
81
87
76
84
56
13
63
57
74
77
82
75
68
45
49,421
16,022
8,717
7,305
14,599
2,153
5,209
7,236
2,947
22
241
2,683
6,637
9,113
5,013
2,403
1,696
104
S ource :
Percent of
total
em ployed
66
77
74
80
67
73
61
69
40
8
45
41
64
65
70
65
55
35
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
Percent of
total
eligible
84
88
87
89
82
85
81
82
71
_
72
71
87
85
86
87
82
78
Types of health care plans measured in the Employee Benefits Survey
Fee-for-service plans allow patients to choose their own
health care providers. The plan reimburses the worker or
health care provider after services are received. Benefits
are typically subject to major medical limitations, includ
ing deductibles, coinsurance, out-of-pocket expense limits,
and maximum allowances.
In a preferred provider organization ( ppo), participants
are covered for medical services at a higher rate of reim
bursement if they receive care from designated hospitals,
physicians, laboratories, or dentists. Individuals may also
choose their own provider, although usually at a lower rate
employer-provided retirement plan:
1.
2.
Now I ’d like to ask about retirement benefits on your
job— not government programs like Social Security,
but employer-sponsored plans. This includes regular
pensions. It also includes other plans where money is
accumulated in an individual account for retirement—
like thrift, savings, profit-sharing, or stock plans. First,
does your employer or union have any such pension
or retirem ent plan for anyone in your com pany or
organization?
Yes
No
O
O
D on’t know
q
(Go to 2.)
Are you included in such a plan?
Yes
No
D on’t know
O
O
o
Persons who responded affirmatively to both questions are
counted as participating in an employer-provided retirement
plan. Persons who did not say “yes” to both questions still
could be counted as having retirement coverage if they re
sponded affirmatively to the following question, asked later
in the supplement about participation in a tax-deferred retire
ment plan:
Some retirement plans allow workers to make tax-deferred
contributions to the plan. For example, you might choose
to have your employer put part of your salary into a retire
ment account, and then you don’t pay income taxes on this
money until you take it out or retire. These plans are called
by different names, including 401 (k) plans, pre-tax plans,
salary reduction plans, and 403(b) plans. Do you partici
pate in a plan like this?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of reimbursement. As in fee-for-service plans, with ppo ’s ,
benefits are typically subject to lim itations, including
deductibles, coinsurance, out-of-pocket expense limits, and
maximum allowances that apply to many or all services.
Health maintenance organizations (hmo’s) provide a fixed
set of medical benefits for a prepaid fee. Most medical services
either are covered in full or require patients to pay a nominal
copayment, but generally restrict enrollees to specific provid
ers. There are two types of hmo: group/staff arrangements, with
services provided in central facilities, and individual practice
associations, with providers working from their own offices.
Yes
No
D on’t know
o
o
o
It is not clear why some respondents would answer “no” to
either of the two main questions on retirement coverage and
subsequently answer “yes” to the question on participation in
a tax-deferred retirement plan. Nevertheless, some respondents
did, and they are counted as participating in an employer-pro
vided retirement plan.22 The May 1983 and 1988 supplements
included similar questions on participation in tax-deferred re
tirement plans. The May 1979 supplement did not include such
a question, because tax-deferred retirement plans were a new
phenomenon at that time, just having been permitted under
Federal law with the passage of the Revenue Act of 1978.
In the February 1995 and 1997 cps supplements on work
ers in contingent and alternative work arrangements, the two
main questions on retirement benefits were similar, although
considerably more brief, than those asked in the April 1993
supplement:
1.
Does (fill in em ployer’s name) offer a pension or
retirement plan to any of its employees?
Yes
No
2.
o
(Go to 2.)
o
Are you included in this plan?
Yes
No
o
o
An affirmative response to both questions resulted in the
worker being counted as participating in an employer-spon
sored retirement plan. The February cps supplements did not
include any follow-up questions specifically about participa
tion in tax-deferred retirement plans. Despite the seemingly
substantial differences in the questions asked in 1995 and 1997
Monthly Labor Review March 2000
11
Health and Retirement Benefits
Table 6.
estimates of the percent of full-time, nonagricultural employees participating in employer-provided health plans,
by type of plan, 1994-95
ebs
Total
Fee for
service
Health
m aintenance
organization
Preferred
provider
organization
Total, private sector and State and local government,
1994-95 ............................................................................
73
33
18
22
White-collar occupations..................................................................
Blue-collar occupations....................................................................
Service occupations.........................................................................
78
74
54
32
38
21
21
15
13
24
20
18
U nion..................................................................................................
N onunion............................................................................................
87
70
42
30
21
17
22
22
Goods-producing indu stries............................................................
Service-producing industries...........................................................
77
72
39
30
17
19
21
22
Private sector, 1 9 9 4 -9 5 ......................................................................
71
32
17
21
White-collar occupations.................................................................
Blue-collar occupations...................................................................
Service occupations.......................................................................
76
73
46
32
39
18
20
14
11
23
19
17
U n io n ..........................................................................................
N onunion..........................................................................................
87
68
49
30
16
17
21
21
Goods-producing industries...........................................................
Service-producing indu stries.........................................................
77
68
39
29
17
17
20
21
Medium and large establishments, 1995.......................................
Small establishments, 1994 ...........................................................
77
66
28
36
21
13
26
16
State and local government, 1 9 9 4 .....................................................
87
33
26
26
White-collar occupations.................................................................
Blue-collar occupations..... .............................................................
Service occu pation s.......................................................................
87
89
84
34
26
35
26
27
23
26
34
23
U n io n ................................................................................................
N onunion.............................................................................
87
86
31
35
30
21
22
Goods-producing industries...........................................................
Service-producing indu stries.........................................................
97
87
34
12
26
51
26
Characteristic
N ote: Sums of percentages participating in each type of health plan do
not equal total because about 1 percent of full-time workers are covered by
other plans, primarily exclusive-provider organizations, which are groups of
hospitals and physicians that contract to provide medical services. Medium and
compared with those asked in 1993, there was little difference
in the estimated proportion of employed private, nonagricul
tural wage and salary workers participating in employer-pro
vided retirement plans, as shown in the following tabulation:
Percent
Total employed................
Fulltime........... ..............
Part time.........................
1993
1995
44
51
13
42
49
12
ebs data
1997
43
50
13
on retirement plans. Information gathered from em
ployers in the 1994-95 ebs shows that 66 percent of all full-time
workers in private industry and State and local government par
ticipate in employer-sponsored retirement plans. Participation
among government workers is higher (95 percent) than those in
12 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33
30
large establishments are those with 100 or more workers. Small establishments
have fewer than 100 workers.
S ource:
Employee Benefits Survey, 1994 and 1995.
private industry (60 percent).
cps and ebs estimates
of retirement plan coverage, cps estimates
of participation in retirement plans are considerably lower than
estimates derived from the ebs. Among full-time workers, the
gap in estimates between the two surveys is 10 or more percent
age points, regardless of whether the workers are union or non
union, in goods-producing or service-producing industries, or in
white-collar, blue-collar, or service occupations. (See table 7.)
Furthermore, the gap in retirement coverage between the sur
veys is larger than that found for health coverage.
There also are large differences between the surveys in the
estimated retirement plan participation rates for workers in State
and local governments. According to the cps, 86 percent of
full-time State and local government employees participated
in an employer-provided retirement plan in 1995, and 87 per-
Table 7.
ops and ebs estimates
of the percent of full-time, nonagricultural wage and salary workers participating
in employer-provided retirement plans, selected years
State and local governrrlent
Private sector
Worker category
1997
86
—
—
87
—
—
95
95
95
93
—
—
99
95
93
82
93
96
1995
1997
T o ta l................................................................
White-collar occupations.........................................
Blue-collar occupations...........................................
Service occupations.................................................
49
56
45
22
50
57
46
23
60
67
60
35
Goods-producing indu stries....................................
Service-producing industries...................................
55
45
56
46
70
56
—
U nion..........................................................................
Nonunion...................................................................
75
44
73
46
86
56
92
82
N ote :
1994
1995
1994-95
S ource :
EBS
CPS
EBS
CPS
Dash indicates data are not available.
Current Population Survey, February 1995 and 1997; Employee Benefits Survey, 1994 and 1995.
cent participated in 1997. By comparison, the participation
rate estimated from the 1994 ebs was 95 percent. Among union
ized workers, however, there was essentially no difference:
both the cps and the ebs show that about 93 percent of union
ized State and local government employees participated in a
retirement plan. Among nonunion public-sector workers, 82
percent participated in a plan according to the cps, compared
with 96 percent according to the ebs .
It is difficult to explain why the cps estimates of retirement
plan coverage systematically tend to be lower than those de
rived from the ebs . It also is not clear why the gap between the
surveys is larger for retirement benefits than for health ben
efits. If one assumes that the ebs estimates are closer to the
true coverage rates that exist in the workforce, then it may be
that the underestimates from the cps result from some respond
ents’ lack of knowledge about their own benefits coverage or
the benefits coverage of other household residents for whom
they responded. More respondents may be able to answer ques
tions correctly about health coverage than about retirement
coverage because health benefits presumably are used more
frequently by a larger number of cps respondents. Unless a
worker expects to retire in the fairly near future and thus may
think about or discuss retirement issues frequently, many cps
respondents may know little, if anything, about the w orker’s
participation in an employer-provided retirement plan. Fur
thermore, as with health care, the ebs participation measure
includes workers who have not yet satisfied their em ployer’s
length-of-service requirement for participation in the retire
ment plan. These reasons for the gap in estimates between the
cps and ebs are speculative, but regardless of the reason, re
searchers, policymakers, and other users of the data should be
aware that the estimated coverage rates from the ebs are con
siderably higher than those from the cps.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Demographic data on retirement coverage.
As shown in table
8, retirement plan participation rates estimated from the cps
are low for full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage and
salary workers aged 16 to 19 and 20 to 24. Participation rates
then rise with age for men and women, until peaking at 60
percent among workers aged 45 to 54 and 55 to 64. Full-time
workers aged 65 and older are only about two-thirds as likely
as 45- to 54-year-olds and 55- to 64-year-olds to participate in
a retirement plan. Overall, men are slightly more likely than
women to participate in a plan, although the gap has narrowed
considerably since the early 1970s, as the participation rate
for men edged down slightly while the rate for women rose by
10 percentage points. The gap between m en’s and wom en’s
retirement plan participation rates is considerably larger among
workers aged 45 and older than it is among workers in younger
age groups. Whites are slightly more likely than blacks to par
ticipate in a retirement plan, and both groups are considerably
more likely than Hispanics to participate.
Industry and occupation. The cps data in table 9 show that full
time workers in manufacturing and in finance, insurance, and
real estate had the highest retirement plan participation rate (62
percent) among the major private, nonagricultural industries in
1997. The participation rate for workers in transportation and
public utilities (61 percent) was also high, although there was a
sizable gap in rates between full-time workers in transportation
(49 percent) and those in communications and public utilities
(77 percent). Full-time workers in retail trade (31 percent)
and construction (29 percent) had the lowest retirement plan
participation rates in the private, nonagricultural sector. Work
ers in those industries were about 3 times as likely as agricul
tural workers were to participate in a plan. Full-time workers
in government were considerably more likely than those in the
Monthly Labor Review March 2000
13
Health and Retirement Benefits
private sector to participate in a retirement plan. The rate for
Federal employees was 88 percent in 1997, while 87 percent
of State and local government workers participated in a retire
ment plan.23
Table 10 shows retirement plan participation rates estimated
from the cps for full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural work
ers, by occupation. Sixty-five percent of workers in profes
sional specialty occupations participated in a retirement plan,
as did 60 percent of workers in executive, administrative, and
managerial occupations. Fifty-nine percent of technicians and
related support workers and 54 percent of administrative sup
port workers (including clerical workers) participated in a plan.
Just under half of full-time sales workers; operators, fabrica
tors, and laborers; and precision production, craft, and repair
workers participated in a plan. Less than a quarter of workers
in service occupations had retirement plan coverage.
Characteristics o f retirement plans. In addition to the ques
tions used to determine whether workers participated in retire
ment plans, the May 1988 and April 1993 cps supplements
included questions about the characteristics of those plans.24
Table 8.
cps estimates
of the percent of full-time, privatesector, nonagricultural wage and salary workers
participating in employer-provided retirement
plans, by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin,
February 1997
A ge and sex
Total
White
Black
Hispanic
origin
Both sexes
Total, 16 years and o ld e r...........
16 to 19 yea rs...........................
20 to 24 yea rs...........................
25 years and o ld e r...................
25 to 34 years.........................
35 to 44 yea rs.........................
45 to 54 yea rs.........................
55 to 64 yea rs.........................
65 years and o ld e r.................
50
11
22
54
46
57
60
60
40
51
11
22
55
47
58
61
60
41
45
8
21
49
40
53
56
58
28
7
14
32
27
34
36
36
—
—
Men
Total, 16 years and o ld e r...........
16 to 19 yea rs...........................
20 to 24 yea rs...........................
25 years and o ld e r....................
25 to 34 yea rs.........................
35 to 44 yea rs.........................
45 to 54 yea rs.........................
55 to 64 years.........................
65 years and o ld e r.................
51
13
21
55
46
58
63
62
43
52
12
22
56
47
59
64
64
43
46
20
50
42
53
56
59
28
10
13
31
26
32
37
37
—
—
Women
Total, 16 years and o ld e r...........
16 to 19 yea rs...........................
20 to 24 yea rs...........................
25 years and o ld e r....................
25 to 34 yea rs.........................
35 to 44 yea rs.........................
45 to 54 yea rs.........................
55 to 64 yea rs.........................
65 years and o ld e r.................
48
9
22
52
46
55
56
56
35
49
9
23
53
47
55
56
55
37
45
6
22
49
38
54
55
58
29
0
17
33
29
37
33
34
—
N ote :
Dash indicates fewer than 75,000 workers.
S ource:
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
14 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—
—
Table 9.
cps estimates of the percent of full-time wage
and salary workers participating in employerprovided retirement plans, by industry and
union membership status, February 1997
Industry
Total, 16 years and o ld e r........
Private s e c to r.........................................
A griculture..........................................
Nonagricultural industries'.................
M in in g .............................................
Construction....................................
M anufacturing................................
Durable g o o d s ............................
Nondurable g o o d s ......................
Transportation and public utilities ..
Transportation.............................
Communications and other
public u tilitie s ...........................
Wholesale tra d e .............................
Retail tra d e ......................................
Eating and drinking p la c e s ........
Other retail tra de.........................
Finance, insurance, and real
estate.........................................
S ervices..........................................
Private households.....................
Other service s............................
Business, auto, and repair
services.................................
Personal services, except
private households...............
Entertainment and recreation
services.................................
Professional services.............
H ospitals.............................
Health services, except
hospitals...........................
Educational se rvice s..........
Social se rvice s...................
Other professional services
Government w orke rs...........................
F ederal...............................................
State and local l ..................................
Total
Union Not a union
member
member
55
49
11
49
58
29
62
64
61
61
49
82
73
—
73
—
58
79
82
72
84
76
50
46
10
46
58
23
59
59
59
52
40
77
51
31
10
39
67
71
49
29
10
36
62
45
1
46
—
66
—
66
62
44
1
45
33
—
33
24
—
24
26
56
72
—
76
72
25
54
72
—
41
69
24
60
83
85
82
42
74
26
60
87
88
87
95
—
64
—
95
—
—
93
95
93
1Estimates shown in this table for union and nonunion workers combined
may differ slightly from estimates shown in other tables for full-time wage and
salary workers because of differences in the way survey responses are
weighted. Questions on union membership are asked of approximately onequarter of the CPS sample each month, whereas most other questions are
asked of the full sample. Estimates in this table were tabulated using quartersample weights and therefore may differ slightly from estimates shown in other
tables in this article that were tabulated using full-sample weights.
N ote :
Dash indicates fewer than 300,000 workers.
S ource:
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
One key feature of retirement plans is the type of plan. Broadly
speaking, there are two types of retirement plans: defined-benefit and defined-contribution plans. Defined-benefit plans le
gally obligate employers to pay retirees an annuity that is based
on a specified formula. The size of the benefit usually depends
on the retiree’s preretirement salary and number of years of
service with the employer. The employer is responsible for
making contributions to the pension fund, investing the fund’s
assets, and paying benefits. The employer also bears the risk if
investments perform poorly.
Defined-contribution plans typically specify how much an
employer has agreed to contribute to each employed participant’s
individual account, but do not stipulate the amount of benefits
that will be paid during retirement.25 Many defined-contribution plans also permit employees to contribute to their accounts,
often on a tax-deferred basis. The size of the benefit each par
ticipant receives during retirement depends on the amount the
employer and employee contributed to the plan and the invest
ment earnings on the contributions. There are several types of
defined-contribution plans, including tax-deferred 401(k),
403(b), and Section 457 plans, which are named after the sec
tions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code that permit them to be
established. Other types of defined-contribution plans include
deferred profit-sharing plans, money purchase pension plans,
employee stock ownership plans, and stock bonus plans.
ebs estimates of retirement plan coverage show that 42 per
cent of full-time workers are covered by a defined-benefit plan,
compared with 39 percent by a defined-contribution plan. Fif
teen percent participate in both types of plans. Nearly all State
and local government workers with retirement coverage partici
pate in a defined-benefit plan. Unionized workers in the private
sector are much more likely to participate in a defined-benefit
plan than in a defined-contribution plan. (See table 11.)
There is some doubt concerning whether respondents to
household surveys such as the cps are able to provide informa
tion on the types of retirement plans they participate in as accu
rately as respondents to establishment surveys. A look at the data
suggests that cps responses in this regard are not without prob
lems. In the April 1993 cps, 53 percent of private-sector retire
ment plan participants (full and part time combined) reported
that they were participating in a defined-benefit plan, 46 percent
responded that they were in an “individual account” or definedcontribution plan, 7 percent said that they participated in some
“other” type of plan, and 12 percent did not know the type of
plan they were in. (The sum of these percentages is greater than
100, because some workers participate in more than one type of
plan.) By comparison, estimates from the ebs show that 55 per
cent of private-sector retirement plan participants in 1994-95
were in a defined-benefit plan, a figure similar to the 53 percent
estimated from the April 1993 cps. For defined-contribution plans,
however, estimates from the two surveys differ widely. Accord
ing to the ebs, 73 percent of private-sector retirement plan par
ticipants were in a defined-contribution plan, a considerably
higher proportion than the cps estimate (46 percent).
The large discrepancy in the estimated proportions par
ticipating in defined-contribution retirement plans signals one
problem with the cps responses, but there also are several other
problems. First, under Internal Revenue Service regulations,
all retirement plans are either defined-benefit or defined-con
tribution plans; there is no “other” plan type. The implausible
“other” responses, along with the proportion of participants
who did not know the type of plan they were in, compose
nearly a fifth of the cps respondents who participated in em
ployer-provided retirement plans in April 1993. These prob
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
lems raise doubts about the reliability of cps information on
the types of retirement plans in which workers participate. Some
cps respondents may not have sufficient knowledge of employee
benefit plans and terminology to provide detailed information
about their provisions. And the problem may be more acute
with proxy responses.
Using brochures obtained from establishments, the ebs as
certains a variety of details about retirement plans. This infor
mation is nearly impossible to obtain in the cps . ebs data on the
details of these plans are available from a variety of b l s pub
lications.26 Among such details are the following:
• age and service eligibility requirements for retirement
• formulas used to determine the payments retirees receive
from defined-benefit plans
• how defined-benefit plan payments are coordinated with
Social Security payments
• eligibility and benefit levels for disability retirement
• payments to survivors after the employee’s or retiree’s
death
• increases in postretirement benefits
• specific types of defined-contribution plans, such as sav
ings and thrift, deferred profit-sharing, or stock plans
• methods used to determine the amount of employer con
tributions to defined-contribution plans
• vesting schedules that determine how much employees
can receive from defined-benefit or defined-contribu
tion plans if they leave the employer before retirement
As described earlier, the bls National Compensation Survey
that is currently being developed will link information on plan
participation and characteristics with data on employer costs.
Such cost information currently is provided in the series on
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation.27
Tea-deferred, retirement plans.
Despite the problems with the
data on participation in defined-benefit and defined-con
tribution retirement plans, the questions in the April 1993
supplement that asked specifically about participation in taxdeferred retirement plans may provide useful information. Re
spondents may know more about these tax-deferred plans be
cause, unlike determining their participation in many other types
of retirement plans, workers must actively choose whether to
participate in tax-deferred retirement plans and how much to
contribute to them. Workers who participate in such plans also
frequently are reminded of their participation because their
pay stubs may indicate the amount deducted from their pay
and invested in the tax-deferred plan. Many plan participants
also receive monthly, quarterly, or annual financial statements
that indicate how much money is in their account, as well as
the amount of contributions and investment performance since
the previous statement. The first four cps questions on taxdeferred retirement plans read as follows (the first question
cps
Monthly Labor Review March 2000
15
Health and Retirement Benefits
was presented earlier in this article):
1. Some retirement plans allow workers to make tax-de
ferred contributions to the plan. For example, you might choose
to have your employer put part of your salary into a retirement
account, and then you don’t pay income taxes on this money
until you take it out or retire. These plans are called by different
names, including 401(k) plans, pre-tax plans, salary reduction
plans, and 403(b) plans. Do you participate in a plan like this?
Yes
No
D on’t know
2.
O
O
(Go to 3.)
(Go to 2.)
q
Does your employer offer you a plan like this?
Yes
No
D on’t know
O
O
o
(Go to4.)
3.
Approximately what percent of your gross pay will
you contribute to the plan this year?
_________%
D on’t know
Refused
o
(Go to 4.)
q
q
4.
If you were to contribute $ 100 to this plan, how much
would your employer contribute?
$ ____
O
Nothing
Would contribute something,
but don’t know how much
Contribution rate varies
D on’t know
o
o
o
o
The first question provides information on the number of
workers who participate in tax-deferred retirement plans. As
table 12 shows, 28 percent of full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage and salary workers participated in a tax-de
ferred retirement plan in April 1993, according to the cps. The
comparable ebs estimate for 1994-95 is 38 percent. As with
the estimates on participation in all types of retirement plans,
the cps estimate for participation in tax-deferred plans is con
siderably lower than the ebs estimate. Again, it is not clear
why this difference occurs, although one could speculate that
employers are better able to provide accurate information on
participation in retirement plans than are workers or their proxy
respondents.
In conjunction with the first cps question on tax-deferred
retirement plans, the second question provides information
on the number of workers who are eligible to participate in a
16 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
plan, regardless of whether they actually contribute to it. To
gether, these two questions can be used to determine the pro
portion of eligible workers who choose to contribute to a plan.
The ebs , by comparison, does not provide a direct measure of
workers who are eligible to participate.28 According to the
cps , 40 percent of full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural
wage and salary workers were eligible to participate in a taxdeferred retirement plan in April 1993, and of those eligible,
68 percent actually chose to contribute to the plan. Readers
should keep in mind that the cps estimate of eligible workers
may have its flaws, because some respondents— especially
proxies— may not be aware that a worker is eligible for a plan
if he or she does not actually contribute to it. Thus, the cps
may understate eligibility even more than it appears to under
state participation. Nevertheless, it is useful for employers,
public policymakers, and others to have some measure of how
many workers who were offered a tax-deferred retirement plan
take advantage of the opportunity to invest in it.
The third cps question on tax-deferred retirement plans pro
vides information on the percentage of pay that participants con
tributed to the plan. Among full-time participants in April 1993,
only 73 percent responded with the percentage of their pay that
they contributed to the plan; the remaining 27 percent either did
not know the percentage or did not respond. There is no way to
verify the accuracy of the responses of participants who did re
spond with a percentage, but some undoubtedly are inaccurate,
especially when obtained from proxies. The ebs used to include
a question on the average percentage of pay that all participants
in an establishment contributed to their tax-deferred retirement
plan. As with the cps question, the nonresponse rate was high,
and many of the responses that employers provided may not
have been accurate. Apparently, many employers did not have
the information organized in a way that would enable them to
provide an accurate response easily. Because of these prob
lems, the question was eliminated from the ebs .
The fourth cps question on tax-deferred retirement plans
asks whether employers supplement employee contributions
and, if so, the amount of the employer contribution. As shown
in table 12,68 percent of full-time plan participants received a
contribution from their employer, according to the April 1993
cps . The estimate from the 1994-95 ebs , by comparison, was
85 percent. Many cps respondents may not be familiar with
the details concerning contributions to a plan from their em
ployers, whereas the documentation that establishments pro
vide to ebs data collectors usually describes in detail whether
and how much the employer contributes to a plan. This dispar
ity suggests that the ebs information on employer contribu
tions is more accurate than that of the cps.
Linked surveys
It is clearly beneficial for researchers, policymakers, and oth
ers to have information on the relationship between participa-
Table 10.
cps estimates of the number and percent of
full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage
and salary workers participating in employerprovided retirement plans, by occupation,
February 1997
[Numbers in thousands]
Occupation
Total, 16 years and o ld e r........
Managerial and professional
specialty.......................................
Executive, administrative,
and m anagerial...........................
Professional specialty.....................
Technical, sales,
and administrative s u p p o rt.........
Technicians and related s u p p o rt....
Sales occupations...........................
Administrative support, including
clerical..........................................
Service occupations.........................
Private household...........................
Protective s e rvice ...........................
Other service occupations.............
Precision production, craft,
and re p a ir.....................................
Operators, fabricators,
and labo rers................................
Machine operators, assemblers,
and inspectors...........................
Transportation and material
m o v in g ........................................
Handlers, equipment cleaners,
helpers, and la b o re rs .................
Farming, forestry, and fishing...........
S ource :
Total
em ployed
Participating in
retirement plan
Number
Percent
74,677
37,206
50
20,867
12,959
62
11,706
9,161
6,999
5,961
60
65
21,914
2,934
8,522
11,234
1,716
3,889
51
59
46
10,458
7,362
266
538
6,558
5,628
1,696
10
148
1,538
54
23
4
28
23
10,310
4,876
47
13,928
6,390
46
7,145
3,515
49
3,710
1,720
46
3,074
296
1,156
51
38
17
Current Population Survey, February 1997.
tion in employee benefit plans and the sex, age, race, marital
status, and other demographic characteristics of workers. De
mographic information is best obtained from household sur
veys like the cps. A s the previous sections have shown, how
ever, the cps is not as well suited as the ebs to provide accurate
information on employee benefits. Accordingly, rather than
asking household respondents to provide information on em
ployee benefits and asking employers to provide demographic
information, it may be preferable to ask each source for the
information that they can provide more accurately. Some re
searchers have taken such an approach and developed data
sources that combine information obtained from both employ
ers and their workers. The development of these linked em
ployer-employee data sets has increased in the United States
in recent years, although some other industrialized countries
are more advanced than the United States in that regard. In
deed, a May 1998 conference on linked employer-employee
data, held in Washington, dc , attracted social scientists and
statisticians from more than 20 countries.29
Linked em ployer-em ployee data sets take a variety of
forms. Some involve linking existing household survey data
with existing administrative or survey data from establish
ments. Other data sets have been designed specifically to col
lect information from employers as well as employees. The
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
administrators of such surveys may sample and gather infor
mation from establishments and subsequently ask questions
of a sample of employees within those establishments. The
1995 bls Survey of Employer-Provided Training (sept95) was
designed in this way.30 A 1993 survey sponsored by the W. E.
Upjohn Institute for Employment Research used the same ap
proach to obtain information from employers and workers
regarding on-the-job training, wages, schooling, experience,
and employee benefits.31
An alternative approach to designing linked surveys is to
sample households and ask the individuals in them to provide
information about themselves, along with the names, addresses,
and telephone numbers of their employers. With the consent
of the employees, data collectors then contact the employers
and gather additional information from them. The bls National
Longitudinal Surveys ( nls) have used this approach in a num
ber of instances. Recently, information on participation in reTable 11
ebs estimates of the percent of full-time,
nonagricultural employees participating in
employer-provided retirement plans, 1994-95
Characteristic
Total
Defined
benefit
Defined
contribution
Total, private sector and State
and local government,
1994-95 ......................................
66
42
39
White-collar occupations.....................
Blue-collar occupations........................
Service occupations............................
73
62
47
46
38
35
44
38
19
U nion.....................................................
N onunion..............................................
89
60
84
32
23
42
Goods-producing indu stries...............
Service-producing industries..............
70
64
45
41
48
35
Private sector, 1 9 94-9 5.........................
60
33
44
White-collar occupations.....................
Blue-collar occupations.......................
Service occupations............................
67
60
35
35
35
21
53
40
21
U nion.....................................................
Nonunion..............................................
86
56
78
26
36
46
Goods-producing indu stries...............
Service-producing industries..............
70
56
45
28
48
42
Medium and large establishments,
1995....................................................
Small establishments, 1994................
80
42
52
15
55
34
State and local government, 1 9 9 4 ........
95
91
9
White-collar occupations.......................
Blue-collar occupations.......................
Service occupations............................
95
95
93
91
91
90
9
9
9
U nion.....................................................
Nonunion..............................................
93
96
94
88
4
13
Goods-producing indu stries...............
Service-producing industries..............
99
95
80
91
20
9
N ote : Medium and large establishments are those with 100 or more
workers. Small establishments have fewer than 100 workers.
S ource : Employee Benefits Survey, 1994-95.___________________
Monthly Labor Review March 2000
17
Health and Retirement Benefits
Table 12.
and
estimates of the number and percent of full-time, private-sector, nonagricultural wage and salary
workers participating in employer-provided tax-deferred defined-contribution retirement plans, selected years
I
c p s
ebs
[Numbers in thousands]
Employee Benefits Survey
Participation in tax-deferred retirement plan
Total, 1994-95
Medium and large
establishments,
1995
Small
establishments,
1994
Current
Population
Survey, April
1993
Total employees..........................................................
Participate in tax-deferred p la n s .............................
With employer contributions...................................
No employer contributions1.....................................
Do not participate in tax-deferred pla n s.................
69,284
26,288
22,261
4,027
42,996
33,374
18,250
15,156
3,094
15,124
35,910
8,038
7,105
933
27,872
68,874
19,044
13,044
6,000
49,830
Percent of em ployees................................................
Participate in tax-deferred p la n s .............................
With employer contributions..................................
No employer contributions’.....................................
Do not participate in tax-deferred p la n s .................
100
38
32
6
62
100
55
45
9
45
100
22
20
3
78
100
28
19
9
72
1The Current Population Survey estimate of the number of participants in
tax-deferred retirement plans who received no employer contributions includes
participants who explicitly said their accounts received no employer contribu
tions, as well as those who refused to answer or did not know whether the
employer contributed.
tirement plans was collected from respondents to the nls M a
ture Women’s survey, and detailed information about the plans
was subsequently obtained from employers.32
Linked employer-employee data sets have two primary ob
jectives. One objective is to compare how employers and em
ployees respond to the same questions, thereby providing re
searchers with insight on the accuracy of responses to their
surveys. A 1983 study, for example, examined two different
linked data sets that included information from employers and
their workers on the em ployers’ industries, the w orkers’ oc
cupations, coverage under a union contract, weekly hours
worked, and wages.33
Another, more common, objective of linked data sets is to
obtain the kinds of information from employers and employ
ees that each can provide more easily and accurately. Ideally,
the resulting data set could afford more accurate information
without having to ask household or establishment respondents
questions that they are not well equipped to answer. In addi
tion to improving accuracy and reducing the burden on re
spondents— by asking individuals and establishments only
those questions they can most easily and accurately answer—
linked data sets also provide researchers and policymakers with
insights into the interactions between employers and workers.
Information on these interactions can be useful for investigat
ing a variety of research questions, such as how employers
and workers negotiate pay rates.34 Employer-employee inter
actions cannot be measured using traditional household or es
tablishment data sources alone.
Linked data sets have their advantages over traditional
household and establishment information sources, but they also
18 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Note: Medium and large establishments are those with 100 or more work
ers. Small establishments have fewer than 100 workers.
S ource: Employee Benefits Survey, 1994 and 1995; Current Population
Survey, April 1993.
have their problems. For example, successfully linking exist
ing household and establishment data requires having suffi
cient information to identify employers from the one survey
with household members from the other, but such identifying
information is not always available or complete. Moreover,
surveys designed specifically to collect information from em
ployers and their workers typically cost more to administer
than traditional surveys, because employers and employees
both must be contacted. Accordingly, response rates often are
lower, because the need to contact both kinds of respondents
increases the probability that sampled establishments or indi
viduals may be unable or unwilling to respond.35 Also, as with
traditional surveys, linked surveys present concerns about the
privacy of participants and the confidentiality of their responses.
And such concerns are heightened in linked surveys because,
for instance, employees may feel uncomfortable about having
their employers contacted, and employers likewise may not
want their employees to be contacted.
article has identified some of the difficulties that are
inherent in collecting detailed inform ation on health and
retirem ent benefits in the household-based C urrent Popu
lation Survey. The establishm ent-based Em ployee Benefits
Survey provides more accurate inform ation on em ployee
benefits, but it is not well suited to providing inform ation
on w orkers’ dem ographic characteristics or, for exam ple,
health insurance that they receive from sources other than
their own em ployers. If the difficulties with linked surveys
regarding cost, response rates, and confidentiality can be
resolved, such a survey design may enable researchers to
T his
com bine the best attributes of household and establishment
data sources to obtain more accurate and useful information
on employee benefits. No such linkage is planned by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics at this time, however.
□
Notes
' For a more complete discussion o f the elements of job quality, includ
ing employee benefits, see Joseph R. Meisenheimer II, “The services indus
try in the ‘good’ versus ‘bad’ jobs debate,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February
1998, pp. 22-47.
2 E m p lo y e r C o s ts f o r E m p lo y e e C o m p e n s a tio n — M a rc h 1 9 9 9 ,
173 (U.S. Department o f Labor, June 24, 1999).
usdl
99-
3 See, for example, Sylvester Schieber and John Shoven, eds. P u b lic
m a , mit Press, 1997).
P o lic y T o w a rd P e n s io n s (Cambridge,
4 The importance o f having accurate information to develop public policy
on health care is discussed by Linda T. Bilheimer and Robert D. Reischauer
in “Confessions o f the estimators: Numbers and health reform,” H e a lth A f
f a ir s , Spring 1995, pp. 37-55.
5 For more information on the National Compensation Survey, see Harriet
G. Weinstein, “Overview of the nc s : Summer 1998,” C o m p e n sa tio n a n d W o rk
in g C o n d itio n s , Summer 1998, pp. 41-44.
6 All o f these supplements included questions on employer-provided
health and retirement benefits. The May 1988 and April 1993 supplements
also included questions on short- and long-term disability benefits, which
are not analyzed in this article.
7 The March supplement to the cps has included questions on health
insurance coverage since 1980. These questions focus on coverage from all
sources and have provided less reliable information than the supplements on
employer-provided health insurance benefits. See Mark C. Berger, Dan A.
Black, and Frank A. Scott, “How Well Do We Measure Employer-Provided
Health Insurance Coverage?” C o n te m p o r a r y E c o n o m ic P o lic y , July 1998,
pp. 356-67.
8 Information on educational levels also appears to be more easily ob
tained from household surveys than from establishment sources. Informa
tion on educational attainment is available each month from the cps , and
estimates are published in the monthly news release, Th e E m p lo y m e n t S itu
a tio n , and in the bls publication, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s .
B ls recently asked employers in four metropolitan areas to provide in
formation on educational attainment in test studies o f the National Com
pensation Survey. These tests showed that employers were unable to pro
vide information on educational attainment for 7 in 10 workers. Although
it may surprise some readers that employers so often were unable to pro
vide information about the educational attainment o f their workers, it is
important to remember that employers may not always find such informa
tion relevant. For example, many service and laborer occupations do not
require academic credentials to perform the job adequately. Even in spe
cialized trades like plumbing and carpentry, work experience in the occu
pation is far more relevant to employers than is educational attainment.
See John E. Buckley, “Collecting Data on Human Capital Variables,” C o m
p e n s a tio n a n d W o rk in g C o n d itio n s , Fall 1998, pp. 29-31.
9 In addition to the employment estimates from the cps , employment
estimates also are available from the bls Current Employment Statistics ( ces )
program, a monthly survey of nonfarm establishments that obtains informa
tion on employment, hours, and earnings by industry. To illustrate the differ
ences that can occur between cps and ces employment estimates for detailed
industries, consider the personnel supply services industry, which consists
largely o f firms that provide temporary employees to establishments in other
industries. The 1998 annual average employment level estimated from the
cps for this industry was about 1 million. The employment estimate from the
ces program was 3.2 million. In part, this large discrepancy stems from the
different treatment o f multiple jobholders in each survey. Persons who are
paid by more than one “temporary-help” or “staffing” firm during a survey
reference period are counted only once in the cps ; in the ces program, these
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
individuals are counted in the employment records o f each staffing firm for
which they worked. A larger part o f the discrepancy probably results from
the different way in which the industry is reported in the two surveys. Many
cps respondents may report the industry o f the client to which a temporary
worker was assigned, rather than that of the staffing firm which provided
the worker to the client. By comparison, respondents to the ces program
report the industry of the establishment that pays the worker— that is, the
staffing firm. Thus, if one wants to know how many people are employed
in the personnel supply services industry, establishment data are a more
reliable source of information than the c p s .
10 This does not, of course, imply that proxy responses are always unre
liable. In fact, for many important items in the c ps , such as a person’s em
ployment or unemployment status, proxy responses may be as reliable as
self-responses, at least when an adult respondent answers questions about
the labor force activity o f another adult in the household. Assessing the
accuracy o f a response is more ambiguous when the response is from an
adult who is answering questions about the labor force activity o f youths in
the household. For a more detailed discussion o f proxy responses in the
cps , see Brian A. Kojetin and Judith M. Tanur, “Proxies for Youths and
Adults: Communication and Reports o f Job Search,” 1 9 9 6 P r o c e e d in g s o f
th e S e c tio n o n S u r v e y R e s e a r c h M e th o d s , vol. 1 (Alexandria, va , American
Statistical Association, 1997), pp. 254-59. See also Norman Bowers, “Youth
labor force activity: alternative surveys compared,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e
v ie w , March 1981, pp. 3-1 7 . Without proxy responses, the cps would cost
far more to administer because cps interviewers typically would have to
contact sampled households several times to obtain information from each
resident of the household. The only alternative to using proxy responses or
incurring higher costs would be to obtain no information at all for some
household residents.
11 In addition to health insurance and retirement plan provisions, the
compiles data on em ployee work schedules, paid leave, disability ben
efits, life insurance, flexible benefits plans, and reimbursement accounts,
as well as a variety o f emerging benefits.
ebs
12 The April 1972 cps supplement was a mail survey that examined the
benefits coverage of full-time workers. Data on retirement benefits were
examined in Walter W. Kolodrubetz and Donald M. Landay, “Coverage
and Vesting o f Full-Time Em ployees Under Private Retirement Plans,”
S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , November 1973. Health benefits data from the
April 1972 cps supplement were not analyzed in that article.
13 Retirement plan coverage rates from 1972 to 1993 were published in
P e n s io n a n d H e a lth B e n e f its o f A m e r ic a n W o r k e r s : N e w F in d in g s f r o m
th e A p r il 1 9 9 3 C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u r v e y (U .S. Department o f Labor,
Social Security Administration, Small Business Administration, and Pen
sion Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1994).
14 The ebs measures, among other things, em ployee benefit programs
sponsored by employers who pay some share o f the costs.
15 The high nonresponse rate on this question partly reflects som e proxy
respondents’ lack o f knowledge about health plan options o f other house
hold members.
16 D a ta b o o k o n E m p lo y e e B e n e f its , 4th ed. (Washington, DC, Employee
Benefit Research Institute, 1997), p. 301.
ll The ebs and the cps define union membership differently. In the e b s ,
the establishment identifies the number o f workers in union occupations.
Those occupations fulfill the follow ing requirements: a labor organization
must be recognized as the bargaining agent for all workers in the occupa
tion; wage and salary rates are determined through collective bargaining
and negotiations; and settlement terms, which must include earnings pro
visions and may include benefit provisions, are em bodied in a signed,
Monthly Labor Review March 2000
19
Health and Retirement Benefits
mutually binding collective bargaining agreement. In the c ps , union mem
bers are respondents who replied affirmatively to the question, “On this
job, (is/are) (name/you) a member o f a labor union or o f an em ployee asso
ciation similar to a union?”
18 The cps sample currently includes 50,000 households each month.
The 1995 Employee Benefits Survey o f Medium and Large Private Estab
lishments sampled 3,462 nonagricultural establishments with 100 or more
workers. The 1994 Employee Benefits Survey of Small Private Establish
ments sampled 2,135 nonagricultural establishments with fewer than 100
em ployees. The 1994 Employee Benefits Survey o f State and Local G ov
ernments sampled 860 government establishments.
19 An establishment is an economic unit— such as a factory, a mine, a
store, or an office— that produces goods or provides services, typically in a
single physical location. An establishment is distinct from a firm, which may
be in a single physical location or may include multiple establishments at dif
ferent locations. The ebs samples are drawn from a list of establishments, not
firms, and readers should be aware that some participants in the survey of
small establishments may in fact be a part of large firms.
20 See, for example, E m p lo y e e B e n e fits in M e d iu m a n d L a r g e P r iv a te
E s ta b lis h m e n ts , 1 9 9 5 , Bulletin 2496 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, April
1998); E m p lo y e e B e n e f its in S m a ll P r iv a te E s ta b lis h m e n ts , 1 9 9 4 , Bulletin
2475 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, April 1996); and E m p lo y e e B e n e f its in
S ta te a n d L o c a l G o v e r n m e n ts , 1 9 9 4 , Bulletin 2477 (Bureau o f Labor Sta
tistics, May 1996).
21 The Employer Costs for Employee Compensation series provides
estimates by industry and major occupational group, as well as by bargain
ing status, region, and establishment size. Not surprisingly, the groups with
the highest employer costs for health insurance mirror those categories with
the higher participation rates. The data on incidence o f participation that
will be produced annually from the National Compensation Survey will be
based on a sample that is about double the current ebs sample. This should
enable the Bureau to publish additional geographic, industrial, occupa
tional, and other detailed information and allow for an analysis o f the link
between plan participation and cost. (See E m p lo y e r C o s ts f o r E m p lo y e e
C o m p e n s a tio n — M a r c h 1 9 9 9 , cited in note 2.)
22 Section 401(k) o f the Internal Revenue Code authorizes private-sec
tor, profitmaking firms (and some nonprofit organizations) to offer taxdeferred retirement plans for their workers. Section 403(b) authorizes such
retirement plans for nonprofit organizations, and Section 457 authorizes
plans for em ployees o f State and local governments. Some tax-deferred
retirement plans are funded solely by employee contributions, and that might
explain why som e respondents answered “no” to either o f the first two
questions about participation in retirement plans and subsequently answered
“y es” to the question on participation in a tax-deferred retirement plan.
When answering the first two questions, some respondents may not have
considered tax-deferred plans that were sponsored, but not funded, by their
employers. When, later in the supplement, these respondents were asked
whether they had the option to contribute money to a plan on a tax-de
ferred basis, they correctly answered affirmatively. Even if a tax-deferred
retirement plan does not receive employer funding, it still benefits em ploy
ees because the employer provides a convenient vehicle through which
em ployees can invest for retirement. More importantly, if the employer
had not established the plan and em ployees instead invested their money
in an after-tax mutual fund or savings account, their contributions would
be subject to taxation at the time they were made, and their investment
earnings would be subject to taxation at the time they were earned. Under
an employer-provided plan, em ployees could defer paying taxes on their
contributions and earnings until retirement. Even for em ployees who are
eligible to invest in pretax individual retirement accounts at banks or other
financial institutions, the limit on how much they can invest each year is
much lower than under an employer-provided plan.
23 Administrative figures from the Office o f Personnel Management
indicate that about 96 percent o f Federal em ployees participated in either
the Civil Service Retirement System or the Federal Employees Retirement
20 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
System in 1997. The considerably lower cps estimate o f 88-percent partici
pation among Federal em ployees may result from a variety o f possible re
sponse errors in that survey. For example, some cps respondents may not
be aware of a household member’s participation in a Federal em ployee
retirement plan. Another possibility is that some noncovered workers em
ployed by a private-sector contractor to the Federal Government may be
classified incorrectly as Federal em ployees.
24 The February 1995 and 1997 supplements did not include questions
on plan characteristics.
25 For detailed descriptions o f the various types o f plans and the calcu
lation o f benefits, see Ann C. Foster, “Factors Affecting Employer-pro
vided Retirement Benefits,” C o m p e n s a tio n a n d W o rk in g C o n d itio n s , Winter
1998, pp. 10-17. See also William J. Wiatrowski, “Factors affecting retire
ment income,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , March 1993, pp. 25-35 .
26 See note 20 for references.
27 A comparison o f ebs data with data from the Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation series indicates that employer expenditures for
retirement plans are higher in groups for which coverage is more common.
In the private sector, employer expenditures were higher for union work
ers, full-time workers in goods-producing industries, and workers in larger
establishments (500 or more employees). Expenditures for union workers’
defined-benefit plans were greater than those for their defined-contribution plans. Similarly, employer costs in larger establishments were higher
for defined-benefit plans than for defined-contribution plans. Ultimately,
the redesigned National Compensation Survey w ill provide data that will
enable researchers to analyze more rigorously the relationship between
employer costs and em ployee participation for a variety o f em ployee ben
efits. See Harriet G. Weinstein, “Linking Retirement Plan Measures,” C o m
p e n s a tio n a n d W o rk in g C o n d itio n s , Spring 1998, pp. 5 2-55.
28 For a discussion of how the ebs estimates a worker’s eligibility for,
and participation in, a retirement plan, see William J. Wiatrowski, “Count
ing the Incidence o f Employee Benefits,” C o m p e n s a tio n a n d W o rk in g C o n
d itio n s , June 1996, pp. 10-18.
29 For additional information on the conference and on the major issues
regarding linked data, see the series o f reports in the July 1998 M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , pp. 48-60.
30 Harley Frazis, Maury Gittleman, Michael Horrigan, and Mary Joyce,
“Results from the 1995 Survey o f Employer-Provided Training,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1998, pp. 3-13.
31 Mark C. Berger, Dan A. Black, and Frank A. Scott, “How Well Do
We Measure Employer-Provided Health Insurance Coverage?” C o n te m p o
r a r y E c o n o m ic P o l ic y , July 1998, pp. 356-67.
32 Alan L. Gustman and Thomas L. Steinmeier, E m p lo y e r P r o v id e d
P e n s io n D a ta in th e n l s M a tu r e W o m e n ’s S u r v e y a n d in th e H e a lth a n d
R e tir e m e n t S tu d y , nber Working Paper no. 7174, (Cambridge, m a , National
Bureau o f Economic Research, Inc.), June 1999.
33 Wesley M ellow and Hal Sider, “Accuracy o f Response in Labor Mar
ket Surveys: Evidence and Implications,” J o u r n a l o f L a b o r E c o n o m ic s ,
October 1983, pp. 3 31-44. One data set used in the study included infor
mation from the January 1977 cps , linked with information collected from
the employers of cps participants. The other data set matched information
collected from workers and employers interviewed in the Employment Op
portunity Pilot Project Survey.
34 See, for example, Ioannis Theodossiou, “Promotions, Job Seniority,
and Product Demand Effects on Earnings,” O x fo r d E c o n o m ic P a p e r s , July
1996, pp. 456-72. See also Robert F. Elliot and Robert Sandy, “Adam Smith
may have been right after all: A new approach to the analysis o f compen
sating differentials,” E c o n o m ic s L e tte r s , Apr. 9, 1998, pp. 127-31.
35 Low response rates occurred in the 1995 bls Survey o f EmployerProvided Training and in the 1993 survey sponsored by the W. E. Upjohn
Institute for Employment Research. (See the articles cited earlier in notes
30 and 31, respectively.)
Earnings and Employment
Earnings and employment
trends in the 1990s
Robust employment growth in high- and low-paying
job categories was not accompanied by large wage gains;
there was no apparent increase in overall earnings
dispersion during the 1990s
Randy E. Ilg
and
Steven E. Haugen
Randy E. Ilg and
Steven E. Haugen are
economists in the
Division of Labor Force
Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
arnings have long been considered an
im portant m easure of o ne’s economic
well-being, and it is widely accepted that
increased earnings over time result in improved
living standards. In the United States, real earn
ings rose sharply for several decades after World
War II, but the trend slowed abruptly during the
1970s. Although the picture during the 1980s and
much of the 1990s is less clear because of dif
ferent patterns among the major earnings meas
ures, it is safe to say that there was compara
tively little real wage growth during that period.1
In recent years, however, workers’ real earnings
have been on the rise.
The stagnation in real earnings for much of
the 1990s stands in marked contrast to the con
siderable growth in employment during that dec
ade. As of December 1999, the end of the period
examined in this article, the current economic ex
pansion had lasted almost 9 years.2 During that
period, total employment, as measured by the
Current Population Survey ( cps), grew by more
than I 6 V2 million.3
Previous research, using data from the cps,
showed that employment growth during the first
half of the 1990s was concentrated in both rela
tively higher paying and relatively lower paying
job categories, with a decline in the number of
jobs paying midlevel wages.4That same research
supported the notion that there was a trend to
ward “polarization” in em ploym ent growth.
However, it did not examine the earnings trends
E
in the fields associated with those categories,
nor did it address whether the marked employment
growth in some of the categories was accompanied
by wage gains. The analysis presented herein ex
tends the earlier work by examining the changes in
both employment and earnings for all wage and
salary workers over the 1989-99 period.5 Specifi
cally, the analysis addresses the following questions:
What has been the relationship between the change
in employment and the change in real median
weekly earnings? In particular, how have earn
ings changed in those job categories that posted
the largest increases in employment? In addition,
what happened to earnings dispersion during the
1990s, especially within the high-, middle-, and
low-paying job categories?
The findings presented in the sections that fol
low suggest that the marked growth in wage and
salary employment that took place from 1989 to
1999 in the highest and lowest earnings groups
was not accompanied by a rapid rise in earnings.
Earnings indeed rose, but only modestly, for both
groups. In contrast, both employment and wages
in the middle earnings group changed relatively
little over the period. While some specific occu
pation-industry categories posted both strong
employment and earnings growth, no significant
correlation between employment and earnings
changes was uncovered for the three major earn
ings groups. Finally, despite the polarization found
in em ploym ent grow th, earnings dispersion
showed little change over the 1989-99 period.6
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 21
Earnings and Employment
Overview
The real median weekly earnings of all wage and salary work
ers showed little change from 1989 to 1996. In 1997, how
ever, real earnings rose, and growth continued through 1999.
As a result of these increases, there was a slight improvement
in real earnings (6.9 percent) for the 1989-99 period. (Real
weekly earnings were adjusted by means of the Consumer
Price Index research series using current methods (CPI-U-RS;
see box, this page).7 During those years, wage and salary em
ployment grew by 15.5 million, or 15.0 percent, with virtu
ally all of the net growth occurring after the 1990-91 reces
sion. (See chart 1 and table 1.) It is important to note that the
bulk of this job growth has been among full-time workers,
whose share of the net growth over the past 10 years (about
four-fifths) was in line with their share of total employment in
1989.8
As shown in table 1, real median weekly earnings rose in
professional specialty, sales, and service occupations, but
changed relatively little among the other major occupational
groups, such as managers. Together, managers and profession
als accounted for three-fifths of the occupational employment
growth. Workers in sales and service occupations supplied most
of the remaining net increase in employment.
Among the major industry groups, real earnings rose in re
tail trade, in services, and in the finance, insurance, and real
estate industry. Real earnings changed relatively little among
the other major industries. O f the total increase in wage and
salary employment since 1989, most of the net growth (about
four-fifths) occurred in services and retail trade.
Occupations within industries
Employment matrix.
A separate look at employment and
earnings trends in m ajor occupations and industries provides
some insight into the nature of job and earnings growth, but
an examination of the changes for occupations within indus
tries presents a more complete picture. For example, the fast
growing services industry pays about the same as the median
for all industries, but encompasses a wide array of occupa
tions, some of which are associated with low wages, some
with relatively high wages.9 The disaggregation of an indus
try by occupation allows one to determine, in much greater
detail than at the aggregate level, which pieces of the industry
are contributing to employment or earnings growth. However,
analyzing the changes in employment and earnings for the
nine major occupations crossed by the 10 major industries
(yielding 90 data series) can be quite cumbersome. To sim
plify such an analysis, the data series were ordered into a more
manageable format.
First, following the methods employed earlier by Ilg, the
occupation-industry categories were ranked in descending or
der by their median weekly earnings in 1988. The categories
were then classified into three groups— highest, middle, and
lowest earnings— each of which accounted for approximately
one-third of total employment in 1988.10 The data for the 90
individual occupation-industry categories were then sorted into
the three earnings groups. Table 2 displays the employment
and real median weekly earnings figures for the individual
categories and the overall figures for each of the three earn
ings groups for the years 1989 and 1999.11
Highest earnings group. From 1989 to 1999, employment in
the highest earnings group increased by 9.7 million, or about
27 percent— the most of the three earnings groups. Real m e
dian weekly earnings for the highest group showed only m od
est improvement. By 1999, real median weekly earnings in
this group had risen by 6.3 percent, to $728 per week.
As the U.S. economy moved out of the recession of the
early 1990s and employment expanded, job growth in the high
est earnings group accelerated, and strong growth continued
through 1999. In contrast, real median weekly earnings for the
The Bureau of Labor Statistics statement on the use of the CPI-U-RS
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has made numerous improve
ments to the Consumer Price Index ( cpi) over the past quartercentury. While these improvements make the present and future
cpi more accurate, historical price index series are not adjusted to
reflect the improvements. Many researchers, however, expressed
an interest in having a historical series that was measured consist
ently over the entire period. Accordingly, the Consumer Price In
dex research series using current methods (cpi-u-rs) presents an
estimate of the cpi for all Urban Consumers (cpi-u) from 1978 to
1998 that incorporates most of the improvements made over that
time span into the entire series.
The cpi- u- rs is in some ways an extension of the cpi- u - x i , an
experimental series that shows what the inflation rate in the cpi-u
might have been if the current rental-equivalence method of meas
uring the cost of homeownership had been in place prior to 1983.
22 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The cpi- u - rs has some limitations. First, most estimates
are based on bls research covering a short period of time and
extrapolated to a longer period. Therefore, there is consider
able uncertainty surrounding the magnitude of the adjustments.
Second, there have been several improvements in the cpi not
incorporated into the cpi- u - rs , either because they do not rep
resent changes in methodology, because they had negligible
impacts on the cpi’s growth rate, or because it was impossible
to systematically estimate the impacts of the new methods in
past years.
Nonetheless, the cpi- u - rs can serve as a valuable proxy for
researchers needing a historical estimate of inflation using cur
rent (1999) methods. The direct adjustment of individual cpi in
dex series makes this the most detailed and systematic estimate
available of a consistent cpi series.
Table 1.
Employment and median weekly earnings of wage and salary workers, by occupation and industry, 1989 and 1999
[Numbers in thousands]
M edian w eekly earnings in
constant 1999 dollars'
Employment
O ccupation and Industry
C hange2
Change2
1989
1999
Number
Percent
1989
1999
Number
Percent
O ccupation
T o tal......................................................
103,480
118,963
15,483
15.0
$447
$478
$31
6.9
Executive, administrative,
and m anagerial.....................................
Professional specialty..............................
Technicians and related support.............
Sales occupations....................................
Administrative support, including clerical
Service occupations................................
Precision production, craft, and re p a ir....
Operators, fabricators, and labo rers......
Farming, forestry, and fis h in g .................
11,950
13,408
3,511
11,354
17,768
14,410
11,906
17,399
1,774
16,000
18,693
4,188
13,451
17,874
16,829
12,474
17,514
1,940
4,050
5,285
677
2,097
106
2,419
568
115
166
33.9
39.4
19.3
18.5
728
32
47
4
35
4.4
16.8
4.8
.7
9.4
574
352
390
245
574
392
280
760
735
578
387
400
273
582
396
301
T o tal......................................................
103,480
118,963
15,483
15.0
447
478
31
6.9
Agriculture.................................................
M ining........................................................
Construction..............................................
Manufacturing...........................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ...........
Wholesale tra d e .......................................
Retail tra d e ................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate........
S ervices....................................................
Public adm inistration...............................
1,499
665
5,798
20,831
7,692
3,942
17,299
7,045
33,133
5,576
1,735
534
6,747
19,408
8,944
4,586
20,185
7,780
43,077
5,966
236
-131
949
-1,423
1,252
644
15.7
-19.7
16.4
289
724
536
528
634
513
258
494
408
607
307
731
525
554
619
528
289
556
460
636
18
7
6.2
1.0
2.1
.6
688
6.8
.7
9.9
10
2.6
28
8
11.4
1.4
4
21
7.5
1.0
Industry
2,886
735
9,944
390
-
6.8
16.3
16.3
16.7
10.4
30.0
7.0
-11
26
-15
15
31
62
52
29
-
4.9
-2 .4
2.9
12.0
12.6
12.7
4.8
1
Data are restricted to wage and salary workers and exclude the self2 Calculated from the rounded estimates shown.
employed, regardless of whether their businesses are incorporated. The data
include both full- and part-time workers. The Consumer Price Index research
N ote : Employment growth was calculated using annual averages for 1989
series using current methods (cpi-u-r s ) was used to convert current dollars to
and 1999.
constant dollars for 1989.
group dipped in the mid-1990s, but earnings growth in 199799 was strong enough to produce a small gain for the period as
a whole. (See chart 2.)
As might be expected, virtually all the high-paying mana
gerial and professional occupations are concentrated in this
group. Employment among managers and professionals in the
highest earnings group accounted for about two-thirds of total
employment in the group in 1989, but made up nearly all of
the net employment increase over the 1989-99 period. Man
agers and professionals in the services industry expanded their
ranks sharply, together accounting for about two-thirds of the
employment gain in the highest earnings group. The trend in
their earnings, however, was comparable to that for the overall
group, declining a bit in the middle of the decade, but more
than recovering toward the end. While the number of execu
tives in construction, manufacturing, and transportation also
rose substantially from 1989 to 1999, their earnings were little
changed. (See table 2.)
Although managers and professionals dominate in the high
est earnings group, some other occupations include a large
number of high-paid workers. For example, precision produc
tion workers in manufacturing and transportation accounted
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
for a sizable share of employment in the highest earnings group.
However, employment and earnings for both job categories
changed little over the 1989-99 period.
In 1989, full-time workers accounted for slightly more than
90 percent of employment within the highest earnings group.
However, full-time workers contributed a somewhat smaller
share of the net increase in job growth over the 10-year pe
riod. This difference reflects the fact that much of the overall
employment growth occurred among professionals in the serv
ices industry, wherein part-time work is more prevalent than it
is among professionals in other industries.
No consistent relationship is evident between employment
and earnings changes in the highest earnings group over the
1989-99 period. For example, the number of executives in
services rose sharply, as did their earnings. Yet, at the same
time, employment among managers in transportation and pub
lic utilities also increased, but their earnings were little changed;
conversely, employment among professionals in construction
was little changed, but their earnings declined.
One measure that more systematically identifies the asso
ciation between two variables (in this case, employment and
earnings) is the simple correlation coefficient. To construct
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 23
Earnings and Employment
Percent change in employment and real median weekly earnings of wage and
salary workers, 1989-99
Chart 1.
P ercen t
P ercen t
N o t e : T h e percent shown represents the percent growth or decline in annual average em ploym ent or real median
weekly earnings between the year indicated and the level in 1989.
this measure, we used the percent change in employment for
each occupation-industry category (weighted by its share of
total employment in 1989) and the percent change in earnings.
The correlation coefficient ranges from -1 .0 to 1.0, with 1.0
indicating a perfect positive relationship and -1 .0 a perfect
negative relationship.
For the highest earnings group, the correlation coefficient
was 0.29, which, while positive, does not indicate a high de
gree of association betw een changes in em ploym ent and
changes in earnings. (The correlation coefficient for this group
was not statistically different from zero at the 90-percent con
fidence level.) Hence, the strongest growing occupation-in
dustry categories in the high-earnings group were not neces
sarily associated with the fastest earnings growth.
Middle earnings group. From 1989 to 1999, employment in
the middle earnings group edged up, as growth in the second
half of the period offset losses during the recession of the early
1990s.12 Employment remained below prerecession levels until
1997. Substantial job growth in 1997 and 1998, however, led
to a net employment gain of some 400,000, about 1 percent,
over the entire 1989-99 period. (See chart 2.)
Real earnings in the middle earnings group drifted down
for most of the period, before recovering markedly during
1997-99. In 1989, median weekly earnings were $464 (in con
24 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
stant 1999 dollars). After reaching a low point in 1996 ($445),
earnings rose sharply. As a result, by 1999, earnings in the
middle earnings group— at $475— were little changed from
1989. (See table 2.)
The pattern of little overall change in employment and earn
ings trends for the middle earnings group masked variations in
several detailed occupation-industry categories. Many of these
categories include blue-collar occupations in a variety of goodsand service-producing industries. Employment in some occu
pation-industry categories, such as operators, fabricators, and
laborers in both construction and the transportation and public
utilities industry, grew markedly over the past decade, but their
weekly earnings declined. Employment declined significantly,
however, among operators, fabricators, and laborers in manu
facturing, while their earnings changed little.
A few occupation-industry categories other than those typi
fied by blue-collar jobs showed substantial em ploym ent
changes. The number of managers in retail trade increased, as
did their earnings. Employment among technicians in the serv
ices industry also rose between 1989 and 1999, but their earn
ings were up only slightly. However, the number of clerical
workers in manufacturing decreased, while earnings for the
group increased.
As with full-time workers in the highest earnings group,
full-time workers in the middle earnings group accounted for
Chart 2.
Percent change in employment and real median weekly earnings of wage and salary
workers, by earnings group, 1989-99
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Middle earnings group
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
Percent
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Percent
20
15
10
5
0
-5
N o t e : The percent shown represents the percent growth or decline in annual average employment or real median weekly
earnings between the year indicated and the level in 1989. Median weekly earnings for the lowest earnings group have been
adjusted for the years 1989-93. (See note 13 in the text.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 25
Earnings and Employment
Table 2.
Employment and median weekly earnings of wage and salary workers, by major occupation and industry,
1989 and 1999
[Numbers in thousands]
M edian w eekly earnings
in constant 1999 dollars1
Employment
Industry
Occupation
C hange2
1989
Highest earnings group
C hange2
1999
1989
Number
Percent
1999
Number Percent
Highest earnings group
T otal.......................................
35,863
45,516
9,653
26.9
$685
$728
$43
6.3
Professional specialty
Professional specialty
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Professional specialty
Technicians and related support
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Technicians and related support
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Sales occupations
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Wholesale tra de ...............................
Construction.....................................
S e rv ic e s ...........................................
S e rv ic e s...........................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Transportation and public utilities....
Transportation and public utilities....
Wholesale tra de ...............................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
198
77
473
3,714
9,667
131
823
262
401
1,242
378
145
784
5,699
14,006
188
1,171
354
541
1,611
180
68
311
1,985
4,339
57
348
92
140
369
90.9
88.3
65.8
53.4
44.9
43.5
42.3
35.1
34.9
29.7
811
961
795
664
645
669
876
781
673
667
856
811
798
734
689
713
872
781
716
672
45
-150
3
70
44
44
0
43
5
5.5
-15.6
.4
10.5
6.8
6.6
-.5
.0
6.4
.7
Service occupations
Professional specialty
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Professional specialty
Professional specialty
Sales occupations
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Professional specialty
Precision production, craft, and repair
Public administration .......................
Public adm inistration.......................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
M ining...............................................
Transportation and public utilities....
Wholesale tra de...............................
Public administration .......................
Manufacturing..................................
Manufacturing..................................
Transportation and public utilities....
1,370
775
1,884
57
463
1,375
1,207
2,204
1,727
1,276
1,742
984
2,311
69
549
1,594
1,378
2,506
1,950
1,345
372
209
427
12
86
219
171
302
223
69
27.2
27.0
22.7
21.1
18.6
15.9
14.2
13.7
12.9
5.4
630
820
685
1,217
863
666
714
928
922
737
630
816
733
1,021
931
697
814
943
978
724
0
-4
48
-196
68
31
100
15
56
-1 3
.0
-.5
7.0
-16.1
7.9
4.7
14.0
1.6
6.1
-1 .8
Professional specialty
Sales occupations
Sales occupations
Precision production, craft, and repair
Technicians and related support
Technicians and related support
Precision production, craft, and repair
Precision production, craft, and repair
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Construction.....................................
Construction.....................................
Manufacturing..................................
Manufacturing..................................
Manufacturing..................................
Public administration .......................
M ining...............................................
Public administration .......................
M ining...............................................
138
58
709
4,004
708
251
220
239
87
143
59
700
3,837
653
231
189
196
66
5
1
-9
-167
-5 5
-2 0
-31
-4 3
-21
3.6
1.7
-1 .3
-4.2
-7.8
-8.0
-14.1
-18.0
-24.1
956
749
668
600
680
668
736
634
1,060
919
637
700
607
715
658
719
624
1,051
-3 7
-112
32
7
35
-1 0
-1 7
-1 0
-9
-3 .9
-15.0
4.8
1.2
5.1
-1 .5
-2 .3
-1 .6
-.8
T o tal.......................................
33,362
33,757
395
1.2
464
475
11
2.4
Technicians and related support
Professional specialty
Executive, administrative, and managerial
Precision production, craft, and repair
Technicians and related support
Precision production, craft, and repair
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Service occupations
Precision production, craft, and repair
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Administrative support, including clerical
Retail tra d e .......................................
Retail tra d e .......................................
Retail tra d e .......................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
S erv ic e s ...........................................
S erv ic e s ...........................................
Transportation and public utilities....
Transportation and public utilities....
Construction.....................................
Construction.....................................
Wholesale tra de ...............................
Transportation and public utilities....
80
275
1,129
131
1,922
1,319
2,135
263
3,260
1,416
928
2,135
198
420
1,484
172
2,389
1,637
2,602
317
3,723
1,592
1,043
2,325
118
145
355
41
467
318
467
54
463
176
115
190
147.5
52.7
31.4
31.3
24.3
24.1
21.9
20.5
14.2
12.4
12.4
8.9
388
471
502
462
502
480
541
485
553
447
395
577
350
600
565
498
515
515
517
405
541
428
400
523
-3 8
129
63
36
13
35
-2 4
-8 0
-1 2
-1 9
5
-5 4
-9 .8
27.4
12.5
7.8
2.6
7.3
-4 .4
-16.5
-2 .2
-4 .3
1.3
-9 .4
Technicians and related support
Precision production, craft, and repair
Precision production, craft, and repair
Administrative support, including clerical
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Administrative support, including clerical
Sales occupations
Farming, forestry, and fishing
Construction.....................................
Wholesale trade...............................
Retail tra d e .......................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Manufacturing..................................
M ining...............................................
Public administration .......................
Transportation and public utilities....
Manufacturing..................................
55
311
1,111
3,081
8,736
176
1,504
322
63
58
308
1,033
2,733
7,636
151
1,269
270
51
3
-3
-7 8
-348
-1,100
-2 5
-235
-5 2
-1 2
5.5
-1.0
-7.0
-11.3
-12.6
-14.2
-15.6
-16.1
-19.0
601
507
458
384
411
626
454
505
391
615
587
499
407
421
590
474
684
471
14
80
41
23
10
-3 6
20
179
80
2.3
15.8
9.0
6.0
2.4
-5 .8
4.4
35.4
20.5
Middle earnings group
-A
Middle earnings group
See footnotes at end of table.
26 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2.
Continued—Employment and median weekly earnings of wage and salary workers, by major occupation and
industry, 1989 and 1999
[Numbers in thousands]
M edian w eekly earnings
in constant 1999 dollars'
Employment
Occupation
Industry
Middle earnings group— continued
C hange2
C hange2
1989
1989
1999
Number
Percent
1999
Number Percent
Middle earnings group— continued
2,336
344
155
1,824
251
105
-512
-9 3
-5 0
-21.9
-27.0
-32.3
$441
403
492
$456
348
473
$15
-5 5
-1 9
3.4
-13.6
-3.9
T o tal..............................................
34,256
39,696
5,440
15.9
3259
289
30
11.6
Sales occupations
Administrative support, including clerical
Sales occupations
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Administrative support, including clerical
Service occupations
Service occupations
Service occupations
S erv ic e s ...........................................
A griculture........................................
Retail tra d e .......................................
Retail tra d e .......................................
S e rv ic e s ...........................................
Retail tra d e .......................................
S e rv ic e s ...........................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
794
82
6,801
2,082
5,988
4,339
7,742
256
1,114
104
8,054
2,450
7,025
5,078
9,056
291
320
22
1,253
368
1,037
739
1,314
35
40.3
26.8
18.4
17.7
17.3
17.0
17.0
13.7
275
282
250
237
340
188
242
286
318
280
286
265
356
220
267
319
43
-2
36
28
16
32
25
33
15.6
-.7
14.4
11.8
4.7
17.0
10.3
11.5
Farming, forestry, and fishing
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Administrative support, including clerical
Administrative support, including clerical
Administrative support, including clerical
Farming, forestry, and fishing
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Farming, forestry, and fishing
A griculture........................................
S erv ic e s ...........................................
Wholesale tra d e ...............................
Retail tra d e .......................................
Construction.....................................
S erv ic e s...........................................
A griculture........................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate
1,186
1,635
747
1,467
353
352
76
61
1,339
1,824
795
1,433
336
327
69
55
153
189
48
-3 4
-1 7
-2 5
-7
-6
12.9
11.6
6.4
-2 .3
-4 .8
-7.1
-9 .2
-9.8
279
271
382
301
354
250
354
293
293
296
403
331
387
331
326
329
14
25
21
30
33
81
-2 8
36
5.0
9.2
5.5
10.0
9.3
32.4
-7 .9
12.3
Administrative support, including clerical
Service occupations
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
Lowest earnings group
Manufacturing..................................
Manufacturing..................................
Public administration .......................
Lowest earnings group
1 Data are restricted to wage and salary workers and exclude the self-em
ployed, regardless of whether their businesses are incorporated. The data in
clude both full- and part-time workers. The Consumer Price Index research
series using current methods (cpi-u-rs ) was used to convert current dollars to
constant dollars for 1989.
2 Calculated from the rounded estimates shown.
3The overall median weekly earnings figure for the lowest earnings group
has been adjusted to make it more comparable with earnings data collected
more than 90 percent of employment in the group in 1989. But
they made up just 55 percent of the small net increase in em
ployment during the entire 1989-99 period. This difference is
due, in part, to the large decline among certain manufacturing
workers (operators, fabricators, and laborers; and administra
tive support personnel), the vast majority of whom work full
time. At the same time, employment increased considerably
among some occupations in the services and retail trade in
dustries, in which part-time work is much more prevalent than
in other industries.
Consistent with the variations in employment and earnings
changes among the job categories in the middle earnings group,
there was little correlation between the two variables. (The
correlation coefficient was -0.06, not statistically different from
zero at the 90-percent confidence level.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
beginning in 1994. Figures for the more detailed occupation-industry catego
ries have not been adjusted. (See note 13 in the text.)
N ote : Details will not sum to totals because occupation-industry catego
ries that had an employment base of less than 50,000 in 1989 or 1999 are not
shown separately. Combined, these categories contributed only 56,000 to the
net increase in employment. Data in each group are presented on the basis of
change, from the largest percent increase to the largest decline. Employment
growth was calculated using annual averages for 1989 and 1999.
Lowest earnings group.
Employment in the lowest earnings
group increased by 5.4 million (about 16 percent) between
1989 and 1999. Real earnings in the group rose by 11.6 per
cent, after adjustment.13 Employment in the lowest earnings
group was relatively unaffected by the recession of the early
1990s. Indeed, through 1993, the rate of employment growth
among low-wage workers actually exceeded that for workers at
the upper end of the earnings spectrum. However, by the mid1990s, job growth in the high earnings group had outpaced growth
in the lowest earnings group. As a result, over the entire 198999 period, net employment growth among low earners was about
three-fifths that for the highest earnings group. As noted earlier,
employment growth in both groups far exceeded that for middlewage earners. (See chart 2 and table 2.)
In 1989, median weekly earnings for the lowest earnings
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 27
Earnings and Employment
group were $259 (in constant 1999 dollars), after adjustment
for the break in series associated with the c p s redesign. Fol
lowing a slight decline in real earnings from 1989 to 1992,
earnings in the lowest earnings group began to increase. Earn
ings rose markedly in 1998-99, reaching $289 in 1999.
Employment in the lowest earnings group is largely made
up of service, sales, and administrative workers, as well as
operators, fabricators, and laborers, in the retail trade and the
services industries. Among these occupation-industry catego
ries, some of the fastest growing were sales and service work
ers in the retail trade and services industries. These categories
accounted for two-thirds of the net employment increase in
the lowest earnings group. Real earnings for all four catego
ries also rose over the 1989-99 period.
Among clerical workers in the lowest earnings group, the
number working in the services industry rose substantially over
the period, but their earnings were up only slightly. In con
trast, the retail trade industry lost administrative support work
ers over the 1989-99 period, but posted a substantial increase
in median weekly earnings.
Compared with the shares of the highest and middle earn
ings groups, a much smaller share of workers in the lowest
earnings group worked full time in 1989 (about three-fifths).
Even so, over the 1989-99 period, a large share of the net
employment gain for the lowest earnings group was attribut
able to full-time workers (about four-fifths). This increase re
flected, in part, the strong growth in the number of full-time
workers in various occupations (for example, sales, service,
and administrative occupations) within the services industry.
Even though employment growth was robust in the lowest
earnings group and real earnings rose, the correlation coeffi
Table 3.
cient was very low, 0.10 (not statistically different from zero
at the 90-percent confidence level). This underscores the weak
relationship between employment and earnings changes among
the occupation-industry categories in the lowest earnings group.
In sum, employment grew substantially in the highest and
in the lowest earnings groups from 1989 to 1999; job growth
was especially pronounced in the highest earnings group. Real
median weekly earnings also rose among workers in the highl
and low-wage groups, with relatively more improvement among
the lowest paid workers. Both employment and earnings among
workers in the middle were essentially unchanged over the
period. In addition, some specific occupation-industry catego
ries in the three earnings groups posted both strong employ
ment increases and real wage increases. However, there ap
pears to be no systematic relationship between employment
and earnings changes, as evidenced by the low correlation
coefficients for the highest, middle, and lowest earnings groups.
Earnings dispersion
In this section, we turn to the question of whether the forego
ing employment and earnings developments are associated with
changes in wage dispersion. As a measure of central tendency,
medians serve as an overall metric for the earnings of a given
group and allow one to make general inferences as to how the
earnings for the group have changed over time. However,
medians provide no information on the degree of dispersion in
an earnings distribution— that is, how widely spread individu
als are in terms of their relative earnings levels— or the extent
to which the dispersion has changed.
One common method used to gauge changes in earnings
Usual weekly earnings of wage and salary workers, by upper limits of selected deciles and quartiles, in current dollars
and in constant 1999 dollars, annual averages, 1989-99
Upper limit of—
Year
First
decile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
First
quartile
Upper limit of—
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
First
decile
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
1$106
1114
'116
1120
’ 122
128
132
136
144
154
163
$206
216
223
227
233
236
243
250
263
277
289
$342
358
371
379
391
398
407
417
433
458
478
$532
564
585
600
616
636
654
673
697
727
755
1The 10th-percentile earnings figure has been adjusted to make it more
comparable with earnings data collected beginning in 1994. (See note 15 in
the text.)
28 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
In constant 1999 dollars
In current dollars
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
First
quartile
$777
807
834
870
901
935
960
988
1,024
1,084
1,139
’$139
’ 142
’ 139
’ 140
’ 139
143
144
144
149
157
163
$269
269
268
266
266
263
264
265
272
283
289
$447
446
446
444
446
444
443
441
449
468
478
$696
702
703
702
703
710
711
712
722
743
755
$1,016
1,005
1,002
1,018
1,028
1,044
1,044
1,046
1,061
1,108
1,139
N o te : The Consumer Price Index research series using current meth
ods ( c p i-u -r s ) was used to convert current dollars to constant dollars for
1989-99.
The 90-10 and adjusted 90-10 percentile ratios for all wage and salary workers,
1989-99
Ratio
N o t e : The 10th-percentile earnings figure has been adjusted to make it more comparable with earnings data
collected beginning in 1994. (See note 15 in the text.)
Chart 4
The 90-50, 50-10, and adjusted 50-10 percentile ratios for all wage and salary workers,
1989-99
R atio
3 .4
R atio
3 .2
3 .0
2.8
2.6
2 .4
2.2
2.0
N o t e : The 10th-percentile earnings figure has been adjusted to make it more comparable with earnings data
collected beginning in 1994. (See note 15 in the text.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 29
Earnings and Employment
1 Usual weekly earnings of wage and salary workers, by upper limits of selected deciles and quartiles, in current
dollars and in constant 1999 dollars for the three earnings groups, annual averages, 1989-99
Highest earnings group
Upper limit of-Year
First
decile
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Upper limit of—
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
First
decile
In current dollars
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
'$225
1237
1247
1247
'256
258
263
266
284
293
306
$524
563
587
604
614
622
638
653
673
700
728
$370
393
405
409
417
415
423
431
449
476
491
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
In constant 1999 dollars
$758
802
814
831
868
894
919
943
969
1,013
1,053
$1,015
1,056
1,116
1,168
1,209
1,237
1,277
1,331
1,373
1,439
1,488
'$294
'295
'297
'289
'292
288
286
282
294
299
306
$484
489
486
479
476
463
460
456
465
487
491
$685
701
705
707
701
694
694
691
697
715
728
$991
999
978
973
991
998
999
998
1,004
1,035
1,053
$1,327
1,315
1,340
1,367
1,380
1,381
1,389
1,409
1,422
1,471
1,488
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
Middle earnings group
Upper limit of—
Upper limit of—
Year
First
decile
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
First
decile
In current dollars
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
1169
1178
1188
'192
'195
192
197
204
214
228
237
248
259
268
274
281
281
287
294
303
316
328
355
367
378
395
405
402
410
420
438
460
475
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
In constant 1999 dollars
502
512
523
549
564
580
592
605
624
654
672
655
683
707
719
756
771
786
813
850
888
915
'221
'222
'226
'225
'222
214
214
216
222
233
237
324
323
322
321
321
314
312
311
314
323
328
464
457
454
462
462
449
446
445
454
470
475
656
638
628
643
644
648
644
640
646
668
672
856
850
849
842
863
861
855
861
881
908
915
Lowest earnings group
Upper limit of—
Year
First
decile
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Upper limit of—
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
First
decile
In current dollars
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
'60
'67
'70
'72
'75
78
81
84
88
92
96
121
129
134
141
144
139
144
150
158
167
178
'198
'207
'211
'215
'223
236
243
252
261
276
289
First
quartile
Second
quartile
(m edian)
Third
quartile
Ninth
decile
In constant 1999 dollars
308
320
327
343
358
362
371
382
392
411
424
429
462
475
496
514
521
538
558
571
599
620
'78
'83
'84
'84
'86
87
88
89
91
94
96
158
161
161
165
164
155
157
159
164
171
178
'259
'258
'253
'252
'254
263
264
267
270
282
289
403
398
393
401
409
404
403
404
406
420
424
561
575
570
581
587
582
585
591
592
612
620
1The 10th-percentile earnings figure for each earnings group and the median weekly earnings figure for the lowest earnings group have been adjusted
to make them more comparable with earnings data collected beginning in 1994. (See notes 13 and 15 in the text.)
N ote: The Consumer Price Index research series using current methods (cpi-u-rs) was used to convert current dollars to constant dollars for 1989-99.
30 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 5.
Selected percentile ratios, by earnings group, annual averages, 1989-99
Highest earnings group
Lowest earnings group
Middle earnings group
Year
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
90-10
90-50
50-10
90-10
90-50
50-10
90-10
90-50
50-10
14.51
'4.46
'4.52
'4.73
14.72
4.79
4.86
5.00
4.83
4.91
4.86
1.94
1.88
1.90
1.93
1.97
1.99
2.00
2.04
2.04
2.06
2.04
12.33
12.38
12.38
12.45
12.40
2.41
2.43
2.45
2.37
2.39
2.38
13.88
'3.84
'3.76
'3.74
'3.88
4.02
3.99
3.99
3.97
3.89
3.86
1.85
1.86
1.87
1.82
1.87
1.92
1.92
1.94
1.94
1.93
1.93
'2.10
'2.06
'2.01
'2.06
'2.08
2.09
2.08
2.06
2.05
2.02
2.00
'7.15
'6.90
'6.79
'6.89
'6.85
6.68
6.64
6.64
6.49
6.51
6.46
'2.17
'2.23
'2.25
'2.31
'2.30
2.21
2.21
2.21
2.19
2.17
2.15
'3.30
'3.09
'3.01
'2.99
'2.97
3.03
3.00
3.00
2.97
3.00
3.01
1The percentile ratios reflect adjustments to the 10th-percentile earnings figure for each group and the 50th-percentile earnings figure for the lowest earnings
group. These adjustments make data more comparable with those beginning in 1994. (See notes 13 and 15 in the text.)
dispersion is to track various ratios of percentiles over time.14
To construct some of these ratios, the weekly earnings values
associated with various percentiles (the upper limits of vari
ous deciles and quartiles) were computed for all workers and
for each of the three separate earnings groups from 1989 to
1999.15 (See tables 3 and 4.) We then calculated 90th-to-10th,
90th-to-50th, and 50th-to-10th percentile ratios (the upper limit
of the ninth decile divided by the upper limit of the first decile,
and so forth) for all workers and for each o f the three earnings
groups for every year during the period.
Chart 3 suggests that earnings dispersion overall changed
very little during the 1990s (after adjustment; see note 13).
The 90th-to-10th percentile ratio held fairly steady. The 90thto-50th percentile ratio edged up, while the 50th-to-10th ratio
edged down, as shown in chart 4. Thus, those at the top and
those at the bottom of the distribution did better relative to
those in the middle, but exhibited little change relative to each
other. (Percentile ratios based on unadjusted data also are in
cluded in charts 3 and 4, to illustrate that the interpretation of
recent trends in earnings dispersion is sensitive to the data used.)
These findings seem to be consistent with the earnings changes
previously noted for the three earnings groups, in that median
weekly earnings rose for the lowest and highest earnings groups,
but held steady for workers in the middle. The most notable
feature of recent earnings patterns, including changes in earn
ings dispersion, is the relatively strong earnings growth among
the lowest paid workers in 1998 and 1999.
Within the earnings groups themselves, growing dispersion
was most evident in the highest earnings group. For example,
the 90th-to-10th percentile ratio increased markedly over the
entire 1989-99 period, reflecting strong real earnings increases
among the highest paid workers in the group. It is notable that
there was a slight decline in the 90th-to- 10th ratio near the end
of the period, because earnings advanced relatively sharply
for those at the bottom rung o f the highest earnings group over
the 1997-99 period. (See table 5.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The middle earnings group showed less evidence of grow
ing earnings dispersion than the highest earnings group, and in
the lowest earnings group, earnings dispersion actually de
clined. It is worth noting again that the lower paid workers in
each of these groups also saw their earnings rise slightly from
1997 to 1999.
a g e a n d s a l a r y e m p l o y m e n t g r e w s u b s t a n t i a l l y from 1989
to 1999. Nearly all of the growth was concentrated among rela
tively high- and low-paid workers, with the strongest job growth
occurring in the highest earnings group. There was scant em
ployment growth among workers with midlevel wages. Real
median weekly earnings for the highest and lowest earnings
groups also showed some improvement over the entire period,
largely due to the marked acceleration in earnings growth to
ward the end of the decade. It is notable that the earnings growth
was somewhat more pronounced among workers in the lowest
earnings group. Despite a similar pickup in real median weekly
earnings in the middle earnings group in the late 1990s, earn
ings remained about unchanged over the entire period.
Among the more detailed occupation-industry classifications,
there was little correlation between those that grew the fastest in
terms of employment and those that registered rising wages. While
some individual occupation-industry categories had both strong
employment growth and strong earnings growth, others showed
divergent employment and earnings trends, and still others showed
declines in both employment and earnings. These widely differ
ent patterns were pervasive throughout the range of detailed oc
cupation-industry categories analyzed.
Finally, given the distinct polarization in em ploym ent
growth from 1989 to 1999 and the absence of substantial over
all earnings growth, we examined the data for changes in the
earnings dispersion. After adjusting for breaks in weekly earn
ings series associated with the redesign of the c p s in 1994, we
did not discern a general rise in earnings dispersion over the
1989-99 period.
□
W
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 31
Earnings and Employment
Notes
A cknow ledgm ent : The authors thank Anne E. Polivka, of the Office of Em
ployment and Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for de
riving adjustment factors used in this article to address the breaks in various
cps weekly earnings data series associated with the 1994 survey redesign.
1 For an analysis o f trends in various wage series from the Current Popu
lation Survey, the National Income and Product Accounts, and the Current
Employment Statistics survey, see Katharine G. Abraham, James R. Spletzer,
and Jay C. Stewart, “Why Do Different Wage Series Tell Different Stories?”
A m e r ic a n E c o n o m ic s A s s o c ia tio n P a p e r s a n d P r o c e e d in g s , May 1999, pp.
3 4 -3 9 .
2 The official end of the last recession, as determined by the National
Bureau o f Economic Research ( nber ), was March 1991. Under n b e r ’s method
for determining the length o f an expansion or recession, the economic trough,
in March 1991, would be counted as the first month in the current economic
expansion. The economic peak (when it occurs) would be counted as the
first month in the subsequent economic recession. The longest expansion on
record, 106 months, occurred during the 1960s. As of December 1999, the
current economic expansion also appears to have lasted 106 months.
3 The cps is a nationwide sample survey o f approximately 50,000 house
holds conducted for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau o f the
Census. The cps provides information about the employment status and de
mographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the civilian noninstitutional
population aged 16 and older. The major gauge of employment growth is the
Current Employment Statistics ( c es ) program, a bls survey of more than
400,000 business establishments. However, this survey does not supply data
on the occupational characteristics o f employment, an essential feature of
the research presented in this article. From March 1992 to December 1999, a
period o f sustained job growth following the 1990-91 recession, the ces sur
vey showed a job gain of about 22 million, well above the 16 V2 million indi
cated by the c ps . (Both estimates are based on changes in seasonally adjusted
data). Numerous conceptual and methodological differences between the two
surveys could account for these differences in measured employment growth.
For a recent study o f this issue, see Mark Schweitzer and Jennifer Ransom,
“Measuring Total Employment: Are a Few Million Workers Important?” E c o
n o m ic C o m m e n ta r y (Federal Reserve Bank o f Cleveland, June 1999).
4 See Randy E. Ilg, “The nature o f employment growth, 1989-95,”
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1996, pp. 29-36.
5 Employment and earnings data analyzed in this article are based on the
Outgoing Rotation Group files from the cps . Median weekly earnings for a ll
wage and salary workers, both full and part time, are analyzed, unless other
wise noted. Self-employed workers are excluded, regardless of whether their
businesses are incorporated. (Earlier research by Ilg, cited in note 4, ana
lyzed to ta l employment, including the self-employed.) The year 1989 was
chosen as the beginning year for the analysis presented herein because labor
market activity at the end o f the 1980s resembled that of the late 1990s and
also because 1989 was sufficiently removed from the influence o f the reces
sion that started in m id-1990.
6 Some o f the earnings data presented in the article have been adjusted
for breaks in series associated with the introduction o f the redesigned cps in
1994. Adjustments were made to median weekly earnings for the lowest earn
ings group and for earnings at the 10th percentile for all workers and each of
the three earnings groups. The rationale for making these adjustments is dis
cussed in detail in notes 13 and 15.
7 See Kenneth J. Stewart and Stephen B. Reed, “Consumer Price Index
research series using current methods, 1978-98,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ,
June 1999, pp. 29-3 8 . The increase in real median weekly earnings in 199799 is particularly noteworthy. A change in real earnings can occur because
either nominal wages or the rate of inflation (or both) changed. Throughout
much o f the 1990s, the annual rate o f increase in the cpi- u - rs was about
equal to that o f nominal earnings. From 1997 to 1999, the rate of inflation
was well below levels seen earlier in the decade, while the increase in nomi
32 Monthly Labor Review March 2000
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
nal earnings improved. Other earnings measures, such as average weekly
earnings for private production or nonsupervisory workers from the ces pro
gram, showed a similar pattern.
8 For the purposes of this article, full-time workers are those who usually
work 35 hours or more on their principal job.
9 For additional information on the employment diversity in the services
industry, see Joseph R. Meisenheimer II, “The services industry in the ‘good’
versus ‘bad’ jobs debate,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1998, pp. 22-47.
10 The methodology used was adopted from that employed in previous
research on job growth. (See Ilg, “The nature o f employment growth.”) Earn
ings data for 1988 were chosen for purposes o f ranking the individual occu
pation-industry categories, because that year was outside the period o f study,
but representative o f the level o f economic activity throughout much o f the
1989-99 period. Similarly, data for 1988 were used as the basis for splitting
employment into three groups o f nearly equal size. The groups do not neces
sarily contain exactly one-third of wage and salary employment, because an
occupation-industry category that fell on the dividing line between groups
was not split, but rather, was included in the group into which most o f its
employment fell. Sensitivity testing has shown that ranking the occupationindustry categories by earnings from other years may influence those catego
ries on the boundary of the major earnings groups. That is, some categories
tend to move in or move out of the major earnings groups, based on which
year is chosen for purposes o f ranking. However, using earnings from other
years to rank the occupation-industry categories also shows that the trends in
employment growth for all earnings groups were similar to those presented
in this analysis, although the magnitudes of the changes differed somewhat.
11 Occupation-industry categories that had an employment base o f less
than 50,000 in either 1989 or 1999 are not shown separately in the table,
because the earnings estimates for relatively small groups are generally asso
ciated with relatively large standard errors. Employment and earnings data
for these categories with fewer workers are, however, included in the totals
for the highest, middle, and lowest earnings groups. Combined, the 21 occu
pation-industry categories (out of the total o f 90) accounted for a negligible
portion o f the net increase in employment between 1989 and 1999. Data are
ranked in descending order by percent change in employment. The annual
estimates of employment and earnings for the nine major occupations and
10 major industries from 1989 to 1999, as well as the 90 individual data
series, are available from the authors upon request.
12 The reader is cautioned that the middle earnings group is not intended to
represent the “middle class.” While many studies have documented the ero
sion of the number of persons, households, or families in the “middle” o f the
distribution of incomes (a trend often characterized as the “declining middle
class”), this article does not attempt to shed further light on that issue.
13 In January 1994, a new questionnaire and survey methodology were
introduced into the cps . The survey questions on earnings were modified
substantially, to improve the quality o f the data. While estimates o f o v e r a ll
median weekly earnings were not materially affected by the redesigned sur
vey, the impact on earnings data for persons at the bottom o f the weekly
earnings distribution was significant. In particular, changes to the survey in
1994 led to lower reported earnings for relatively low-paid workers, com
pared with pre-1994 estimates. To account for this break in the various se
ries, median weekly earnings figures for the lowest earnings group over the
1989-93 period have been adjusted to reflect the methodology used in 1994
and later years. After adjustment, the real median weekly earnings for the
lowest earnings group for the years 1989-93 are somewhat lower than the
unadjusted figures for those years, resulting in a slightly larger percent change
over the entire 1989-99 period (11.6 percent, as opposed to 7.8 percent be
fore adjustment). Because of the very small sample sizes, no attempt was
made to adjust the earnings series for the detailed occupation-industry cat
egories in the lowest earnings group. (The adjustment factors were produced
specifically for this article by Anne E. Polivka o f the Bureau of Labor Statis
tics and were derived using methods she has developed as part o f ongoing
research. See Anne E. Polivka, “Using Earnings Data from the Current Popu
lation Survey after the Redesign,” Bureau of Labor Statistics, working paper
306, January 1999. The adjustment factors are available from the authors
upon request.)
Mishel, “Has wage inequality stopped growing?” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ,
December 1997, pp. 3-16.
15
As explained in note 13, in this article earnings data for the 1989-93
period have been adjusted (where applicable) for breaks in series associated
14
Percentiles for any wage or income distribution are calculated by rankwith the redesign of the cps in 1994. With respect to various percentiles,
ing earnings observations from lowest to highest and then determining the
research has shown that the upper limit o f the first decile for all workers was
earnings level for the upper limit o f a given percentile cutoff. For example,
significantly lower, as measured under the redesigned survey; hence, data
10 percent o f earnings observations are below the upper limit of the 10th
for the 1989-93 period have been adjusted (downward) to make them more
percentile (or first decile). For a recent analysis and discussion of wage in
comparable. In addition, the first decile was adjusted for each of the three
equality, see, for example, Paul Ryscavage, I n c o m e I n e q u a lity in A m e r ic a
individual earnings groups. As mentioned in note 13, the 50th percentile
(New York, M.E. Sharpe, 1998); see also Jared Bernstein and Lawrence
(median) for the lowest earnings group also required adjustment.
■■■■■■a
Where are you publishing your research?
The Monthly Labor Review will consider for publication studies of the labor force, labor-man
agement relations, business conditions, industry productivity, compensation, occupational safety
and health, demographic trends, and other economic developments. Papers should be factual and
analytical, not polemical in tone.
We prefer (but do not require) submission in the form of an electronic file in Microsoft Word,
either on a diskette or as an attachment to e-mail. Please use separate files for the text of the article;
the tables; and charts. We also accept hard copies of manuscripts.
Potential articles should be mailed to: Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Washington, DC 20212, or by e-mail to mlr@bls.gov
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review March 2000 33
Aviation Employment
Transportation by air: job growth
moderates from stellar rates
Aviation employment and business activities
increased massively fo r decades,
but growth slowed in the ’90s
William C. Goodman
William C. Goodman
Is an economist in the
Office of Employment
and Unemployment
Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
ommercial air transportation has grown
rapidly in the United States since 1938 or
earlier.1The most significant reason for
such growth is probably that air travel has be
come almost continuously more affordable. Ticket
prices adjusted for inflation have been falling con
sistently since 1950 or earlier.2
Airfares have decreased over the years not
because of any one consistent reason, but be
cause of two distinct sets of circumstances: regu
lation and deregulation. From 1938 to 1978, Fed
eral control of fares, routes, and even the exist
ence o f each airline prevailed. After the lifting of
economic regulation, price competition was a
major force. Before 1978, development of the
commercial airplane itself contributed heavily to
decreases in the costs of operations and conse
quently to lower fares (after adjustment for infla
tion). After 1978, when changes in routes and
fares and the formation of new airlines became
unrestricted, price competition and a variety of
management responses to competition have re
duced o p erato rs’ costs. The resulting lower
fares have multiplied demand and jobs in the in
dustry.
A ccording to estim ates from the Bureau of
Labor S ta tistic s,3 em ploym ent in commercial
aviation increased by about 700,000 jobs, or
m ore than 400 percent, from 1958 to 1996 as
output, consisting m ainly of passenger-m iles
and cargo ton-m iles, increased by more than
1,800 percent.4 Although the main purpose of
this article is to explain the trend in numbers of
jobs in the industry, the m ovem ent of aviation
output is cited often. Some industries have
been know n to lack a close connection be-
C
34
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
tw een p ro d u c tio n and e m p lo y m en t; th o r
oughly autom ated processes in certain indus
tries may explain the possibility of little con
nection betw een volum e o f production and
num ber of em ployees. The aviation industry,
despite its great technological advances, re
m ains a service industry, and is labor-inten
sive. A ccording to the A ir T ransport A ssocia
tion, “ . . . there is no changing the fact that
they [airlines] are in a service business where
custom ers require, and often dem and, a lot of
personal attention. M ore than one-third of the
revenue generated each day by the airlines
goes to pay its w orkforce.”5 This article shows
the extent to which em ploym ent and produc
tion are linked in the aviation industry.
Despite the massive cumulative increases of
output and employment, the growth of both de
celerated; recent increases have been at reduced
rates. This article explains some of the many tech
nological, legislative, and business changes that
have caused the growth and the deceleration of
the industry.
Economic performance
The amount of growth that has occurred in the
industry’s jobs and business, both in isolation and
in relation to other transportation industries, the
general economy, and U.S. international trade, is
extraordinary. To give one of many possible per
spectives, from 1971 to 1997, the proportion of U.S.
adults who had ever traveled by an airliner increased
from less than half (49 percent) to 81 percent. Ac
cording to surveys from the Air Transport Asso
ciation of America, the proportion of adults who
Trends in the former and current estimates of air transportation employment, 1988-96
Within the transportation division, establishments are as
signed to a specific industry based on the main economic ac
tivity of the entire company. In 1996, a considerable number of
establishments engaged in express delivery of letters and pack
ages were re-evaluated regarding the industry in which they
properly belonged. Most of the establishments in question
had been considered members of the trucking industry; a
smaller number had been assigned to the transportation ser
vices industry. In 1997, these establishments were reassigned
to the air transportation industry. Estimates of employment in
trucking were reduced, and estimates of employment in trans
portation by air were increased. Each of the two changes was
on the order of 250,000 jobs. Because of the significant break
in the aviation employment data, the old series, which is ana
lyzed in this article, was terminated in 1997. On the basis of the
changes in industry classification, new estimates of employ
ment in trucking and in transportation by air were calculated
from microdata back to the year 1988.
The revision in the estimated number of employees in
transportation by air is large enough so that estimates for
years prior to 1988, available only in the old series, are not
compatible with estimates from the new series for purposes
of analyzing the trends of the industry. To analyze the
growth of employment in airlines over several decades,
starting in 1958, analysis of employment in this article is
generally confined to the use of the old series of estimates.
Despite the difference in magnitude between the old series
and the new one, the 8-year trend of the old series in terms of
percent employment growth agrees with the new series’ trend
during the period of overlap, from 1988 to 1996. Although the
two time-series show differing percent changes in various in
dividual years, the two estimated aggregate percent changes
from 1988 to 1996 are within 1 percentage point of each other.
(As shown below, the aggregate growth in employment is
estimated at 31.1 percent in the discontinued series and 30.2
percent in the new series.) Average annual percent growth
during the 8-year period is 3.4 percent in each of the two series.
An indication of growth in jobs in years after 1996 is pro
vided only by the new series. From 1996 to 1999, growth
accelerated somewhat to 3.8 percent per year from 3.4 per
cent in the preceding 8-year period.
The recent growth, however, is clearly slower than that of
still earlier years as estimated by the old series. In the 31year period through 1989, employment grew by an average
of 4.7 percent per year, sharply differing from the more re
cent 3.8 percent rate.
C om parison o f two sets o f estim ates o f em ploym ent in transportation by air, 1988-99
Old series
New series
Year
Thousands
Total 1 9 8 8 -9 6 ..................
1 9 8 8 ...............................
1 9 8 9 ...............................
1990 ...............................
1 9 9 1 ...............................
1 9 9 2 ...............................
1 9 9 3 ...............................
1 9 9 4 ...............................
1 9 9 5 ...............................
1996 ...............................
1997 .....................................
1998 .....................................
1999 ....................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent change
Thousands
31.1
646
683
745
733
730
740
753
788
847
5.7
9.1
-1 .6
-.4
1.4
1.8
4.6
7.5
Percent change
30.2
850
897
968
962
964
988
1,023
1,068
1,107
5.5
7.9
-.6
.2
2.5
3.5
4.4
3.7
1,134
1,183
1,237
2.4
4.3
4.6
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
35
Aviation Employment
had traveled on an airliner in the latest 12 months increased from
21 percent to 39 percent during the period.6
Between 1960 and 1996, the output of the air transport in
dustry increased sixteen-fold. By comparison, the output of
the entire business sector only increased by a factor of 3.6.
Total passenger-miles of all major forms of transportation
tripled, and domestic ton-miles of all major modes of freight
transportation increased 1-1/2 times. (See chart l.)7
major mode of freight transportation.
It is true, however, that the percent increases in interna
tional air cargo and domestic air cargo are not nearly ap
proached by the other modes. The following tabulation shows
rates of growth in the major forms of freight transportation.9
Increase in ton-miles
Mode
In billions
In percent
12
701
784
351
2,226
146
37
85
7
502
Substitution?
Most modes of transportation have grown
during the last 40 years. But to a considerable extent, aviation
has taken over the roles of other forms of travel in the typical
American life; flight is now a more frequent experience, and
most other major modes of passenger transportation have not
kept up with the growth of the general economy. The only
large category of U.S. transportation to show an actual reduc
tion of business in recent decades is rail passenger transport,
which lost 12 billion annual passenger miles from 1960 to 1996.
Even if all those who previously traveled by train now travel
by air, the loss in rail passenger transport would explain only 3
percent of the increase in domestic air passenger business. In
1960, air transport was 2 percent of all U.S. domestic passen
ger-miles (including the use of private automotive vehicles);
air transport rose to 10 percent of the total by 1996. The fol
lowing tabulation compares changes in the volumes of the
major passenger modes from 1960 to 1996. (Over the same
period, by comparison, gross domestic product in chained
1996 dollars increased by 231 percent.) 8
Change in passenger- miles
Mode
Total, all modes...............
Air......................................
Highway, except bus..........
Intercity bus (1960-95).....
Rail.....................................
In billions
2,939
395
2,400
9.7
-12
200
1,293
170
50
-70
March 2000
455 million tons
78
Deceleration.
The growth of output in air transport, however,
has decelerated over the decades. The output of the industry
increased by 648 percent, or 10.6 percent per year, from 1958 to
1978. A closer look shows that growth was concentrated in the
earlier part of the period and slowed to a 6.0-percent rate in the 10
years ending in 1978. From 1978 to 1996, output increased by 5.5
percent per year. From 1986 to 1996, output gained a further
decelerated 5.0 percent per year.10 Some, but not all, of the decel
eration is attributable to reduced growth in the business sector
as a whole. The following tabulation shows the relationship be
tween growth of output in air transport and increases in output
in the entire business sector.
In percent
In contrast to air passenger service, air cargo has not taken
the role of any other mode of freight transportation to any
large extent. All three domestic surface modes of freight trans
portation (truck, rail, and water) operate on a much greater
scale than air transportation of freight and have shown much
more massive growth. The increase in domestic air freight tonmiles since 1960, though large as a percentage of its 1960 level,
is about 12 billion ton-miles, while intercity trucking, domestic
water, and rail freight have each increased by between 350
billion and 785 billion ton-miles. Similarly, the scale of interna
tional air cargo has been insufficient to affect the growth of
the much vaster operations of international water cargo by
much. Aviation has not seriously reduced the growth of any
36
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1960-96:
Domestic air cargo...................
Intercity trucking.....................
R ail..........................................
Domestic w ater.......................
1970-94:
International air cargo..............
International water tonnage
(ton-miles not available)......
Percent change per
year in output
Air
transport
(a)
1960-70................. ...............
1970-80................. ...............
1980-90................. ...............
1990-96................. ...............
14.3
6.0
6.1
4.4
Business Ratio of
sector (a) to (b)
(b)
4.3
3.5
3.4
3.0
3.3
1.7
1.8
1.5
Further explanations for the deceleration in air transport busi
ness, and in turn for the deceleration of employment in avia
tion, have to do with the history of aviation technology, regu
lation by the Federal Government, and the airlines’ operational
methods. Other explanations relate to general economic decel
eration. The technology, regulation, and business strategies
of the industry have changed greatly; major changes will be
explained in later sections of this article.
Growth o f subdivisions o f air transport.
The various cat
egories of air transport (freight, passenger, domestic, and in-
Chart 1
Aviation output and business-sector output, 1959 to 1996
Multiple of
1959 level
Multiple of
1959 level
Chart 2. Output and employment in transportation by air, 1958 to 1996
Employment
in thousands
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Index of
output
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
37
Aviation Employment
temational) have grown at far different rates. Air cargo has
increased much more rapidly, in percent terms, than passenger
flight. From 1970 to 1996, while passenger-miles almost qua
drupled, air cargo ton-miles increased to about six times their
1970 level. One explanation for the rapid growth of air cargo
may be the growth of catalog and mail-order retailers, who
often offer express delivery by air. From 1982 to 1995, the out
put of such catalog and mail-order retailing increased by 222
percent, while the output of the entire business sector in
creased by 61 percent.11 In the domestic market for freight
transportation, relative costs are a factor; from 1960 to 1996,
the cost of domestic airfreight adjusted for inflation declined,
while the cost of class 1 intercity trucking increased.12 Greater
international trade is another explanation for the growth of air
cargo, as discussed later in this article.
The transportation of passengers may be divided between
business travel and personal travel. Both business trips and
personal trips have increased substantially, but the growth of
personal travel has been greater. From 1977 to 1997, business
trips increased by 125 percent, but personal trips increased by
175 percent. As personal travel is more sensitive to fares, the
long-term decline in fares is a more important factor in per
sonal flights than in business trips.
W ithin the broad category of reasons for personal travel,
the specific reason that showed the most dramatic gain was
sightseeing and resort use. Travel to resorts and the sights
motivated trips for 20 percent of air travelers in 1977 and 31
percent in 1997. Flying to visit friends or relatives also in
creased as a proportion of air travelers’ purposes. In 1977, 53
percent of air travelers flew to visit people; in 1997,71 percent
did. (Some individuals took more than one trip for more than
one personal reason.)13
in leisure activities during at least part of their stay increased
substantially, from 47 percent in 1983 to 63 percent in 1996.
Growth in visits to the United States appears to be concen
trated among those motivated by leisure and recreational ac
tivities.15
Among U.S. residents flying overseas, growth in trips has
the opposite concentration in motive. All major categories of
activity contributed to an overall 103-percent increase in over
seas flights by U.S. residents, but the proportionately greatest
increase was in work and work-related activities. Those per
forming business or professional activities overseas increased
from 27 percent of the total in 1983 to 36 percent in 1996.16
In freight transport as well, domestic service is greater in
scale than international service and contributed a larger in
crease in ton-miles. From 1970 to 1996, domestic air cargo in
creased by 10.7 billion ton-miles, and international ton-miles
increased by 7.4 billion. But, as in passenger service, interna
tional freight increased at a greater percentage rate (567 per
cent) than domestic freight (488 percent).
The enormously increased share of international, as opposed
to domestic, business in general requires more air travel, in
cluding both cargo transport and passenger flight for busi
ness purposes. International cargo traffic is also boosted by
manufacturers’ “just-in-time” approach to inventory, which
became widespread in the 1980s and 1990s, and by recent con
sumer demand for fresh foods of all kinds regardless of the
season.17 The following tabulation shows the increasing pro
portions of international business as a part o f the U.S.
economy.18
U.S imports as a
percentage
o f gross domestic.
product
Growth: domestic versus international.
Within the category
of passenger transport, domestic flight contributed most of
the increase in business because domestic operations consti
tute the bulk of the passenger business. But international busi
ness grew proportionately more. From 1960 to 1996, domestic
passenger miles increased by 1,293 percent (395 billion pas
senger miles), and international passenger-miles increased by
1,741 percent (145 billion passenger-miles).14
From 1983 to 1996, the number of overseas visitors to the
United States nearly tripled (a 189-percent increase), reaching
a level of 22.7 million arrivals in 1996. Trips to the United
States by overseas residents grew to outnum ber overseas
trips from the United States by U.S. residents, during the pe
riod. W hile a single trip can have more than one purpose, a
nearly constant percentage of visitors from overseas (32 per
cent in 1983 and 31 percent in 1996) performed business or
professional activities in the United States. The proportion
that visited friends or relatives in the United States also was
stable at 30 percent to 31 percent. The percentage indulging
38
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
1960...............................
1970...............................
1980...............................
1990...............................
1996...............................
Jobs.
4.6
6.3
6.7
9.5
12.3
U.S exports as a
percentage
o f gross domestic
product
3.7
4.5
6.8
8.6
11.2
Employment of airline personnel is linked tightly to air
transport output. Ninety-nine percent of the variation in num
bers of employees from 1958 to 1996 can be predicted on the
basis of industry output, according to a regression calcula
tion. Chart 2 shows that the curves representing output and
employment over time have similar shapes.
The number of jobs added and the amount of output added
each year, however, have not been in a constant proportion to
each other. Over time, fewer employees are hired for a given
amount of additional business because technological and op
erational progress allows for the more efficient use of both old
and new employees.
Like output, employment in the industry has grown almost
every year since 1958. From 1958 to 1996, despite various mass
layoffs, mergers, and failures, employment in the air transpor
tation industry as a whole increased from 165,000 to 847,000, a
413-percent increase, or an average of 4.4 percent per year.
(See table 1.)
Not surprisingly, employment in air transportation has ex
panded at a far greater rate than employment in other modes of
travel. Aside from the much greater percent increases of busi
ness in air transportation, another major factor contributes to
the differences in hiring: employment in rail and water trans
portation declined even as ton-miles increased. Percent in
creases or decreases in jobs by mode are shown in the follow
ing tabulation:
Mode
Year
Rail..............................................
Water...........................................
Air...............................................
Trucking and
warehousing ............................
Air...............................................
Employment
change
in percent
1958-96
1964-96
1958-96
-76
-24
413
1988-96
1988-96
21
31
A deceleration is evident in aviation employment. While
jobs increased by 4.6 percent per year from 1958 to 1978, from
1978 to 1996 they increased by 4.1 percent per year. From 1990
to 1996, the rate of increase slowed to 2.2 percent. The follow
ing tabulation shows the relationship between growth in avia
tion-industry jobs and all nonfarm payroll jobs:
Air
transport
Total
nonfarm
Ratio o f percent
growth in air
transportation
to percent growth
in total
nonagricultural
industry
4.6
4.1
5.1
2.2
2.7
1.8
1.9
1.5
1.7
2.3
2.7
1.5
Annual percent
change in jobs
1958-78
1978-96
1980-90
1990-96
..................
..................
..................
..................
In proportion to the general economy, then, jobs in transpor
tation by air have not increased as strongly in the 1990s as
they had in earlier decades.
Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics permit the
comparison of rates of job growth in the following subdivi
sions of the aviation industry since 1988: scheduled passen
ger service, air courier service (the carrying of letters and small
parcels), nonscheduled air transportation, and support ser
vices, including the operation of airports and the servicing of
aircraft. The following tabulation shows rates of growth in
employment by industry from 1988 to 1998.19
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SIC
Industry
Transportation by air ..
45
4512 Scheduled air
transportation
(passenger and
cargo, over regular
routes on regular
schedules).................
4513 Air couriers (letters,
parcels, and generally
smaller packages)......
452
Nonscheduled transport
(nonscheduled cargo,
charter, and others)....
458
Support services
(airports, flying fields,
services)....................
Increase as a
percentage
o f entire increase
Percent
in jobs in
increase
transportation
in employment
by air
39
100
15
20
70
59
137
8
48
13
The faster recent growth of cargo transportation, as opposed
to passenger traffic, is reflected in the more rapid growth of air
couriers (who carry only letters, parcels, and packages) and
nonscheduled transport (which is dom inated by cargo).
Scheduled air transportation, on the other hand, is dominated
by the more slowly growing passenger traffic. The rapid
growth of support services such as airport operations is ex
plained in part by the building up of airport facilities to handle
greater cargo traffic.20
Layoffs in recessions. During and soon after the last three
recessions (over the years 1980 to 1991), layoffs in the indus
try have been proportionately much more severe than those
of the entire nonfarm sector. (See table 2.) Because personal
air travel is generally not a necessity, individuals may be more
likely to sacrifice it as opposed to other goods or services.
The consistently thin financing of the airlines also makes lay
offs and company failures more difficult to avoid.21
After the recession of 1969 to 1970 (and to a lesser extent,
after the recession of the mid-1970s), air transport employ
ment continued to fall well after the official end of the reces
sion and the upturn of total employment. In the case of the
1969 to 1970 period, the decline in airline employment also
started before the recession. In both periods, the declines were
not strictly recessionary, as various special problems then af
fected the industry. (See the section on deregulation later in
this article.)
In the latest recession, the loss of jobs in air transportation
was almost entirely in scheduled air transportation (sic 4512,
losing 24,000 jobs). Air couriers (sic 4513) expanded in em
ployment at a reduced rate during the recession; they gained
19,000 jobs in the 12 months just before the recession and
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
39
Aviation Employment
Table 1.
Comparison of employment in air transportation and in all nonagricultural industry, 1958-96
Total
nonagricultural
employment
Air transportation
employment
Year
Number
(in thousands)
Percent
change
Number
(in thousands)
Percent
change
Ratio of percent growth
In air transport
em ploym ent to percent
growth in total nonfarm
employment
1958...........................
1959...........................
165
179
8.5
51,322
53,270
3.8
2.2
1960...........................
1961 ...........................
1962...........................
1963...........................
1964...........................
1965...........................
1966...........................
1967...........................
1968...........................
1969...........................
191
196
197
202
213
229
248
298
329
353
6.7
2.6
.5
2.5
5.4
7.5
8.3
20.2
10.4
7.3
54,189
53,999
55,549
56,653
58,283
60,763
63,901
65,803
67,897
70,384
1.7
-.4
2.9
2.0
2.9
4.3
5.2
3.0
3.2
3.7
3.9
-7 .5
.2
1.3
1.9
1.8
1.6
6.8
3.3
2.0
1970...........................
1971 ...........................
1972...........................
1973...........................
1974...........................
1975...........................
1976...........................
1977...........................
1978...........................
1979...........................
352
345
348
366
368
363
374
386
408
438
-.3
-2 .0
.9
5.2
.5
-1 .4
3.0
3.2
5.7
7.4
70,880
71,211
73,675
76,790
78,265
76,945
79,382
82,471
86,697
89,823
.7
.5
3.5
4.2
1.9
-1 .7
3.2
3.9
5.1
3.6
-.4
-4.3
.3
1.2
.3
.8
1.0
.8
1.1
2.0
1980...........................
1981 ...........................
1982...........................
1983...........................
1984...........................
1985...........................
1986...........................
1987...........................
1988...........................
1989...........................
453
455
444
455
488
522
566
603
646
683
3.4
.4
-2.4
2.5
7.3
7.0
8.4
6.5
7.1
5.7
90,406
91,152
89,544
90,152
94,408
97,387
99,344
101,958
105,209
107,884
.6
.8
-1 .8
.7
4.7
3.2
2.0
2.6
3.2
2.5
5.3
.5
1.4
3.6
1.5
2.2
4.2
2.5
2.2
2.3
1990...........................
1991 ...........................
1992...........................
1993...........................
1994...........................
1995...........................
1996...........................
745
733
730
740
753
788
847
9.1
-1 .6
-.4
1.4
1.8
4.6
7.5
109,403
108,249
108,601
110,713
114,163
117,191
119,608
1.4
-1.1
.3
1.9
3.1
2.7
2.1
6.4
1.5
-1 .3
.7
.6
1.8
3.6
gained 5,000 during the recession. Airports, flying fields, and
services (sic 458), previously gaining about 7,000 jobs per year,
stopped growing, but lost only 1,400 jobs during the reces
sion. It appears that scheduled passenger service is the com
ponent most vulnerable to economic layoffs.
Quality. An increasing volume of complaints in recent years
indicates that the flight experience is more often unpleasant.
Complaints have been about less spacious configurations, “. . .
unexplained delays, baggage hassles and crowded cabins.”22
Unlike other aspects of the industry, the quality of the flight
experience is difficult or impossible to quantify.23Exactly how
to weight less comfortable flights against seriously lower
prices is unclear.
40
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
Technological progress
By 1958, economic regulation of the industry was well estab
lished and effectively prevented price competition. Airlines
therefore had incentive to compete and advance in aspects
other than fares. Between 1958 and 1978 (as well as earlier),
the large civil aircraft typically in use changed greatly. Its
improvements both appealed to the general public in and of
themselves and lowered operational costs. Although prices
did not vary between airlines at a given point in time, cost
savings achieved through m ore advanced aircraft were
passed on to passengers in the form of substantially declin
ing ticket prices after adjustment for inflation. Two changes
to the aircraft were of particular economic importance. First,
fares and make reservations via the Internet.
More importantly, computers are well suited to a much more
sophisticated use. Although ticket pricing had been simple
before the late 1970s (typically divided into only two classes:
first and coach), modern computer reservations systems en
able airlines to provide a complicated and rapidly changing
set of prices for better economic advantage.
Computerized reservations systems facilitate benefiting
from the differing natures of two types of demand: business
travel and personal travel. Generally, the executive on a busi
ness trip has an inflexible schedule and relative indifference to
ticket prices. The pleasure traveler has more time to spend on
layover, more ability to adapt to unpreferred times and dates
of travel, and more sensitivity to prices. With computer reser
vations systems, the airlines can rapidly formulate and imple
ment lower fares with certain restrictions in scheduling, typi
cally required stayovers, to attract more pleasure travelers.
The computer systems also quickly calculate higher fares with
freer scheduling to attract executives on business.
In addition, tickets tend to become more valuable as the
flight becomes more filled and as the date of travel approaches.
Computer reservations systems enable the airlines to recalcu
late fares rapidly in accordance with the changing supply and
demand for seats on a particular flight.31 The industry has
succeeded in filling more seats by means of varying fares;
therefore more passengers share the cost of a flight, bringing
down average fares and consequently aiding growth as aver
age ticket prices fall.
aircraft consistently became larger, so that more travelers
could share the cost of a particular flight. From 1960 to 1978,
the average number of passenger seats per plane increased
from 66 to 146.24
Secondly, aircraft became faster because of the gradual
transition from propeller-generated thrust to jet power, start
ing in the late 19 5 0 s.25 A much faster craft could make more
runs in a given amount of time, so that the crew and the plane
became more productive; consequently, the average cost of a
flight declined. Furthermore, at the time, jet fuel cost about
half as much as the gasoline used in piston aircraft engines.
Faster travel also was more attractive to passengers, and de
mand increased because of quicker trips and because of lower
prices.
Perhaps surprisingly, wide-bodied aircraft, introduced in
1969,26 represented the last major technological change in the
craft to have m ajor economic consequences. After the late
1970s, technological advances in civil air transport have con
tinued, especially in the areas of fuel efficiency and noise
reduction,27 but have been less economically important than
earlier developments. By the late 1970s, the transition to jet
power among the m ajor airlines was already accomplished.
The size of the average airliner in passenger service (in terms
of the number of seats) peaked in 1983, when the average
craft had 165 passenger seats. The average number of seats
then declined to 152 in 1996.28
An initiative to build a domestic supersonic jet for passen
ger service ended in 1971 because of the issue of sonic booms
traveling over populated areas. No U.S. airline has ever oper
ated a supersonic craft.29 Airlines have continued to improve
in fuel efficiency, emissions control, and noise abatement.30
If the further development of civil aircraft had less eco
nomic importance after 1978, a certain earthbound type of
technological system did have considerable economic impact.
Com puter-based reservations systems made reservations
bookkeeping more efficient. Certain major airlines shared sys
tems, generating still greater efficiency. Travel agents’ elec
tronic access to the airlines’ reservations systems further fa
cilitated the sales process. Most recently, customers can check
Deregulation: new ways of competing
After the 1970s, fares continued to fall, even though techno
logical changes had much less economic impact. The reasons
for the continued reductions of fares are mainly related to the
end of most of the Federal Government’s economic control of
air transport.
Federal control of fares and allocation of routes can be
traced back to 1938, when Congress created the Civil Aero
nautics Authority to foster satisfactory air service. The theory
1 Cyclical behavior of aviation employment, 1 9 6 0 -9 1
Transportation by air
Total nonagricultural industry
Official dates
of recession
Dates
of decline
In employment
Duration
of decline
(in months)
Percent
decline
In employment
Dates
of decline
In employment
Duration
of decline
(In months)
Percent
decline
In employment
Apr. 1960— Feb. 1961....
Dec. 1969— Nov. 1970 ....
Nov. 1973— Mar. 1975...
Jan. 1980— Jul. 1980....
Jul.1981— Nov. 1982 ....
Jul. 1990—Mar. 1991 ....
Apr. 1960— Feb. 1961
Mar. 1970— Nov. 1970
Oct. 1974— Apr. 1975
Mar. 1980— Jul. 1980
Jul.1981— Nov. 1982
Jun. 1990— Feb. 1992
10
8
6
4
16
20
2.3
1.5
2.9
1.4
3.0
1.6
A ug.1960—Jan. 1961
Sept. 1969—Jan. 1972
Dec. 1974— Oct. 1975
Jan. 1980— Nov. 1980
Aug. 1981—Aug. 1982
Dec. 1990— Dec. 1991
5
28
10
10
12
12
2.1
6.6
6.0
2.8
4.2
5.1
N o t e : Recessions are designated by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
41
Aviation Employment
that excess, disorderly competition would be bad for the in
dustry exerted a crucial influence on Congress. Unregulated
start-ups of an unlimited number of operators theoretically
would have resulted in so much competition that any particu
lar airline would be unable to attract the capital required to
offer good, sustainable service. A certain degree of concen
tration of capital was believed to be necessary for the devel
opment of adequate airlines. “Chaotic competition” had been
a great problem in the 1920s in various industries. The Civil
Aeronautics Act of 1938 and the Federal Aviation Act of 1958
provided government control of fares, of the creation of any
new interstate airlines, and of allocation of routes among air
lines.32 The airlines were to be protected from too many com
petitors and destructive price slashing.
The Civil Aeronautics Board, the agency created by Con
gress to regulate the airlines economically, prevented cuts in
fares in several ways. First, considerable advance notice of a
change in fare had to be given to the board, alerting competi
tors and thereby reducing the financial incentive to cut fares.
The board also disallowed the formation of new airlines; from
1950 to 1974, 79 companies submitted applications to start
airline service, but none of the applications were approved.
Furthermore, starting in the late 1960s, the Board’s rules effec
tively required an airline to change fares, if it did so, on all of its
routes rather than selected ones. The result was that fare cuts
seldom occurred after 1968.33 The government not only set
rates, but also held down the number of carriers servicing most
routes to three or fewer, greatly reducing the potential compe
tition. (Despite these problems, airfares adjusted for inflation
did decline substantially and almost continuously during the
period of regulation, but perhaps not as much as they could
have.)
With no competition on price, airlines competed on ameni
ties and on convenience, meaning frequency of scheduled
flights. Routine flights, including coast-to-coast ones, by
about half-empty planes became a recognized example of vast
waste. At least theoretically, such wasteful practices at the
expense o f travelers would be seriously reduced by unre
stricted market entry and price competition.
Why Congress deregulated airlines. Various economic pa
pers from as early as the late 1950s suggested that price com
petition in air transport would seriously lower fares.34Deregu
lation did not occur, however, until the combination of three
economic events contributed to widespread public dissatis
faction with air travel and passage of the Airline Deregulation
Act of 1978. First, the Arab oil embargo of 1973 was followed
by huge increases in fuel costs. The price of jet fuel climbed
greatly through 1981. Secondly, the recession of the m id-1970s
reduced growth in airline business and contributed to a down
turn in airline volume in 1975. And third, the carriers’ financial
vulnerability was worsened because carriers had recently in
42
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
curred the expense of newly developed wide-bodied aircraft
and were unable to fill them. To protect the airlines, the Civil
Aeronautics Board allowed considerable increases in fares (the
price of a passenger-mile, not adjusted for inflation, rose by a
third from 1973 to 197835) and allowed carriers to reduce ser
vice. The public response to higher prices and scarcer seats
was unfavorable. Prominent Senate subcommittee hearings
spread the idea that ticket prices would be reduced signifi
cantly under free competition. Fares, including the cost of
moving freight as well as people, availability of seats, and the
financial soundness of the carriers, then, were the key issues
in a historic reversal of government policy.36
Starting in late 1977, cargo carriers were allowed to set their
own prices and fly any domestic route. The Airline Deregula
tion Act passed in October 1978, and by late 1979, “carriers
were able to launch just about any domestic service they
wanted”and decide on their own ticket prices.37 New provid
ers of domestic airline service also were permitted to start op
erations; the number of carriers using craft with over 60 pas
senger seats more than tripled from 1978 to 1984.38 Interna
tional air service, however, was not deregulated, as the vari
ous governments did not agree to do so.
In retrospect, two of the developments that caused deregu
lation were of relatively short duration or were misperceived.
The large increases in ticket prices were perhaps the most
important immediate motivation, yet they were arguably illu
sory. The nominal price increases near the end of regulation,
from 1973 to 1978, were indeed large, but adjustment of the
fares for general inflation (using the Consumer Price Index or
c p i ) shows that real prices of airline tickets continued to fall
even in that time, despite the Arab oil embargo. Adjusted for
inflation, airfares fell by 2.3 percent per year from 1973 to 1978.
The downward trend in real prices in the 5-year period, then,
was at about the same rate as in the preceding years.39
The mid-1970s recession, which in reducing airline business
led to fears about the airlines’ financial survival, ended in 1975.
Even during the recession, airline business (as measured by
output) declined in only one year, 1975, the final year of the
recession. In 1976, still under regulation even if regulation was
eased in policy, airline-industry output (consisting primarily
of passenger-miles and cargo ton-miles) rose by 10 percent
and reached an all-time high, as it had in every year since 1948
except for 1975. Two of the immediate motivations for deregu
lation (rising fares and declining business), then, were argu
ably illusory reasons for a permanent change in policy.
Changes in economic trends of the industry clearly occurred
soon after deregulation. Greater competition, generating lower
prices and consequently greater demand, was a major devel
opment. The number of carriers was obviously affected. Soon
after passage of the Airline Deregulation Act, entrepreneurs
did indeed respond to the sudden possibility of flying routes
at will. The number of major, national, and regional airlines had
decreased from 52 in 1971 to 43 in 1978; but in 1979,60 such
carriers (40 percent more) operated. Still more airlines opened
for business, until the number peaked at 87 in 1984.40
The established major airlines successfully regained market
share by means of the following changes:
• Flying more routes
• Making cooperative arrangements with commuter airlines to
offer m ore continuous routes under the same brand
name so as to offer greater convenience and more visibility
• Using computer reservation systems tied in with travel agen
cies and offering a range of prices for the same trip
• Conducting frequent-flyer programs
• Increasing production quotas of personnel
The number of carriers decreased to 60 in 1989 as mainly the
newer ones failed. The number of carriers then climbed to 96
by 199641 as demand for travel continued to increase and the
successful strategies of the majors had already had their most
crucial effects.42
Yet the level of competition has been greater ever since
deregulation because, since 1978, the major carriers have com
peted much more with each other on particular routes.43 Sur
prisingly enough, the number of carriers nationwide shows
little relationship to overall prices, the volume of business, or
employment. (See chart 3.) But the number of carriers serving
a particular route is highly relevant to ticket prices on that
route. Naturally, routes served by a larger number of competi
tors have lower prices per mile.44
During regulation, from 1969 to 1978, average per-mile ticket
costs, adjusted for inflation using the CPI, fell 2.2 percent per
year. After deregulation, real prices fell at only a slightly faster
rate, 2.3 percent. (See chart 4.) While the airliner was no longer
changing so substantially to produce more economical opera
tions, price competition was occurring. According to one re
spected source, deregulation was responsible for 58 percent
of the price cuts from 1978 to 1993 and made fares 22 percent
lower than they would have been without deregulation.45 As
stated earlier, lower prices raise demand and contribute to
growth and, in turn, employment.
In recent years, however, ticket prices have fallen at a reduced
rate. From 1986 to 1998, they declined by 1.8 percent per year.
passengers to be transported by a flight crew, aided by a
dispatcher and other ground personnel whose efforts also
became more efficient as the airliner grew. But in the new
competitive market, the average capacity of a passenger air
craft (in seats) about leveled off, then dropped by 14 percent
from 1986 to 1996. W hen a price war strained airline budgets
soon after deregulation, massive layoffs by certain major air
lines, reduced pay, and renegotiated work rules were used to
cut costs.46 Reservations systems were com puterized and
shared among airlines, reducing the manual workload entailed
in reservations.
The development of the hub-and-spoke system of routes in
the early 1980s was especially advantageous.47 Instead of the
simpler, more traditional arrangement of routes between paired
cities, passengers from various points of origin were flown to
a “hub” and then grouped together to fill a large craft more
fully during a common leg of their journeys. The hub-andspoke system was successful in increasing the number of
seats filled. “Load factor,” the percentage of passenger seats
filled, had increased by 0.2 percent per year from 1958 to 1978,
but increased more than three times as fast, by 0.7 percent per
year, from 1978 to 1996. The hub-and-spoke system, however,
was only one factor responsible for the gains; the deliberate
use of smaller aircraft on routes with less demand has been
another important cause of increasing load factors.48 Despite
more frequent use of smaller craft, the average number of pas
sengers carried per aircraft mile increased from 90 in 1978 to
103 in 1996, making craft and crew more productive.49
Productivity on a per-employee basis50has shown improve
ment almost continuously since 1947, increasing every year
except 1980,1981, and 1988 to 1991 (mostly years of recession,
when reduced business activity in general worked against load
factors). Despite all the benefits of competition, output per
employee advanced much more slowly after 1978, when ongo
ing changes to the aircraft were not so economically meaning
ful. Gains of 6.4 percent per year from 1958 to 1978 slowed to
2.6 percent per year during the 18-year period ending in 1996.
Once the hub-and-spoke system and computer reservations
systems had already been implemented, the rate of increase in
productivity slowed to 1.7 percent per year from 1986 to 1996.
The following tabulation summarizes the percent change per
year in output per person in air transport.
Annual rate
of change
Changed rules and productivity
Labor productivity, highly relevant to the rate of growth in
jobs, had already been increasing impressively before deregu
lation; larger and faster craft made greater productivity on the
part of flight crews possible. After 1978, the causes of increas
ing productivity changed, as m anagem ent developed re
sponses to the newly competitive environment. In earlier years,
the increasing capacity of the average airliner allowed more
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1958-78 ........................................................
1968-78 ......................................................
1978-96........................................................
1978-86 ......................................................
1986-96......................................................
6.4
4.8
2.6
3.8
1.7
Because productivity has been rising more slowly in recent
years, requirements for labor have been greater recently than
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
43
Aviation Employment
44
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
they would have been if productivity had continued to rise at
the faster rates of the past.
The use of smaller planes to reduce costs, while not directly
relevant to labor productivity, is also an important means of
economizing. Smaller aircraft are used more often to cut costs
of equipment and fuel, even if labor productivity is reduced
somewhat as a result. Smaller craft often are appropriate for
more minor spoke routes.51 Most aircraft also are configured
with less room per seat to increase the number of seats and the
potential revenues of each flight, reducing comfort but con
tributing to lower prices.52
The various means of increasing labor productivity and of
increasing the productivity of capital contribute to lower costs
that enable the airlines to reduce fares. Lower fares attract
more passengers and contribute to growth and employment.
Safety
Another important long-term trend in the industry, seldom rec
ognized as a contributor to industry growth in recent decades,
is airline safety. The increasingly safe nature of commercial
flight may be a factor in the public’s increased flying. Rates of
accidents and fatalities have declined greatly in the long
term.53
As the possibility of deregulation was debated in the 1970s,
critics predicted that the loss of regulation would result in a
major decline in safety as smaller, less reliable airlines gained
larger shares of traffic and as established carriers were pressured
to reduce costs, including aircraft maintenance.54 (Only eco
nomic regulation was being debated. Regulation for purposes o f
safety, including required maintenance of craft, specified training
of pilots, and right-of-way rules in the sky, was never ended or
even seriously considered for termination by any important
party.) Trends in two measures of airline safety have remained
favorable, although improvements have decelerated.
Passenger fatalities per million aircraft-miles is one estab
lished measure of air safety. Accidents per thousand depar
tures may be a better one, though, for measuring the fitness of
pilots, controllers, and equipment, considering that the crash
of just one large aircraft can skew the fatality statistic. Depar
tures and arrivals are the most hazardous normal operations
because they involve the greatest proximity to the ground as
well as the heavier traffic o f the airport environment. Further
more, the fatalities-per-miles measure is subject to distortion
when the average length of a flight changes, but the rate of
accidents per thousand departures is free of influence by the
length of flights.
According to both statistical measures of safety, the air
transportation system improved both before and after deregu
lation. Far greater improvement occurred in times closer to the
beginning of substantial commercial aviation, because the rela
tively young industry had more problems to solve. (See chart 5.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The following tabulation will give an idea of the progress that
has been made since 1958, although the year-to-year variability
of figures makes precise analysis of progress in safety difficult.
Average annual percent change
Fatalities
Accidents per
per million
1,000
aircraft miles
departures
1958-96................................
1958-78 ................................
1978-96................................
-2.1
-3.7
-.3
-3.5
-6.1
-.4
In 1996,8.2 million scheduled departures entailed 32 acci
dents, including three fatal ones. The same year, 319 passen
gers out of 581 million carried were killed, implying a fatality
rate of one death for every 1.8 million people boarded.55
Because the most dramatic decreases in accidents occurred
in the earlier decades of the period under study, it seems likely
that most of the increase in the public’s confidence in aviation
also occurred during the earlier decades. If greater confidence
in the safety of aviation contributes to the growth of busi
ness, the bulk of such economic effects were probably also in
the earlier decades.
Analysis
In the last 40 years, in commercial aviation, fares after adjust
ing for inflation have declined, labor productivity has in
creased, and output and employment have increased vastly.
Such trends appear to suggest continuous driving forces.
Certain factors, such as at least some improvement in safety,
general economic growth, and increased international trade
have endured from the regulatory period to the free-market
period and have continued to contribute to the growth of the
industry. But by all accounts, great changes in the economics
of aviation occurred. The pre-regulatory, regulatory, and postregulatory periods each allowed for certain types of progress
in the industry. The development of the airplane itself into a
safe, fast, and efficient vehicle, primarily during the pre-regulatory and regulatory periods, allow ed vast com m ercial
progress. The development of radio navigation systems and
air traffic control, also primarily before deregulation, reduced
accidents, probably reducing the public’s fear of aviation.
Navigation systems and air traffic control also made air ser
vice more reliable because flight became sensible in a greater
range of weather conditions. After deregulation, competition
drove airlines to find ways to economize in operations to
lower fares. Recent fares, after adjustment for inflation, are
cheaper than ever.
General economic deceleration accounts for only part of
the deceleration in the growth of air transport. Other explana-
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
45
Aviation Employment
Chart 5.
Airline accidents per thousand departures, 1958-96
Accidents per
thousand departures
Accidents per
thousand departures
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
N o t e : Data are for Part 121 airlines, which are those subject to Part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations and include all airlines
operating craft with over 30 seats.
S o u r c e : Calculated from series from the Air Transport Association.
tions have to do with innovations that contributed to accel
eration in growth as they were introduced and as they spread
but now have been largely completed. Aircraft ceased to be
come larger or so radically improved in engine design as when
the jet engine first came into commercial use. The time-saving
and cost-cutting accomplished by the two major changes to
the craft have long ceased to be new advantages over the
operations o f the recent past. Hub-and-spoke routing and
computer reservations systems have become standard in the
industry. They can no longer serve to accelerate growth, as they
did when they were introduced and as they spread. The one-time
technological and operational innovations of both the regula
tory period and the post-regulatory period have been standard
for years, and cannot now increase the rate of growth; ticket
sales via the Internet are one possible exception. After 1986,
increases in productivity, reductions in fares, and the growth of
output and employment decelerated. Further innovation may be
required if growth is to be as rapid as in the past.
□
Notes
1 Annual numbers o f passengers carried starting in 1938 can be found
in the “Safety Record o f U.S. Airlines,” Air Transport Association, on
the Internet at h ttp ://w w w .a ir -tr a n sp o r t.o r g .
monthly periodical, E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s . See the box on page 3
for the special attributes o f the estim ates o f em ploym ent used in this
article.
2 Real fares also are from the Air Transport A ssociation, on the
Internet at h ttp ://w w w .a ir -tr a n sp o r t.o r g .
4 Output and productivity statistics used in this article are from the
Office o f Productivity and Technology, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
3 Estimates o f em ploym ent in this article are from the b l s Current
Employment Statistics ( c e s ) survey o f establishments, unless otherwise
noted. The c es program produces estimates o f em ployees on all non
farm payrolls, except in private households, based on a monthly survey
o f about 390,000 work sites. Data from the survey appear in the Bureau’s
46 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
5 Air Transport Association, T h e A ir l in e H a n d b o o k , ch. 4, p. 2, on
the Internet at w w w .a ir -tr a n sp o r t.o r g /h a n d b k /c h a p tr 0 4 .h tm .
6 Air Transport A ssociation o f A m erica, A i r T r a v e l S u r v e y 1 9 9 8
(Washington, 1998), p. V - l.
7 Passenger-mile and ton-mile figures are from N a tio n a l T r a n s p o r ta -
tio n S t a t i s t i c s 1 9 9 8 (U .S . Department o f Transportation, Bureau o f
Transportation Statistics, 1998), tables 1 -10 and 1-11.
8 Passenger-mile and ton-mile figures o f the various modes are from
N a t i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S t a t i s t i c s 1 9 9 8 , tables 1 -1 0 , 1-11 and N a
tio n a l T r a n s p o r ta tio n S ta t is tic s 1 9 9 7 , table 1-7, p. 15.
9 International water tonnage is from N a tio n a l T r a n s p o r ta tio n S t a
t i s t i c s 1 9 9 6 (U .S. Department o f Transportation, 1997), pp. 49, 50.
10 Output figures are from the O ffice o f Productivity and Technol
ogy, Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
11 Traffic figures are from the Air Transport A ssociation, on the
Internet at h ttp ://w w w .a ir-tra n sp o rt.o rg .
12 N a tio n a l T r a n s p o r ta tio n S ta tis tic s 1 9 9 8 (U.S. Department o f Trans
portation, Bureau o f Transportation Statistics, 1998), table 2 -2 1 .
13 Figures for reasons for air travel are from the A ir T ra vel S u rv e y 1 9 9 8
(Washington, Air Transport Association o f America, 1998), p. V-5.
14 D om estic statistics are from N a t i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a tio n S t a t i s t i c s
1 9 9 8 , table 1-11. International statistics are for U.S. scheduled airlines
and are from the Air Transport Association, on the Internet at h ttp ://
w w w .a ir -tr a n sp o r t.o r g .
15 Figures are from the U.S. Department o f Commerce, International
Trade Administration, Tourism Industries. Flights between the U.S. and
Canada or M exico are excluded.
16 International Trade Adm inistration, Tourism Industries. Flights
between the U.S. and Canada or M exico are excluded.
17 See “ t ia c a trustee projects industry growth, impact through 2015,”
(The International Air Cargo A ssociation, July 7, 1997).
Also see Gary Hendricks, “Hartsfield City Limits: Air cargo taking off
at airport,” T h e A tla n ta J o u r n a l, Oct. 20, 1997, pp. E5 ff .
P r e s s w ir e
18 Figures are from the Bureau o f Economic Analysis, U.S. Depart
m ent o f C o m m erce, on the Internet at h tt p : //w w w .s t a t- u s a .g o v /
online.nsf/NIPAnav?openNavigator.
29 T h e A ir lin e H a n d b o o k , ch. 1, p. 10.
30 I b id ., ch. 4, p. 7.
31 I b id ., p. 5.
32 Richard H.K. Vietor, “Contrived competition: econom ic regula
tion and deregulation, 1 920s-1980s,” B u s in e s s H is t o r y , October 1994,
PP- 1 ff33 Stephen Breyer, R e g u la tio n a n d its R e f o r m (Harvard University
Press, 1982), p. 210.
34 T r a n s p o r ta tio n S ta t is tic s A n n u a l R e p o r t 1 9 9 6 , p. 235.
35 Figures provided by Air Transport Association, on the Internet at
h ttp ://w w w .a ir -tr a n sp o r t.o r g .
36 T h e A ir l i n e H a n d b o o k , ch. 2, pp. 1, 2, and Vietor, “Contrived
C om p etition .”
37 Th e A ir lin e H a n d b o o k , p. 2.
38 I b id ., p. 4.
39 Real yield (fare per passenger-m ile) is from the Air Transport
A ssociation.
40 T r a n s p o r ta tio n S ta t is tic s A n n u a l R e p o r t 1 9 9 6 , p. 236.
41 N a tio n a l T r a n s p o rta tio n S ta tis tic s 1 9 9 8 (U.S. Department of Trans
portation, Bureau o f Transportation Statistics, 1999), Appendix A.
42 W in d s o f C h a n g e : D o m e s t i c A i r T r a n s p o r t S in c e D e r e g u l a t i o n
(Washington, Transportation Research Board, National Research Coun
cil, 1991), pp. 103-7.
43 W in d s o f C h a n g e , p. 107.
44
A ir l in e R e g u la tio n : C h a n g e s in A ir f a r e s , S e r v ic e , a n d S a f e ty a t
S m a ll, M e d iu m - S iz e d , a n d L a r g e C o m m u n itie s , rced 9 6 -7 9 (W ashing
ton, General Accounting O ffice, 1996).
45 Morrison and W inston, pp. 12-15.
46 Vietor, “Contrived com petition.”
19 Sic is the acronym for Standard Industrial Classification. See S ta n
d a r d I n d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n M a n u a l 1 9 8 7 (W ashington, O ffice o f
Management and Budget).
20 Gary Hendricks, “Hartsfield City Lim its,” T h e A tla n ta J o u r n a l.
21 See Steven A. Morrison and Clifford Winston, The E v o lu tio n o f the
(W ashington, The Brookings Institution, 1995), pp.
2 8 -3 1 , on the subject o f the relatively low profitability o f airlines.
47 T r a n s p o r ta tio n S ta t is tic s A n n u a l R e p o r t 1 9 9 6 , p. 242.
48 Don Phillips, “Climbing out o f the Red: Struggling Airlines Are
Cramming Passengers into Planes in Bid to Survive,” T h e W a s h in g to n
P o s t, June 18, 1995, pp. HI ff .
A ir l in e I n d u s tr y
49 Calculated from aircraft-miles and passenger-miles, both from the
Air Transport A ssociation.
22 Christopher R eynolds, “ t r a v e l : Lawmakers and waning profits
push airlines into voluntary reforms . .
L o s A n g e le s T im es, June 27,
1999. See also Cynthia Corzo, “A irlin es’ Promises to Improve Cus
tomer Service Mean Little, Skeptics Say,” K n ig h t R id d e r T rib u n e B u s i
n e s s N e w s , June 19, 1999.
50 The hours spent during layovers and how such hours are counted
by em ployers for purposes o f com pensation make the hours worked
by airline em ployees difficult to sample and estimate. Therefore labor
productivity in air transport is calculated in terms o f output per em
ployee, rather than output per hour o f work. Considerable changes in
the average workweek, if they occur, may cause increases or decreases
in output per em ployee. Such changes may distort the apparent e ffi
ciency o f personnel. Nevertheless, this section w ill describe the trends
o f productivity in terms o f the available unit, output per em ployee.
23 See Morrison and Winston, pp. 19-20.
24 Calculated from available seat-mile and aircraft-mile statistics pro
vided by the Air Transport A ssociation. A lso, the point that seating
capacity is an important factor in costs is explained by the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics, U .S. Department of Transportation in T r a n s
p o r t a t i o n S t a t i s t i c s A n n u a l R e p o r t 1 9 9 5 , p. 122.
25 T r a n s p o r ta tio n S t a t is tic s A n n u a l R e p o r t 1 9 9 6 (U .S. Department
o f Transportation, Bureau o f Transportation Statistics, 1996), p. 234.
26 T h e A ir lin e H a n d b o o k , ch . 1, p. 10.
27 I b id ., ch. 4, p. 7.
28 The average seats per craft were calculated by dividing total seatm iles by total aircraft m iles. Therefore the average is a weighted aver
age, with the weights being the amount o f use (in aircraft miles) o f each
plane. The raw seat-miles and aircraft miles were obtained from the Air
Transport A ssociation.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
51 Phillips, “Climbing out o f the Red,” and Th e A ir lin e H a n d b o o k , ch.
4, p. 7.
52 Phillips, “Climbing out o f the Red.”
53 For information on occupational fatalities in aeronautics, see Peggy
Suarez, “Flying Too High: Worker Fatalities in the Aeronautics Field,”
C o m p e n s a t io n a n d W o r k in g C o n d itio n s (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
Spring 2000), pp. 3 9 -4 2 . The article confirms a decreasing trend in
fatalities.
54 T h e E v o lu tio n o f th e A ir lin e I n d u s tr y , pp. 31, 32.
55 Safety figures are derived from statistics provided by the Air Trans
port A ssociation, on the Internet at h ttp ://w w w .a lr-tra n sp o rt.o rg .
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
47
Comparing Earnings Inequality
Comparing earnings inequality
using two major surveys
Some previous research suggests that discrepancies exist
between the National Longitudinal Survey o f Youth
and the Current Population Survey in terms o f earnings trends;
when the sample is limited to full-time, year-round workers,
however, the discrepancies are largely eliminated
Marks. Handcock,
Martina Morris,
and
Annette Bernhardt
Mark S. Handcock is a
statistician and
Martina Morris is a
sociologist at
Pennsylvania State
University, and
Annette Bernhardt is a
sociologist at the
Institute on Education
and the Economy,
Teachers College,
Columbia University
uch of the research on the growing dis
persion of earnings has relied on the
M arch su pplem ent to the C urrent
Population Survey (C PS). As the research ques
tions have turned to such issues as job instabil
ity and long-term wage growth, however, the fo
cus often has shifted to longitudinal surveys,
such as the Panel Study of Income Dynamics
(P S ID )1 and the National Longitudinal Surveys
( n l s ) . 2 In a recent unpublished but widely cited
paper,3 Peter Gottschalk and Robert A. Moffitt
compare annual earnings trends from the p s i d
and two cohorts of the NLS with those of the CPS.4
The authors find that reported earnings in the
p s i d and the original NLS cohort show roughly
the same trends as the CPS, although the magni
tudes are quite different.
For the later NLS cohort, however, known as
the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979
(N L SY 79), Gottschalk and Moffitt find both sig
nificantly lower variance in reported annual earn
ings and a negative trend in variance over time
(1979-1988)— at least for high school gradu
ates. In addition, a more recently published pa
per using different methodology finds a similar
d isc re p a n c y .5 B ecause the findings o f these
studies stand in sharp contrast to the well-known
“stylized fact” that the variance in earnings was
increasing substantially during the 1980s, seri
ous questions may be raised about the validity
of the NLSY79 for research on the topic of recent
trends in earnings inequality.
This article focuses on the comparison be
M
48 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
tw een the N L SY 79 and the c p s , updating the
Gottschalk-Moffitt analysis to 1994, the final year
of data collection for the NLSY79 cohort. Because
Gottschalk and Moffitt report few discrepancies
in the trends for high school dropouts, the analy
sis is restricted to high school graduates. The
article begins by replicating the G ottschalkMoffitt analysis in order to verify the discrep
ancies in reported earnings between the two sets
of data. Next, exploratory data analysis and
respecified regression models are used to com
pare the trends and patterns, and to look for po
tential sources of the discrepancies. The final
section discusses the implications of the find
ings for the validity of the two samples.
Data and methods
The present study generally follows the conven
tions adopted by Gottschalk and M offitt. For
their benchm ark analyses, they select white
males in the civilian noninstitutionalized popu
lation and divide the samples into cells defined
by single years of age (from 16 to 31 years),
level of education (less than a high school edu
cation, high school graduate or more), and survey
year (1979-88).6 Nominal annual earnings are
adjusted for inflation and are expressed in con
stant (1982) dollars. Also, to avoid topcoding is
sues and reduce the problem of earnings nomi
nally falling below minimum wage, the top and
bottom 5 percent of the values are trimmed out
within each cell. Because the trimming is based
on the percentiles within cells rather than across the entire
sample, the cells are the unit of analysis. As in the earlier
paper, for the regression analyses, the CPS and NLSY79 samples
are restricted to respondents who were aged 20 years or older
in the survey year and whose earnings and number of weeks
worked during the previous calendar year both were posi
tive. The dependent variable is the within-cell standard de
viation of trimmed real log annual earnings in the year prior
to the interview.
Updating the Gottschalk-Moffitt analysis beyond 1988 re
quires some changes to the sample selection criteria due to
changes in survey coding procedures that have taken place
since then. In addition, to focus the sample more tightly on a
homogeneous set of white males, some new exclusions are
adopted. The following tabulation compares the sample se
lection criteria used in the present analysis with those used
by Gottschalk and Moffitt in their study.
where
and P2 are the coefficients for the linear effects of
age and year, respectively. The present analysis extends the
earlier study in two ways. First, the regression model is
respecified and two alternative specifications are examined:
a nonparametric model for the age term and a random-ef
fects model to capture the longitudinal sample dependence
in the NLSY79.
The regression residuals for model A show a marked curvi
linear pattern in age that is roughly parabolic in nature. The
time trend is of primary interest here, rather than the effects
of age. Given the correlation between year and age in these
samples, however, the age effect must be specified properly
to obtain an accurate estimate of the time trend. As the lin
ear age specification compromises the interpretation and
statistical significance of the coefficients of both linear
coefficients, the model is respecified using a nonparamet
ric age effect, as follows:
Criteria...............
Gottschalk-Moffitt
Updated analysis
y = a + p + P t + e t a = 20,...,36; t = 79,...,94
Years...................
1979-1988
1979-1994
Age range............
16-21 in 1979
16-21 in 1979
Race....................
White
White, nonHi spanic
Enrollment..........
Employment status
No student
recode-based exclusion
exclusion
Earnings..............
Positive
Positive
Regression sample:
A g e ..................
Weeks worked ..
20 years and older
Positive
20 years and older
Positive
The most important difference in the criteria used here con
cerns the exclusion of students. On the basis of the “employ
ment status recode” variable, Gottschalk and M offitt exclude
CPS and NLSY79 respondents who reported school attendance
as their major activity during the survey week. But the coding
for this variable in the CPS was changed in 1988 and it no
longer identifies school attendance as a unique status. To
preserve consistency across the time series, therefore, this
analysis does not directly exclude students in this way. The
overall impact of the change is relatively small, though, be
cause several of the other exclusions (positive earnings and
number of weeks worked, for example) capture much of the
same population.7
For each data set, descriptive regression analyses similar to
those used in the earlier study were conducted to compare the
trends in earnings across the different samples. Let yai be the
standard deviation of the log annual wages for workers age a
in year t. The model fit by Gottschalk and Moffitt is a simple
linear specification:
y - - f t + A fl + / V + c «
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
<3= 20,...,36; r = 79,...,94
[A]
[B]
where /?0, ..., fi36 are coefficients for each age and jS is the re
gression parameter for the linear time trend.
It is important to note that the two previous studies have
treated both the CPS and the NLSY79 as cross-sectional sur
veys, although the latter is a longitudinal survey. There are
eight cohorts in the NLSY79, defined by respondent’s age in
1979, and each cohort is followed across the entire 16 years
of the series. Observations from the same cohort in the
NLSY79 are likely to be correlated across time, a fact not taken
into account in the G ottschalk-M offitt analysis, the study
by Thomas MaCurdy and others (cited earlier), or in the mod
els (A and B) shown above. The cohort sample dependence
can be modeled in one of two ways— as a fixed effect or as a
random effect. Adding a fixed effect to either model A or
model B is not possible because the parameters for age, year,
and cohort are perfectly confounded (cohort = year minus
age). A random-effect specification is therefore required and
also is more appropriate from a substantive standpoint. The
interest here is not in the cohort effects as indicators of in
herent differences among specific age-year groups. The co
horts are simply samples from their populations, and this
study seeks to capture the covariance in these samples over
time, rather than an estimate of a cohort-specific level ef
fect. Therefore, model B is respecified for the NLSY79 to in
clude a random effect for cohort, as follows:
yyate= a + B• a+ B•t + e tc a = 20,...,36; r= 7 9 ,...,9 4 ;
c = 1,...,8;
£tc -
0
+ 0
TC
[C]
tc
where jS20, ..., /fr36 are coefficients for each age,
Monthly Labor Review
is the coeffi-
March 2000
49
Comparing Earnings Inequality
cient for the linear effect of year, and
(pHare random
variance components for each cohort. Because it requires
no assumptions about the parametric form of the random
cohort effects, a generalized estimating equation (GEE) is
used to fit the model.8
For all o f the linear m odels, w eights are used to re
flect the differing variances o f the yat com ponent of the
m o d e l.9 In the GEE m o d e ls, th e v a ria n c e -c o v a ria n c e
w eight m atrix includes covariance estim ates in the offd ia g o n a l c e lls to a d ju st fo r th e lo n g itu d in a l co h o rt
sam ple dependence. All m odels are fit using the S-PLUS
statistical p ro g ram .10
The second way in which the present study extends the
G ottschalk-M offitt analysis is by reexamining the discrep
an cies in e a rn in g s d isp e rsio n by la b o r fo rce statu s.
Gottschalk and Moffitt use several indicators as proxies of
labor force attachment in an attempt to explain the discrep
ancy in earnings trends: the employment status recode vari
able, more than 40 weeks worked in the past year, and age
23 years and older (presumably to exclude most collegeage students). The present study takes a more direct ap
proach, subdividing the sample into two groups: full-time,
year-round workers ( f t f y ) and others (non-FTFY). The f t f y
group comprises those who worked 35 or more hours per
week and 50 or more weeks per year during the previous
calendar year; the non-FTFY group comprises those who had
positive earnings and hours w orked but who did not work
w ork full tim e and year round. F or the C P S, the co n
structed variable that identifies this status is used, and
for the N L S Y 79, hours and weeks are selected directly. The
definition is the same in both sam ples. The idea here, as
in the earlier study, is to com pare w orkers with relatively
strong attachm ents to the labor force with w orkers who
are less attached to the labor force.
Table 1.
Results
Tables 1 and 2 provide summary statistics for labor force
attachment and annual earnings for workers in both data sets
in 1979, the first year of the series. The sample selections
reflect the updated analysis criteria and can be compared
with the corresponding tables in the paper by Gottschalk
and Moffitt. Table 2 shows patterns similar to those found
in the earlier study— a significantly larger portion of the
NLSY79 sample reports working 40 weeks or more per year.
While fairly pronounced in 1979, this discrepancy in the num
ber of weeks worked during the year declines in subsequent
years.
Despite the difference in reported number of weeks worked,
the earnings figures in table 2 are quite similar across the two
samples. There are no systematic differences in either means or
variances. The numerical values are different than those reported
by Gottschalk and Moffitt, due largely to the inclusion here of
students who had been excluded in the earlier study on the
basis of the employment status recode variable. The bottom
portion of the table shows the statistics for FTFY respondents—
a group likely to exclude such students— and here the two
samples become very close.
The trends in earnings variances over time for the two
samples are shown in chart 1. They show a general decrease
in earnings dispersion with age, and this pattern is much
stronger than the trend over time within specific age groups.
The NLSY79 estimates are more variable, reflecting the smaller
sample sizes. Net of the differences in variability between the
two samples, the greatest differences between them occur
within the younger age groups— those aged 19 to 24 years.
These differences are not very systematic, and in particular,
they do not appear to take the form of consistently stronger
increasing trends over time in the CPS. There is some conver-
Basic descriptive statistics for 1979 survey year
Among high school graduates
High school
graduates
(in percent)
Unweighted
N
A ge
Total (all a g e s )....
1 6 ......................
1 7 ......................
1 8 ......................
1 9 ......................
2 0 ......................
2 1 ......................
N LSY79
CPS
44.7
0.4
.9
45.6
79.3
86.7
87.4
57.8
0.2
.5
47.5
80.3
88.4
87.5
50 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NLSY79
796
1
4
145
218
224
204
March 2000
Percent working
at least 1 week
during the year
CPS
NLSY79
3,261
4
30
507
903
885
932
95.6
96.3
95.2
94.4
96.6
Percent working
40 or more weeks
during the year
Percent working
full time, year round
N LSY79
CPS
92.5
52.9
48.8
26.1
28.4
75.9
90.3
91.7
93.5
93.9
39.2
49.0
62.3
54.6
19.0
37.3
43.4
50.1
59.1
10.5
23.5
36.4
27.2
3.4
15.3
22.6
32.4
37.1
CPS
N LSY79
CPS
Table 2.
Basic income statistics for survey year 1979
Incom e
Unweighted N
m ean
C o v arian c e
Log incom e
Standard
m ean
deviation
Age
NLSY79
CPS
N LSY79
CPS
NLSY79
CPS
N LSY79
CPS
N LSY79
CPS
All workers
1 6 .........................
1 7 .........................
1 8 .........................
1 9 .........................
2 0 .........................
21 .........................
1
2
118
198
214
202
2
28
601
1,100
1,160
1,230
2,608
3,814
6,120
8,373
8,812
1,221
3,071
4,163
5,819
6,643
8,991
463
1,416
2,716
2,661
3,793
3,323
1,621
2,817
2,938
3,768
7.84
8.02
8.45
8.84
8.82
7.11
7.54
8.12
8.39
8.53
8.83
.35
.73
.80
.67
.79
0.00
1.08
.69
.80
.80
.81
0
0
12
45
83
51
0
1
93
245
385
481
5,380
10,067
11,413
13,648
3,497
7,547
10,414
10,823
13,374
839
1,354
1,607
1,466
805
1,012
1,066
1,581
8.48
9.13
9.24
9.46
8.16
8.87
9.18
9.23
9.42
.55
.47
.51
.39
.36
.42
.38
.48
Full-time, yearround workers
1 6 .........................
1 7 .........................
1 8 .........................
1 9 .........................
2 0 .........................
21 .........................
N o t e : Statistics are calculated using sample weights and 5 percent trim of top and bottom earnings.
gence between the two samples for the older respondents,
but the earnings dispersion for the NLSY79 is about 10 per
cent lower, on average, than for the CPS. By contrast, the cell
median incomes in the NLSY79 are consistently about 20 per
cent higher than the corresponding CPS cell means (data not
shown here). Once the two samples of respondents settle into
their prime working years, then, the annual earnings reported
in the NLSY79 are both higher and less variable than those
reported in the CPS.
The standard deviations are modeled by reverting to cells
defined by survey year and single year of age. Much like the
G ottschalk-M offitt study, attention here is restricted to
those aged 20 years and older, with positive weeks worked
in the previous calendar year. The results are displayed in
table 3. All coefficients are multiplied by 10 to be consis
tent with the values reported by Gottschalk and Moffitt. The
coefficients can be interpreted as the change in standard de
viation over a 10-year period.
The results obtained by Gottschalk and Moffitt are shown
in the first three rows of the table for comparison. Consider
first their results based on the em ployment status recode
schooling exclusion. For the CPS, they find a positive but not
significant upward trend in earnings dispersion, while the
corresponding trend for the NLSY79 is negative and also not
significant. Using a more specific measure of school enroll
ment over the past year that is available in the NLSY79 to ex
clude students in that sample, they find the coefficient for
the trend in dispersion changes sign and becomes as strongly
positive as it had been negative, though still not significant.
Further restricting this NLSY79 sample to those aged 23 years
and older, they find the coefficient changes sign again and is
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Unweighted
N
reflects post-trim cell values.
now much more strongly negative than it had been, though
still not significant.
The Gottschalk-M offitt estimate of the time trend is thus
extremely sensitive to the sample exclusions. The same is true
in the present analysis, in part due to the relatively small num
ber of observations in each cell after the screens for positive
earnings and weeks worked and the 10-percent trimming. This
makes for a high level of instability in the cell-specific esti
mates of the earnings variance, and these in turn have a large
impact on the within-age trend estimates. The latter is due to
the interaction between the model, which estimates the time
trend within age, and the structure of the sample. W hile the
two surveys cover 16 years, age groups are observed for, at
most, 8 years, and the average for persons aged 20 years and
older is 6.3 years. The moving cohort window is thus not an
ideal structure for capturing trends within age over time.
When drawing inferences about the discrepancies between
the two samples, it should be kept in mind that the estimates
are not particularly robust.
The remaining rows in table 3 present the results from the
updated analysis. In the first set, we restrict the sample to
the years used by Gottschalk and Moffitt, 1979-1988. The
differences between the results for model A and the results
in the first row of the G ottschalk-M offitt figures reflect
the difference in the sample restrictions between the two
analyses— namely, the inclusion in this analysis of students
who were excluded from the earlier study on the basis of the
CPS employment status recode, as well as the exclusion here
of Hispanics. The impacts are not dramatic, with the CPS co
efficient becom ing slightly less positive under the new
sample restrictions. The NLSY79 coefficient becomes more
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
51
Comparing Earnings Inequality
Chart 1. |Variance of log annual earnings for employed high school graduates by age/year cells, Current
Population Survey and National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1979-94
V ariance of
Current Population Survey
annua! earnings
79
r~
80
81
~82
Ë5
Variance of
St
8Ê
sS
Year
8^8 iS
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
annual earnings
JN O TE _R espondents are grouped in 2-year intervals. Bars show the 95 -p e rce n t con fidence intervals.
52
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
To
sr
92
~^3
^4
negative and now also is statistically significant, though in
magnitude it still lies within the range of estimates reported
in the earlier study.
When a nonparametric specification for age is adopted in
model B, the discrepancy declines— the CPS coefficient in
creases modestly, and the NLSY79 coefficient becomes much
less negative. W hen the random effect for the longitudinal
cohort dependence in the NLSY79 (model C) is added, the co
efficient for the time trend again becomes slightly less nega
tive, and now it is about 30 percent lower than the initial
estimate in model A. While the numerical results obtained
in the earlier study are not replicated exactly, the general
pattern is replicated, showing an increasing trend for earn
ings dispersion in the CPS and a decreasing trend for the
N LSY 79 . The magnitude of the discrepancy and of the nega
tive trend in the NLSY 79 becomes smaller in both of the
respecified models.
The next set of results shown in table 3 (labeled all work
ers) updates the analysis to 1994. For the CPS, the trend in
earnings dispersion is now significantly negative in model
A, as is the trend for the NLSY79. With the nonparametric age
effect, the sign of the CPS coefficient changes to become
positive (although weakly so and not significant), while the
magnitude of the NLSY79 coefficient is still negative but re
duced by about half. Adding the random effect to the NLSY79
slightly increases the magnitude of the negative trend, but it
is still 40 percent lower than the estimate under the initial
model. Respecifying the model once again reduced the dis
crepancy between the two samples.
The results from model C are graphically displayed in
chart 2. The top panel plots the nonparametric age-effect
estimates. The results show that earnings dispersion is high
est among the young, and it falls steeply through the mid
twenties age groups. For the CPS, dispersion then begins to
rise slightly, while for the NLSY79, the decline continues
through the early-thirties age groups, though less steeply,
and then also begins to rise. The nonlinearity for the CPS is
more pronounced, which helps to explain why the nonpara
metric specification in Model B has a relatively larger im
pact on the trend coefficient for that sample.
The bottom panel of chart 2 shows the partial regression
plot of earnings dispersion by year after adjusting for age.
The trend lines are nonparametric local-linear estimates. As
can be seen, the CPS trend is modestly positive. The plot for
the NLSY79, by contrast, clearly shows a negative trend. Note,
however, the large residual variation. The magnitudes of the
time trends for both samples are modest relative to the re
sidual variability.
Next, the analysis is restricted to full-time, year-round
workers in order to determine whether the discrepancies in
earnings dispersion between the two samples persist among
the core group of workers with the strongest attachment to
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 3.
Regression results
Sample restriction and model
CPS
NLSY79
Gottschalk-Moffitt analysis:
CPS— not in scho ol......................................
0.019
-0.038
NLSY79—
nonenrolled................................................
.038
NLSY79—
23 years and o ld e r..................................
-.100
Updated analysis:
1979-88 only
A ..............................................................
B ..............................................................
.015
.020
-.124
-.093
-.089
-049
.009
-.165
-.085
-.092
.025
.032
-.030
-.020
.036
.030
.042
-.126
-.096
-.116
.033
.041
-.019
-.004
.027
C..................................................
All workers, 1979-94
A ..............................................................
B ..............................................................
C ..............................................................
Full-time year-round workers, 1979-94
A ..............................................................
B ..............................................................
C..................................................
Part-time, part-year workers, 1979-94
A ..............................................................
B ..............................................................
C..................................................
Full-time, year-round workers, 1979-94,
excluding self-employed
A ..............................................................
B ..............................................................
C..................................................
N ote : Model A specifies linear effects for both age and year, model B
specifies a non-parametric age effect, and Model C includes a random
effect for longitudinal cohort dependence in the NLSY79.
the labor force. This group becomes an increasingly larger
share of the two samples over time, rising from about 35
percent of the regression-eligible sample in 1979 to 80 per
cent in 1994. If the trend differential persists for these work
ers, then it is a fundamental and pervasive discrepancy. If
not, then the samples are comparable for the core workers,
and some progress has been made in narrowing down the
possible sources of the problem.
The trend coefficient under model A reproduces the discrep
ancy observed above, but the negative trend for the NLSY79 is
substantially smaller than in all of the previous analyses. The
estimates from model B are consistent with the earlier pat
tern—that is, the discrepancy narrows as the trend becomes
more positive for the CPS and less negative for the NLSY79. When
the random effect for the sample dependence in model C is
added, however, the NLSY79 coefficient changes sign, becom
ing strongly positive and similar in magnitude to the CPS coef
ficient, though not statistically significant. Under model C,
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
53
Comparing Earnings Inequality
then, both samples of full-time, year-round workers show a
positive trend in earnings dispersion of comparable magnitude.
The results for the other (non-FTFY) workers show the op
posite pattern, with the discrepancy very large under model
A and virtually unchanged under model C. For these work
ers, opposite trends are seen in earnings dispersion for the
two samples— dispersion grows over time in the CPS, while
it declines over time in the NLSY79. The pattern of statistical
significance is also different for this subgroup, with the
NLSY79 trends testing highly significant and the CPS trends
testing only modestly significant.
The age effects and partial regression plots for model C
for the full-time, year-round workers and for the other work
ers are shown in chart 3. The pattern of higher dispersion for
older NLSY79 respondents also is visible here in both sub
groups. The smoothed trend lines are clearly different, how
ever, with the ftfy workers in both the CPS and NLSY79 samples
now showing a weak positive trend. The residual variability
also differs: it is now lower for the ftfy workers and higher
for the non-FTFY workers. The smoothed trend lines do not
tell an entirely unambiguous story— when the endpoints are
excluded, a different trend sometimes emerges. The regres
sion line would be even more strongly influenced by the high
leverage points at the extremes, simply reinforcing the ear
lier point that caution is appropriate when drawing inferences
from any of the trend coefficients estim ated from these
samples.
One final analysis was conducted in which the self-em
ployed were excluded. This is a group known to have highly
variable earnings. They are almost universally excluded in
studies of earnings inequality because their earnings determi
nation process is fundamentally different from that of wage
and salary workers. Excluding the self-employed, the pattern
obtained is basically the same as that of the full sample of
ftfy workers: in the final specification of model C, both
samples again show a positive trend of similar magnitude in
earnings dispersion over time.
These analyses suggest that the earnings dispersion dis
crepancy found by Gottschalk and Moffitt results largely from
the specification of their regression model as well as a trend
that appears to be driven by workers who do not work full
time and year round. To examine the latter, chart 4 shows the
trends in earnings dispersion by age-year cell separately for
ftfy and non-FTFY workers.11 The trends for ftfy workers
look similar for the two samples— that is, both groups show a
modest upward trend. The age effects discussed earlier (see
chart 1) are completely absent here. In the graph for nonFTFY workers, by contrast, the CPS shows a fairly stable pat
tern of earnings dispersion over time, while the trend for the
NLSY79 is somewhat negative. This clearly is what is driving
the negative trend in the NLSY79 data when both groups of
workers are combined. For non-FTFY workers, the age differ
54 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
ences are absent as well. Thus, what at first appears to be an age
effect in the graph for all workers actually is a composition ef
fect—as age increases, the majority of workers shift from nonFTFY status to working full time and year round.
To better understand the nature of these discrepancies, it
is useful to look at estimates of the distributions them
selves. Chart 5 shows the 1979 earnings densities for the
two samples as an example.12 The top panel corresponds to
all workers. While the two distributions are similar at the
higher earnings levels, the CPS sample has a longer, denser
lower tail than the NLSY79 sample. The bottom panel shows
the corresponding distributions for non-FTFY workers. The
CPS distribution is strongly downshifted, indicating lower
levels of reported earnings compared with the NLSY79, and
the bottom tail of the distribution for these workers reaches
much further down the earnings scale. The location of the
lower tail of the non-FTFY earnings density, from about 6 to
8 on the log scale, corresponds exactly to the location of
the lower tail differences in the distribution for all work
ers. The plot for FTFY workers, not shown here, looks much
like the plot for all workers, without the greater relative
density in the lower tail of the CPS.
This lower tail discrepancy becomes more pronounced
over time, as can be seen by the 90:50 and 50:10 earnings
ratios for non-FTFY workers shown in chart 6. The 50:10
ratio for the two samples is relatively similar at the start of
the series, but the CPS ratio increases over time while the
NLSY79 ratio declines. Given the consistently lower median
reported earnings in the CPS, the rise in the 50:10 ratio im
plies an increasingly longer tail at the bottom of the distri
bution than that observed in the NLSY79. The 90:50 ratios are
more similar for the two samples, with both showing a
downward trend over time, though the timing of the decline
is different. The variance differential between the two
samples is thus being driven primarily by the discrepancies
in the lower tails. Specifically, it is being driven by the
longer lower tail of the CPS non-FTFY earnings distribution.
Discussion
The discrepant findings in the trends in annual earnings dis
persion between the CPS and the NLSY79 appear to be a func
tion of the model specification and the non-FTFY workers.
Regression diagnostics clearly show that a linear specifi
cation for age is not appropriate, and fitting a nonparametric effect reduces the discrepancy in the estimated disper
sion trends by one-third to one-half. Treating the two
samples as cross-sectional, thus ignoring the longitudinal
cohort dependence in the NLSY79, also is not appropriate.
Modeling the cohort dependence in the NLSY79 changes the
estimates of the dispersion trend, especially when the
sample is restricted to ftfy workers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
55
Comparing Earnings Inequality
Chart 3. Estimated age effects relative to 21-year-olds by fuli-time/part-time status, and standard
deviation partial residua! plot, regression results under model C
Full-time, full-year workers
Aqe effects
-------------- Current Population Survey
National Longitudinal Survey;
0.06
of Youth
#
0.02
-
t
'i
1
;
ii
.
:
11
0.1
-------------- Current Population Survey
National Longitudinal Survey
of Youth
0.05
//
ii
i
i
t\
i »
•i
•
>
i
*1
_____ ______ ' /
0.0
0.02
/
-0.1
A
r---------------- 1
----------------- r 1
I-------------1
-------------1-------------r-1
-2
Age (a)
Part-time or part-year workers
Age effects
nlsyftfyav$y
Current Population Survey
National Longitudinal Survey
of Youth
0.15
0.05
-0.05
20
25
Age (c)
30
35
NOTE: Trend shown in panel (d) as a local linear smoothed estimate.
56 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
0
Adjusted year (b)
2
Chart 4. Variance of log annual earnings by age/year cells, 1979-94
Full-time, full-year workers
Variance
Variance
1.0-
Current Population Survey
0 .8 -
0 .6 -
0.4-
I
1979
r~
1981
i
l
1983
r
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
Year
Year
Part-time or part-year workers
Variance
Variance
1979
1981
1983
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1985
1987
Year
1989
1991
1993
i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i— i i
i
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
Year
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
57
Comparing Earnings Inequality
58 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
Chart 6. Trends in the 90:50 and 50:10 annual earnings ratios, 1979-94
Log-earnings
difference
Log-earnings
difference
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Current Population Survey
National Longitudinal Survey
Years (b)
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
59
Comparing Earnings Inequality
After these corrections, the earnings dispersion trends for
workers look remarkably similar for the two samples.
Formal analysis confirms this visual impression— the esti
mated trends in earnings dispersion are nearly identical.
Thus, restricting the samples to f t f y workers, no significant
discrepancy in earnings variance is found between the two
data sets: both the CPS and NLSY79 show a general trend of
increasing earnings dispersion over time.
The trends in earnings dispersion among non-FTFY work
ers, however, appear to be different in the two samples. Closer
examination of the two earnings distributions shows clearly
that the distribution of reported annual earnings among nonFTFY workers in the CPS is both strongly downshifted and
skewed more to the left than in the NLSY79. CPS respondents
who do not work full time and year round not only report
lower earnings, on average, but also the bottom tail of their
distribution reaches much farther down the earnings scale.
These differences already are pronounced in 1979, and they
grow over time, thus contributing directly to the growing
discrepancy between the two samples.
For both groups of workers, annual earnings reports are
higher in the NLSY79 than in the CPS by about 20 percent at the
median. This begins to suggest that the primary source of
the discrepancy may be underreporting in the CPS. The most
likely explanation is differences in the respective question
naires, because neither sample bias nor attrition bias has been
suggested as a problem in the NLSY79.13 As noted in the study
by Gottschalk and Moffitt, the design of the NLSY79 ques
tionnaire probably increases the accuracy of earnings re
ports. The sequence of questions asked about individual jobs
in the NLSY79 aids in the recall of both earnings and hours
relative to the CPS, and the effect would be expected to be
strongest for part-time or part-year workers with irregular
schedules and sources of earnings.
In addition, the NLSY79 is administered as a face-to-face
interview, whereas the CPS, except for the initial interview, usu
ally is administered by telephone.14 This probably will raise
the validity and reliability of the NLSY79 data relative to the
CPS. The longitudinal basis of the NLSY79 provides a continu
ing relationship between the respondents and the survey or
ganization. The promise of confidentiality has been met over
time, and respondents may feel more comfortable disclos
ftfy
ing sensitive information on earnings. Also, in the CPS, proxy
reports may be a factor. All of this suggests that the discrep
ancies in non-FTFY annual earnings reports between the CPS
and the NLSY79 may be due to underreporting in the CPS.
It is worth reiterating, however, that the regression trend
estimates obtained from these samples should be interpreted
with care. They were found to be highly sensitive to small
changes in sample selection and model specification. Idle
structure of the analytic question, which focuses analysis on
the trends within age over time, leads to both relatively small
cell sizes for estimating dispersion, and a mismatch between
sample structure and the analytic task. To obtain stable esti
mates of the time trend, one would need relatively long peri
ods of observation within age groups. The cohort scheme of
the NLSY79, with its 8-year moving age window over time,
only provides a maximum of 8 years during which any respon
dents are observed at a particular age, and some of the age
segments include less than 2 years of observation.15 O f
course, the equivalent CPS sample reflects the same con
straints. While the goal of benchmarking the NLSY79 against
the CPS is an important one, the NLSY79 sample structure is
not ideal for answering the question posed here, and it is not
clear that the survey would ever be used in this fashion.
With that caveat, however, the findings described in this ar
ticle still attest to the validity of the NLSY79 data. Researchers
should therefore take advantage of these data to examine the
longitudinal questions for which this survey was designed.
In general, the National Longitudinal Surveys, with their
unique employer identification codes, remain the only longi
tudinal data set with an accurate measure of job and em
ployer stability— a significant feature, given the many con
tradictory empirical findings in this field.16 The age range
covered by the survey provides a detailed window into the
period when roughly two-thirds of lifetime job changes and
wage growth occur.17 These also are the formative years of
labor market experience when long-term relationships with
employers are established. The two National Longitudinal
Survey cohorts also bracket the growth in earnings inequal
ity that emerged in the 1980s. Together, the cohorts of the
National Longitudinal Surveys provide a unique resource for
the analysis of these and other important economic and so
cial issues covering the last 30 years.
□
Notes
1
The Panel Study o f Income Dynam ics (psid), begun in 1968, is in 1990 to alm ost 8,700 in 1995. As o f 1995, the psid had collected
conducted by the Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research,
information about more than 50,000 individuals spanning as much as
University o f Michigan. The psid is a longitudinal study of a represen
28 years o f their lives. For more information on the psid, visit their
tative sample o f U.S. individuals (men, women, and children) and the
w ebsite at http://www.isr.umich.edu/src/psid/.
family units in which they reside. It emphasizes the dynamic aspects of
2
The National Longitudinal Surveys (nls), sponsored and directed by
economic and demographic behavior, but its content is broad, including
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, gather detailed information about the labor
sociological and psychological measures. As a consequence o f low attri
market experiences and other aspects o f the lives o f six groups o f men and
tion rates and the su ccess o f recontact efforts, the sam ple size has
women. Over the years, a variety o f other government agencies, such as the
grown dramatically in recent years, from about 7,000 core households
National Institute o f Child Health and Human Development, the Department
60 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
o f D efen se, and the D epartm ent o f Education, the Departm ent o f
Justice, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and the National School
to Work O ffice, have funded components o f the surveys that provided
data relevant to their m issions. As a result, the surveys include data
about a wide range o f events such as schooling and career transitions,
marriage and fertility, training investments, child-care usage, and drug
and alcohol use. The depth and breadth o f each survey allow for analysis
o f an expansive variety o f topics such as the transition from school to
work, job m obility, youth unemployment, educational attainment and
the returns to education, welfare recipiency, the impact o f training, and
retirement decisions.
The first set o f surveys, initiated in 1966, consisted o f four cohorts.
These four groups are referred to as the “older men,” “mature women,”
“young m en,” and “young wom en” cohorts o f the nls, and are known
collectively as the “original cohorts.” In 1979, a longitudinal study o f a
cohort o f young men and women aged 14 to 22 was begun. This sample
o f youth was called the National Longitudinal Survey o f Youth 1979
(NLSY79). In 1986, the NLSY79 was expanded to include surveys o f the
children bom to wom en in that cohort, with the new cohort called the
nlsy 79 Children. In 1997, the nls program was again expanded with a
new cohort o f young people aged 12 to 16 as o f December 31, 1996.
This new cohort is the National Longitudinal Survey o f Youth 1997
(NLSY97).
The National Longitudinal Surveys, especially the NLSY79, have ex
ceptional retention rates. As a result, many nls survey members have
been followed for many years, some for decades, allowing researchers to
study large panels o f men, women, and children over significant seg
ments o f their lives. For more information on the National Longitudi
nal Surveys, see the n l s H a n d b o o k , 1 9 9 9 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
1 9 9 9 ).
3 S ee Peter G ottschalk and Robert A. M offitt, “Changes in the
structure o f earnings in three longitudinal data sets,” 1997, unpublished.
4 The Current Population Survey (cps), which uses a scientifically
selected sample o f about 50,000 households, is conducted monthly for
the Bureau o f Labor Statistics by the Bureau o f the Census. The cps
provides statistics on the labor force status o f the civilian noninstitutional population o f the United States, aged 16 years of older. In the cps,
respondents are asked about their activity during the week that includes
the 12th day o f the month, the so-called reference week. As such, the
cps is a cross-sectional survey o f the population, as opposed to a longi
tudinal survey like the nls . For more information on the cps, see b l s
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s , Bulletin 2490 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, April
1997), pp. 4 -1 4 .
5 See Thom as MaCurdy, Thomas Mroz, and R. Mark Gritz, “An
Evaluation o f the National Longitudinal Survey o f Youth,” J o u r n a l o f
H u m a n R e s o u r c e s , Spring 1998, pp. 3 4 5 -4 3 6 .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6 To further minimize heterogeneity, this study excludes Hispanics
from the samples analyzed. The study by Gottschalk and Moffitt made
no such exclusion.
7 For the regression-eligible sample used here, ESR-type students
represent about 15 percent o f the respondents in 1979, dropping to 5
percent in 1985 and down to 1 percent by 1988.
8 See Peter J. Diggle, Kung-Yee Liang, and Scott L. Zeger, A n a ly s is
o f L o n g itu d in a l D a ta , (N ew York, Oxford University Press), 1994.
9 See Gottschalk and Moffitt, "Changes in the structure o f earnings,"
p. 7.
10 S-PLUS is an enhanced version o f the S environm ent for data
analysis. Unix and W indow s versions are available from M athSoft,
Inc. The programs used for the analysis in this paper are available
from the authors.
11 As in Chart 1, 2-year age groups are used. For f t fy workers, the
values average about 180 respondents per cell for the NLSY79 and about
870 respondents per cell for the c p s . For non-FTFY workers, the corre
sponding values average about 90 and 300, respectively.
12 For this figure ages within a year are pooled, but the distributions
have been compositionally adjusted for the differences in marginal age
distributions between the cps and NLSY79.
13 See MaCurdy and others, “An Evaluation o f the National Longi
tudinal Survey o f Youth."
14 In the c p s , respondents are part o f the survey for 4 consecutive
months, then they are out of the survey for the following 8 months, and
finally they are back in the survey for 4 more months the following year.
The first interviews are supposed to take place in person, at the home o f
the respondents, although face-to-face interviews are not always pos
sible. In any case, subsequent interviews are conducted by telephone.
15 Ages 20 to 29 provide 8 years of observation each, other ages in
the 16-to-36 year range provide 8 minus the difference to the closer o f
the two endpoints. In the analysis by G ottschalk and M offitt, which
only included up to survey year 1988, only three ages (20 to 23) would
have provided 8 years o f observation; all others would have provided
fewer years o f observation.
16 See A.D. Bernhardt, M. Handcock, and M. Scott, “Trends in Job
Instability and Wages for Young Adult M en,” J o u r n a l o f L a b o r E c o
n o m ic s , P a r t 2 , October, 1999, pp. S 6 5-90.
17 See Kevin Murphy and Finnis Welch, “Empirical Age-Earnings
P rofiles,” J o u r n a l o f L a b o r E c o n o m ic s , April 1990, pp. 202 -2 9 ; and
Robert Topel and Michael Ward, “Job Mobility and the Careers o f Young
Men,” Q u a r te r ly J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m ic s , May 1992, pp. 4 39-7 9 .
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
61
Telecommuting or work
invasion?
Telecommuting— using the Internet and
other communications technologies to
enable significant regular work at sites
away from a traditional workplace— re
mains the wave of the future, according to
some observers. An article by Federal
Computer Week reporters Colleen O ’Hara
and Natasha Haubold finds that telecom
muting among Federal workers has leveled
off at about 25,000 workers in 1999, well
short o f an inform al goal o f 60,000
telecommuters. O ’Hara and Haubold report
that such factors as management attitude, data
security, and technical support are some of
the challenges restraining the growth of these
work arrangements in the Federal sector.
A Stanford University study, Internet and
Society: A Preliminary Report, of the impact
of the Internet also finds little evidence that
telecommuting is starting to make strong in
roads. Although the principal author, Pro
fessor Norman H. Nie, expressed some sur
prise at the degree to which survey respon
dents reported using the Internet at home to
do work for an employer, the report found
that only a small number (4 percent) had re
duced hours at a regular worksite while in
creasing hours worked at home. In fact, ac
cording to the study, “more than a quarter of
full- or part-time workers who use the Internet
more than 5 hours a week said that the Internet
has increased the amount of time working at
home without decreasing the amount of time
working in the office.”
Some o f the language used in the
Stanford report was also indicative of other
attitudinal challenges telecommuters might
face. The chart of the work data is labeled
“Chart 8: Work invades home and in
creases at the office,” and the text of an
accompanying press release echoes the
theme. After admitting the possibility that
the 4 percent of Internet users who have
cut back on hours at the office may be the
start of telecommuting, Nie is quoted as
saying: “On the other hand, we all know
62 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
from our cell phones and laptops that
work appears to be intruding into every
other aspect of our lives, and that’s one of
the clearest trends in these data.”
Computer-aided
instruction
A witticism attributed to Robert Solow
holds that, “We can see the computer age
everywhere but in the productivity statis
tics.” There is widespread agreement that
this paradox is a measurement problem—
official price and output data are simply
missing the computer revolution.
E very now and then, how ever, a
shadow of doubt appears. Are comput
ers truly an unalloyed boon for produc
tivity? One recent example takes the form
of a study, New Evidence on Classroom
Computers and Pupil Learning, a NBER
working paper by Joshua Angrist and
Victor Lavy.
Their paper analyzes the impact of
Israel’s “Tomorrow-98” program, an ambi
tious effort to upgrade the computer re
sources available to elementary and middle
schools in that nation. If one accepts av
erage pupil test scores as a measure of
output, then the authors’ findings that
there is “a consistently negative relation
ship between the program-induced use of
computers and fourth-grade math scores”
and “ [f]or other grades and subjects, the
estimates are not significant, though also
mostly negative,” are troublesome. Per
haps, the computer revolution is having a
beneficial effect everywhere but in the pro
ductivity statistics and the productivity
of the classroom.
This study, of course, is not, and does
not purport to be, a complete productivity
analysis. For one thing, there is little in
formation on inputs to be matched with
the data on educational outcomes. But
Angrist and Lavy conclude by question
ing whether those inputs appear to be jus
tified by performance.
Woikplace practices and
the New Economy
Much of the discussion of a “New Economy”
focuses on information technology—hard
ware, software, capital expenditures, and so
forth. Sandra E. Black and Lisa M. Lynch’s
recent NBER working paper, What’s Driving
the New Economy: The Benefits o f Work
place Innovation, picks up the parallel argu
ment which some analysts have made that
some part of the renaissance in productivity
is attributable to “increased managerial fo
cus on quality management, continuous in
novation, incentive-based compensation,
and employee involvement programs.”
Using data from the 1993 and 1996 waves
of the Educational Quality of the Workforce
National Employers Survey (eqw -nes), Black
and Lynch found considerable change in
such workplace practice over the 3-year
period. Nearly a third of firms in the sur
vey changed in their deployment of bench
marking, number of management levels,
and share of workers in self-managed
teams or other regular councils. Black and
Lynch found that the diffusion of technol
ogy, as measured by change in the pro
portion of nonmanagers using computers,
is positively related to productivity. The
authors also concluded that workplace
practices matter: “[Fjirms that re-engineer
their workplace to incorporate more high
performance practices experience higher
productivity growth. Profitsharing and/or
stock options are also associated with
higher productivity growth, although it is
not always statistically significant in all
specifications. ... Finally, employee voice
(as proxied by the percentage of workers
meeting regularly to discuss workplace
issues) does appear to contribute to labor
productivity.”
□
We are interested in your feedback
on this column. Write to: Executive Edi
tor, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, Washington, DC 20212,
or e-mail MLR@bls.gov
Book Reviews
Lessons from the Depression
The Economics o f the Great Depres
sion. E d ite d by M ark W heeler.
Kalamazoo, M l, w.E. Upjohn Insti
tute fo r E m p lo y m e n t R esearch ,
1998, 211 pp.
What do people know about the causes
of the Great Depression? We certainly
know that the era altered the lives of
everyone who experienced it, but it is
difficult to recognize how bad those
times were in comparison to more re
cent periods. Certainly unemployment
was high and there were dramatic ef
forts to improve the economy in the
1930s, but what policy lessons can be
learned to help us avoid or recover
from su ch tre m e n d o u s eco n o m ic
sh o ck s in th e fu tu re ? P o litic ia n s ,
economists, and writers have studied
these issues for decades, but what in
sights do modern economists have to
share on the topic?
The Economics o f the Great Depres
sion is a collection of academic papers
discussing what happened and what we
can learn from the Great Depression.
The six authors provide a mix of ap
proaches and views into the causes of
the event, and their differing interpreta
tions of data, events, and policies re
flect a wide range of economic thinking.
Some of the essays are historically ori
ented— what happened and what was
thought at the time; others relate to the
present situation— what actions were
taken and what policy lessons are use
ful for today. The authors used invest
ment analyses, econometric methods,
and review of public microdata records
to address the subject. The arguments
offered are concise and thought provok
ing, although they are couched in the
technical jargon of the economist.
As m ight be expected, there was a
range of analytical approaches to the
issue. One historical study looked at
characteristics o f the unem ploym ent
and those who were unemployed dur
ing the Great Depression. Unemploy
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ment episodes during the Depression
were much longer than previously and
many episodes lasted for more than a
year. As well, those who were unem
ployed for these long periods tended to
be either younger workers or older work
ers, and workers with fewer skills and
less education. A nother essay noted
that the severity of the Depression var
ied by industry and region in the United
States, and even among countries. Al
though aggregate output and employ
ment declined, there were increases in
both output and employment for some
consumer industries. Further, the De
pression was less severe in Southern
States than in some other parts of the
country such as in the Northwest and
the Central States. As well, the decrease
in international trade forced many lessdeveloped countries to shift emphasis
away from raw-material exports and to
ward industrialization for internal con
sumption. Thus, the Great Depression
affected different areas in different
ways.
Some of the papers examined the root
causes of the Great Depression. One
economist analyzed a number of theo
ries that sought to explain the length
and severity of the Depression, such as
collapse of the financial markets, gov
ernment and Federal Reserve policies,
and economic maturation. Another used
econometric modeling to test a number of
possible causes, although it determined
no dominant explanation. A study by
David C. Wheelock examined the impact
of policies developed during the Great De
pression on more recent actions of the
Federal Reserve. He specifically cited the
impact of 1930s changes to currency re
quirements that led to a Federal Reserve
bias toward inflationary monetary policies
in the 1960s and 1970s.
Econom ist Stephen Cecchetti pro
posed that deflation, itself a result of
the significant economic downturn, ex
plained several other behaviors and ef
fects of the Great Depression. Deflation
decreased the value of real goods and es
pecially hurt those who were heavily in
vested in such goods, including factory
owners, landowners (such as farmers) and
lenders (such as banks). It also led to a
desire to maintain assets in cash, leading
to bank runs and cash hoarding. Cecchetti
suggested a key lesson from the Great
Depression is that deflation leads to such
catastropic consequences that policy
makers should avoid it at all costs.
It is no surprise that there was no firm
agreement as to the reasons for the Great
Depression among these six economists.
Further, because of the technical lan
guage, this book is no casual read. None
theless, it increases the economic under
standing of the Great Depression and
its causes. It rigorously examines vari
ous explanations for the Depression,
shows weaknesses in the simple an
swers often given for it, and provides
some policy lessons for the future.
Thus, it is a worthwhile addition to the
vast literature concerning the Great D e
pression.
— Stanley W. Suchman
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Kansas City Region
Income inequality
Income Inequality in America: An Analy
sis o f Trends. By Paul Ryscavage.
Armonk, NY, m .e . Sharpe, Inc., 1998,
229 pp. $56.95, hardcover; $22.95,
paperback.
With the U.S. economy approaching the
longest uninterrupted expansion on
record, unemployment and inflation at
their lowest levels in decades, and real
earnings growing after years of stag
nation, it may seem an odd time to write
a book about incom e inequality in
America. Yet, despite rosy economic
conditions overall, not all Americans
are riding the current wave of economic
prosperity. Millions remain in poverty.
C o nstant restru ctu rin g in the U .S.
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
63
Book Reviews
economy has displaced many workers
from “middle class” jobs once considered
secure, and some workers must settle for
contingent jobs, which by definition may
not be there for them tomorrow.
Against this setting, Paul Ryscavage
(who formerly worked for both the Bu
reau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau
of the Census) has written Income In
equality in America. It is accurately
billed as a primer on income inequality.
The book is well-written, readily under
standable, and comprehensive. It pro
vides an overview of the data, tools, and
techniques used to gauge income in
equality and a thorough assessment of
income inequality trends in the United
States. The book includes a discussion
of some of the latest thinking on the
underlying causes behind the growing
earnings and income inequality of recent
decades, and also compares the U.S. ex
perience with that of other industrial
ized nations.
R yscavage recognizes at the very
outset of his book that the topic is “pro
vocative.” The subject provokes con
troversy am ong econom ists because
even though there is a general consen
64 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
sus that the distribution of income in
America has become more polarized in
recent decades, there is comparatively
little agreement on the answers to ques
tions that naturally follow. How much
has income inequality grown? Is it still
grow ing? W hat are the underlying
causes? If growing income inequality is
a bad thing, as is widely assumed, what
are the policy prescriptions that can re
verse the trend? In his book, Ryscavage
sifts through the data and the literature
to provide some answers to the first
three questions, but deliberately steers
clear o f the m uch m ore politicallycharged debate over the merits and limi
tations of various policies designed to
address growing income inequality.
The subject is also provocative, if not
overtly so, for m any “m ain stre e t”
A m ericans— persons who have not
studied the issue but have nevertheless
sensed that something is happening to
the distribution of income in the coun
try. They see it when the local shoe fac
tory closes or when the bulldozers turn
the family farm down the road into an
expensive housing development. Their
perception is fueled further by news sto
March 2000
ries recounting the enormous pay pack
ages awarded to business executives
and professional sport figures, juxtaposed
with daily announcements of mass lay
offs. Unfortunately, laypersons attempt
ing to square their perceptions of income
inequality—commonly thought of in terms
of the declining middle class— with ac
tual facts and figures may be discouraged
by complicated and sometimes contradic
tory stories on the topic. Getting a fix on
the “truth” is made even more difficult by
the polemical tone that pervades much of
the discussion.
Income Inequality in America does a
good job of summarizing what is known,
as well as what is not known, about in
come inequality. Perhaps most impor
tantly, the information is presented in
an apolitical, unbiased m anner. A l
though the subject matter is technical
by nature, persons with a nontechnical
background also can learn from this
book. It is a good resource for anyone
interested in studying the issue.
— Steven Haugen
Office of Employment
and Unemployment Statistics
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Current Labor Statistics
Notes on labor statistics
...................
66
Comparative indicators
1. Labor market indicators................................................... 76
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in
compensation, prices, and productivity...................... 77
3. Alternative measures of wages and
compensation changes.................................................. 77
Labor force data
4. Employment status of the population,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
5. Selected employment indicators,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
6. Selected unemployment indicators,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
7. Duration of unemployment,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
8. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
9. Unemployment rates by sex and age,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
10. Unemployment rates by States,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
11. Employment of workers by States,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
12. Employment of workers by industry,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
13. Average weekly hours by industry,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
14. Average hourly earnings by industry,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
15. Average hourly earnings by industry...............................
16. Average weekly earnings by industry..............................
17. Diffusion indexes of employment change,
seasonally adjusted......................................................
18. Annual data: Employment status of the population.......
19. Annual data: Employment levels by industry.................
20. Annual data: Average hours
and earnings levels by industry....................................
78
79
80
80
81
81
82
82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
26. Participants in benefits plans, small firms
and government............................................................ 96
27. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or m ore.......... 97
Price data
28. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average, by expenditure
category and commodity and service groups...............
29. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and
local data, all items.......................................................
30. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items
and major groups..........................................................
31. Producer Price Indexes by stage of processing................
32. Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major
industry groups............................................................
33. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes
by stage of processing..................................................
34. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International
Trade Classification.....................................................
35. U.S. import price indexes by Standard International
Trade Classification.....................................................
36. U.S. export price indexes by end-use category................
37. U.S. import price indexes by end-use category...............
38. U.S.international price indexes for selected
categories of services....................................................
98
101
102
103
104
104
105
106
107
108
108
83
85
85
86
87
88
88
89
89
Labor compensation and collective
bargaining d ata
21. Employment Cost Index, compensation,
by occupation and industry group...............................
22. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries,
by occupation and industry group...............................
23. Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry
workers, by occupation and industry group................
24. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers,
by bargaining status, region, and area siz e ...................
25. Participants in benefit plans, medium and large firm s.....
Labor compensation and collective
bargaining data—continued
90
Productivity data
39. Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
,
and unit costs, data seasonally adjusted......................
40. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity.....................
41. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
unit costs, and prices...................................................
42. Annual indexes of output per hour for selected
industries......................................................................
109
110
111
112
International comparisons data
43. Unemployment rates in nine countries,
data seasonally adjusted............................................... 114
44. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian
working-age population, 10 countries.......................... 115
45. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures,
12 countries.................................................................. 116
92
Injury and illness data
93
46. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness
incidence rates.............................................................. 117
47. Fatal occupational injuries by event or
exposure....................................................................... 119
94
95
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
65
Notes on Current Labor Statistics
This section of the Review presents the prin
cipal statistical series collected and calcu
lated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
series on labor force; employment; unem
ployment; labor compensation; consumer,
producer, and international prices; produc
tivity; international comparisons; and injury
and illness statistics. In the notes that follow,
the data in each group of tables are briefly
described; key definitions are given; notes
on the data are set forth; and sources of addi
tional information are cited.
General notes
The following notes apply to several tables
in this section:
Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly
and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect on the data of such factors as cli
matic conditions, industry production sched
ules, opening and closing of schools, holi
day buying periods, and vacation practices,
which might prevent short-term evaluation
of the statistical series. Tables containing
data that have been adjusted are identified as
“seasonally adjusted.” (All other data are not
seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal effects are es
timated on the basis of past experience.
When new seasonal factors are computed
each year, revisions may affect seasonally
adjusted data for several preceding years.
Seasonally adjusted data appear in tables
1-14,16-17,39, and 43. Seasonally adjusted
labor force data in tables 1 and 4-9 were re
vised in the February 1999 issue of the Re
view. Seasonally adjusted establishment sur
vey data shown in tables 1, 12-14 and 1617 were revised in the July 1998 Review and
reflect the experience through March 1998.
A brief explanation of the seasonal adjust
ment methodology appears in “Notes on the
data.”
Revisions in the productivity data in table
45 are usually introduced in the September
issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and per
cent changes from month-to-month and
quarter-to-quarter are published for numer
ous Consumer and Producer Price Index se
ries. However, seasonally adjusted indexes
are not published for the U.S. average AllItems CPI. Only seasonally adjusted percent
changes are available for this series.
Adjustments for price changes. Some
data—such as the “real” earnings shown in
table 14— are adjusted to eliminate the ef
fect of changes in price. These adjustments
are made by dividing current-dollar values
by the Consumer Price Index or the appro
priate component of the index, then multi
plying by 100. For example, given a current
hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price
66 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
index number of 150, where 1982 = 100, the
hourly rate expressed in 1982 dollars is $2
($3/150 x 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,”
“constant,” or “ 1982” dollars.
Sources of information
Data that supplement the tables in this sec
tion are published by the Bureau in a variety
of sources. Definitions of each series and
notes on the data are contained in later sec
tions of these Notes describing each set of
data. For detailed descriptions of each data
series, see b l s Handbook o f Methods, Bul
letin 2490. Users also may wish to consult
Major Programs o f the Bureau o f Labor Sta
tistics, Report 919. News releases provide
the latest statistical information published by
the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule appear
ing on the back cover of this issue.
More information about labor force, em
ployment, and unemployment data and the
household and establishment surveys under
lying the data are available in the Bureau’s
monthly publication, Employment and Earn
ings. Historical unadjusted and seasonally
adjusted data from the household survey are
available on the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/cpshome.htm
Historically comparable unadjusted and sea
sonally adjusted data from the establishment
survey also are available on the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/ceshome.htm
Additional information on labor force data
for areas below the national level are pro
vided in the b l s annual report, Geographic
Profile o f Employment and Unemployment.
For a comprehensive discussion of the
Employment Cost Index, see Employment
Cost Indexes and Levels, 1975-95, BLS Bul
letin 2466. The most recent data from the
Employee Benefits Survey appear in the fol
lowing Bureau of Labor Statistics bulletins:
Employee Benefits in Medium and Large
Firms; Employee Benefits in Small Private
Establishments; and Employee Benefits in
State and Local Governments.
More detailed data on consumer and pro
ducer prices are published in the monthly
periodicals, The CPI Detailed Report and
Producer Price Indexes. For an overview of
the 1998 revision of the c p i , see the Decem
ber 1996 issue of the Monthly Labor Review.
Additional data on international prices ap
pear in monthly news releases.
Listings of industries for which produc
tivity indexes are available may be found on
the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/iprhome.htm
For additional information on interna
March 2000
tional comparisons data, see International
Comparisons of Unemployment, BLS Bulle
tin 1979.
Detailed data on the occupational injury
and illness series are published in Occupa
tional Injuries and Illnesses in the United
States, by Industry, a BLS annual bulletin.
Finally, the Monthly Labor Review car
ries analytical articles on annual and longer
term developments in labor force, employ
ment, and unemployment; employee com
pensation and collective bargaining; prices;
productivity; international comparisons; and
injury and illness data.
Symbols
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified,
n.e.s. = not elsewhere specified.
p = preliminary. To increase the time
liness of some series, preliminary
figures are issued based on repre
sentative but incomplete returns,
r = revised. Generally, this revision
reflects the availability of later
data, but also may reflect other ad
justments.
Comparative Indicators
(Tables 1-3)
Comparative indicators tables provide an
overview and comparison of major b l s sta
tistical series. Consequently, although many
of the included series are available monthly,
all measures in these comparative tables are
presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include em
ployment measures from two major surveys
and information on rates of change in com
pensation provided by the Employment Cost
Index (ECl) program. The labor force partici
pation rate, the employment-to-population
ratio, and unemployment rates for major de
mographic groups based on the Current
Population (“household”) Survey are pre
sented, while measures of employment and
average weekly hours by major industry sec
tor are given using nonfarm payroll data. The
Employment Cost Index (compensation), by
major sector and by bargaining status, is cho
sen from a variety of b l s compensation and
wage measures because it provides a com
prehensive measure of employer costs for
hiring labor, not just outlays for wages, and
it is not affected by employment shifts among
occupations and industries.
Data on changes in compensation, prices,
and productivity are presented in table 2.
Measures of rates of change of compensa
tion and wages from the Employment Cost
Index program are provided for all civil
ian 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;
overall prices by stage of processing; and
overall export and import price indexes are
given. Measures of productivity (output per
hour of all persons) are provided for major
sectors.
Alternative measures of wage and com
pensation rates of change, which reflect the
overall trend in labor costs, are summarized
in table 3. Differences in concepts and scope,
related to the specific purposes of the series,
contribute to the variation in changes among
the individual measures.
Notes on the data
Definitions of each series and notes on the
data are contained in later sections of these
notes describing each set of data.
Employment and
Unemployment Data
(Tables 1; 4-20)
Household survey data
Description of the series
p l o y m e n t d a t a in this section are ob
tained from the Current Population Survey,
a program of personal interviews conducted
monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sample con
sists of about 50,000 households selected to
represent the U.S. population 16 years of age
and older. Households are interviewed on a
rotating basis, so that three-fourths of the
sample is the same for any 2 consecutive
months.
Em
Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all those who
worked for pay any time during the week
which includes the 12th day of the month or
who worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in
a family-operated enterprise and (2) those
who were temporarily absent from their regu
lar jobs because of illness, vacation, indus
trial dispute, or similar reasons. A person
working at more than one job is counted only
in the job at which he or she worked the
greatest number of hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did
not work during the survey week, but were
available for work except for temporary ill
ness and had looked for jobs within the pre
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for
work because they were on layoff are also
counted among the unemployed. The unem
ployment rate represents the number unem
ployed as a percent of the civilian labor force.
The civilian labor force consists of all
employed or unemployed persons in the
civilian noninstitutional population. Persons
not in the labor force are those not classified
as employed or unemployed. This group
includes discouraged workers, defined as
persons who want and are available for a job
and who have looked for work sometime in
the past 12 months (or since the end of their
last job if they held one within the past 12
months), but are not currently looking,
because they believe there are no jobs
available or there are none for which they
would qualify. The civilian noninstitu
tional population comprises all persons 16
years of age and older who are not inmates
of penal or mental institutions, sanitariums,
or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy. The
civilian labor force participation rate is the
proportion of the civilian noninstitutional
population that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is employ
ment as a percent of the civilian nonin
stitutional population.
Revisions in the household
survey
Data beginning in 1999 are not strictly
comparable with data for 1998 and earlier
years because of the introduction of re
vised population controls. Additional in
formation appears in the February 1999
issue of Employment and Earnings.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on na
tional household survey data, contact the
Division of Labor Force Statistics: (202)
691-6378.
Establishment survey data
Description of the series
Em
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
intercensal years. These adjustments affect
the comparability of historical data. A de
scription of these adjustments and their ef
fect on the various data series appears in the
Explanatory Notes of Employment and
Earnings.
Labor force data in tables 1 and 4-9 are
seasonally adjusted. Since January 1980,
national labor force data have been season
ally adjusted with a procedure called X -ll
a r i m a which was developed at Statistics
Canada as an extension of the standard X11 method previously used by b l s . A de
tailed description of the procedure appears
in the X -ll a r i m a Seasonal Adjustment
Method, by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics
Canada, Catalogue No. 12-564E, January
1983).
At the beginning of each calendar year,
historical seasonally adjusted data usually
are revised, and projected seasonal adjust
ment factors are calculated for use during
the January-June period. The historical sea
sonally adjusted data usually are revised for
only the most recent 5 years. In July, new
seasonal adjustment factors, which incorpo
rate the experience through June, are pro
duced for the July-December period, but no
revisions are made in the historical data.
p l o y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a t a
in this section are compiled from payroll
records reported monthly on a voluntary ba
sis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its
cooperating State agencies by about
390,000 establishments representing all in
dustries except agriculture. Industries are
classified in accordance with the 1987 Stan
dard Industrial Classification (SIC) Manual.
In most industries, the sampling probabili
ties are based on the size of the establish
ment; most large establishments are there
fore in the sample. (An establishment is not
necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant,
for example, or warehouse.) Self-em
ployed persons and others not on a regu
lar civilian payroll are outside the scope
of the survey because they are excluded
from establishment records. This largely
accounts for the difference in employment
figures between the household and estab
lishment surveys.
Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit which
produces goods or services (such as a fac
tory or store) at a single location and is en
gaged in one type of economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who
received pay (including holiday and sick
pay) for any part of the payroll period in
cluding the 12th day of the month. Per
sons holding more than one job (about 5
percent of all persons in the labor force)
are counted in each establishment which
reports them.
Production workers in manufacturing
include working supervisors and nonsupervisory workers closely associated with pro
duction operations. Those workers men
tioned in tables 11-16 include production
workers in manufacturing and mining;
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
67
Current Labor Statistics
construction workers in construction; and
nonsupervisory workers in the following in
dustries: transportation and public utilities;
wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance,
and real estate; and services. These groups ac
count for about four-fifths of the total employ
ment on private nonagricultural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production
or nonsupervisory workers receive during
the survey period, including premium pay
for overtime or late-shift work but exclud
ing irregular bonuses and other special
payments. R eal 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).
Hours represent the average weekly
hours of production or nonsupervisory work
ers for which pay was received, and are dif
ferent from standard or scheduled hours.
Overtime hours represent the portion of av
erage weekly hours which was in excess of
regular hours and for which overtime premi
ums were paid.
The Diffusion Index represents the per
cent of industries in which employment was
rising over the indicated period, plus one-half
of the industries with unchanged employment;
50 percent indicates an equal balance between
industries with increasing and decreasing em
ployment. In line with Bureau practice, data
for the 1-, 3-, and 6-month spans are season
ally adjusted, while those for the 12-month
span are unadjusted. Data are centered within
the span. Table 17 provides an index on pri
vate nonfarm employment based on 356 in
dustries, and a manufacturing index based on
139 industries. These indexes are useful for
measuring the dispersion of economic gains
or losses and are also economic indicators.
Notes on the data
Establishment survey data are annually ad
justed to comprehensive counts of employ
ment (called “benchmarks”). The latest ad
justment, which incorporated March 1997
benchmarks, was made with the release of
May 1998 data, published in the July 1998
issue of the Review. Coincident with the
benchmark adjustment, historical seasonally
adjusted data were revised to reflect updated
seasonal factors and refinement in the sea
sonal adjustment procedures. Unadjusted
data from April 1997 forward and season
ally adjusted data from January 1994 forward
are subject to revision in future benchmarks.
Revisions in State data (table 11) occurred
with the publication of January 1999 data.
Beginning in June 1996, the b l s uses the
X-12 a r i m a methodology to seasonally ad
just establishment survey data. This proce
dure, developed by the Bureau of the Cen
sus, controls for the effect of varying survey
68 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
intervals (also known as the 4- versus 5-week
effect), thereby providing improved mea
surement of over-the-month changes and un
derlying economic trends. Revisions of data,
usually for the most recent 5-year period, are
made once a year coincident with the bench
mark revisions.
In the establishment survey, estimates for
the most recent 2 months are based on in
complete returns and are published as pre
liminary in the tables (12-17 in the Review).
When all returns have been received, the es
timates are revised and published as “final”
(prior to any benchmark revisions) in the
third month of their appearance. Thus, De
cember data are published as preliminary in
January and February and as final in March.
For the same reasons, quarterly establish
ment data (table 1) are preliminary for the
first 2 months of publication and final in the
third month. Thus, fourth-quarter data are
published as preliminary in January and Feb
ruary and as final in March.
A comprehensive discussion of the differ
ences between household and establishment
data on employment appears in Gloria R Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from
household and payroll surveys,” Monthly La
bor Review, December 1969, pp. 9-20.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on estab
lishment survey data, contact the Division of
Monthly Industry Employment Statistics:
(202) 691-6555.
Unemployment data by
State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained
from the Local Area Unemployment Statis
tics (LAUS) program, which is conducted in
cooperation with State employment security
agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment for States
and sub-State areas are a key indicator of lo
cal economic conditions, and form the basis
for determining the eligibility of an area for
benefits under Federal economic assistance
programs such as the Job Training Partner
ship Act. Seasonally adjusted unemployment
rates are presented in table 10. Insofar as
possible, the concepts and definitions under
lying these data are those used in the national
estimates obtained from the CPS.
Notes on the data
Data refer to State of residence. Monthly data
for all States and the District of Columbia are
derived using standardized procedures
established by b l s . Once a year, estimates are
revised to new population controls, usually
with publication of January estimates, and
benchmarked to annual average c p s levels.
March 2000
For
a d d it io n a l in f o r m a t io n
o n d a t a in
(202) 691-6392 ( t a b l e 10) o r
(202) 691-6559 ( t a b le 11).
t h is s e r i e s , c a l l
Compensation and
Wage Data
(Tables 1-3; 21-27)
a n d w a g e d a t a are gathered
by the Bureau from business establishments,
State and local governments, labor unions,
collective bargaining agreements on file with
the Bureau, and secondary sources.
C o m p e n s a t io n
Employment Cost Index
Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index (ECl) is a quar
terly measure of the rate of change in com
pensation per hour worked and includes
wages, salaries, and employer costs of em
ployee benefits. It uses a fixed market
basket of labor—similar in concept to the
Consumer Price Index’s fixed market basket
of goods and services—to measure change
over time in employer costs of employing
labor.
Statistical series on total compensation
costs, on wages and salaries, and on benefit
costs are available for private nonfarm work
ers excluding proprietors, the self-employed,
and household workers. The total compensa
tion costs and wages and salaries series are
also available for State and local government
workers and for the civilian nonfarm economy,
which consists of private industry and State
and local government workers combined. Fed
eral workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability
sample consists of about 4,400 private non
farm establishments providing about 23,000
occupational observations and 1,000 State
and local government establishments provid
ing 6,000 occupational observations selected
to represent total employment in each sector.
On average, each reporting unit provides
wage and compensation information on five
well-specified occupations. Data are col
lected each quarter for the pay period includ
ing the 12th day of March, June, September,
and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed
employment weights from the 1980 Census
of Population are used each quarter to
calculate the civilian and private indexes
and the index for State and local govern
ments. (Prior to June 1986, the employment
weights are from the 1970 Census of Popu
lation.) These fixed weights, also used to
derive all of the industry and occupation
series indexes, ensure that changes in these
indexes reflect only changes in compensa-
tion, not employment shifts among indus
tries or occupations with different levels of
wages and compensation. For the bargain
ing 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 cur
rent sample. Therefore, these indexes are not
strictly comparable to those for the aggre
gate, industry, and occupation series.
Definitions
Total compensation costs include wages,
salaries, and the employer’s costs for em
ployee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings
before payroll deductions, including produc
tion bonuses, incentive earnings, commis
sions, and cost-of-living adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers
for paid leave, supplemental pay (includ
ing nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retire
ment and savings plans, and legally required
benefits (such as Social Security, workers’
compensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and em
ployee benefits are such items as payment-inkind, free room and board, and tips.
Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index for changes in
wages and salaries in the private nonfarm
economy was published beginning in 1975.
Changes in total compensation cost—wages
and salaries and benefits combined—were
published beginning in 1980. The series of
changes in wages and salaries and for total
compensation in the State and local govern
ment sector and in the civilian nonfarm
economy (excluding Federal employees)
were published beginning in 1981. Histori
cal indexes (June 1981=100) are available on
the Internet:
http://stats.bls.gov/ecthome.htm
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Employment Cost Index, contact the Office
of Compensation Levels and Trends: (202)
691-6199.
Employee Benefits Survey
Description of the series
Employee benefits data are obtained from
the Employee Benefits Survey, an annual
survey of the incidence and provisions of
selected benefits provided by employers.
The survey collects data from a sample of
approximately 9,000 private sector and State
and local government establishments. The
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
come taxes until withdrawal.
Flexible benefit plans allow employees to
choose among several benefits, such as life
insurance, medical care, and vacation days,
and among several levels of coverage within a
given benefit.
data are presented as a percentage of employ
ees who participate in a certain benefit, or as
an average benefit provision (for example, the
average number of paid holidays provided to
employees per year). Selected data from the
survey are presented in table 25 for medium
and large private establishments and in table
26 for small private establishments and State
and local government.
The survey covers paid leave benefits
such as holidays and vacations, and personal,
funeral, jury duty, military, family, and sick
leave; short-term disability, long-term dis
ability, and life insurance; medical, dental,
and vision care plans; defined benefit and
defined contribution plans; flexible benefits
plans; reimbursement accounts; and unpaid
family leave.
Also, data are tabulated on the inci
dence of several other benefits, such as
severance pay, child-care assistance, well
ness programs, and employee assistance
programs.
Notes on the data
Definitions
Employer-provided benefits are benefits
that are financed either wholly or partly by
the employer. They may be sponsored by a
union or other third party, as long as there is
some employer financing. However, some
benefits that are fully paid for by the em
ployee also are included. For example, long
term care insurance and postretirement life
insurance paid entirely by the employee are
included because the guarantee of insurabil
ity and availability at group premium rates
are considered a benefit.
Participants are workers who are covered
by a benefit, whether or not they use that benefit
If the benefit plan is financed wholly by
employers and requires employees to complete
a minimum length of service for eligibility, the
workers are considered participants whether or
not they have met the requirement. If workers
are required to contribute towards the cost of
a plan, they are considered participants only
if they elect the plan and agree to make the
required contributions.
Defined benefit pension plans use prede
termined formulas to calculate a retirement
benefit (if any), and obligate the employer to
provide those benefits. Benefits are generally
based on salary, years of service, or both.
Defined contribution plans generally
specify the level of employer and employee
contributions to a plan, but not the formula
for determining eventual benefits. Instead,
individual accounts are set up for partici
pants, and benefits are based on amounts
credited to these accounts.
Tax-deferred savings plans are a type of
defined contribution plan that allow par
ticipants to contribute a portion of their salary
to an employer-sponsored plan and defer in
Surveys of employees in medium and large
establishments conducted over the 1979-86
period included establishm ents that
employed at least 50, 100, or 250 workers,
depending on the industry (most service
industries were excluded). The survey
conducted in 1987 covered only State and
local governments with 50 or more
employees. The surveys conducted in 1988
and 1989 included medium and large
establishments with 100 workers or more in
private industries. All surveys conducted over
the 1979-89 period excluded establishments
in Alaska and Hawaii, as well as part-time
employees.
Beginning in 1990, surveys of State and
local governments and small private
establishments were conducted in evennumbered years, and surveys of medium and
large establishments were conducted in oddnumbered years. The small establishment
survey includes all private nonfarm
establishments with fewer than 100 workers,
while the State and local government survey
includes all governments, regardless of the
number of workers. All three surveys include
full- and part-time workers, and workers in all
50 States and the District of Columbia.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Employee Benefits Survey, contact the Of
fice of Compensation Levels and Trends on
the Internet:
http ://sta ts.bls.gov/ebshome.htm
Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the num
ber and duration of major strikes or lockouts
(involving 1,000 workers or more) occurring
during the month (or year), the number of
workers involved, and the amount of work
time lost because of stoppage. These data are
presented in table 27.
Data are largely from a variety of pub
lished sources and cover only establish
ments directly involved in a stoppage. They
do not measure the indirect or secondary
effect of stoppages on other establishments
whose employees are idle owing to material
shortages or lack of service.
Definitions
The number of
strikes and lockouts involving 1,000 work-
Number of stoppages:
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
69
Current Labor Statistics
ers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
W orkers 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.
ployed, retirees, and others not in the labor
force.
The c p i is based on prices of food, cloth
ing, shelter, fuel, drugs, transportation fares,
doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods
and services that people buy for day-to-day
living. The quantity and quality of these
items are kept essentially unchanged be
tween major revisions so that only price
changes will be measured. All taxes directly
associated with the purchase and use of items
are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 23,000 re
tail establishments and 5,800 housing units
in 87 urban areas across the country are used
to develop the “U.S. city average.” Separate
estimates for 14 major urban centers are pre
sented in table 29. The areas listed are as in
dicated in footnote 1 to the table. The area
indexes measure only the average change in
prices for each area since the base period, and
do not indicate differences in the level of
prices among cities.
Days of idleness as a percent of estimated
working time: Aggregate workdays lost as a
percent of the aggregate number of standard
workdays in the period multiplied by total
employment in the period.
Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one
terminated in 1981 that covered strikes in
volving six workers or more.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on work
stoppages data, contact the Office of Com
pensation and Working Conditions: (202)
691-6282, or the Internet:
http ://sta ts.bls.gov/cbahome.htm
Price Data
Notes on the data
(Tables 2; 28-38)
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the
way in which homeownership costs are
meaured for the CPI-U. A rental equivalence
method replaced the asset-price approach to
homeownership costs for that series. In
January 1985, the same change was made
in the CPI-W . The central purpose of the
change was to separate shelter costs from
the investment component of home-owner
ship so that the index would reflect only the
cost of shelter services provided by owneroccupied homes. An updated CPI-U and CPIw were introduced with release of the Janu
ary 1987 and January 1998 data.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on con
sumer prices, contact the Division of Con
sumer Prices and Price Indexes: (202)
691-7000.
are gathered by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics from retail and pri
mary markets in the United States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base pe
riod— 1982 = 100 for many Producer Price
Indexes, 1982-84 = 100 for many Con
sumer Price Indexes (unless otherwise
noted), and 1990 = 100 for International
Price Indexes.
P r ic e
data
Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a mea
sure of the average change in the prices paid
by urban consumers for a fixed market bas
ket of goods and services. The CPI is calcu
lated monthly for two population groups, one
consisting only of urban households whose
primary source of income is derived from the
employment of wage earners and clerical
workers, and the other consisting of all ur
ban households. The wage earner index (CPiw) is a continuation of the historic index that
was introduced well over a half-century ago
for use in wage negotiations. As new uses
were developed for the CPI in recent years,
the need for a broader and more representa
tive index became apparent. The all-urban
consumer index (C PI-U ), introduced in 1978,
is representative of the 1993-95 buying hab
its of about 87 percent of the noninstitutional
population of the United States at that time,
compared with 32 percent represented in the
c p i - w . In addition to wage earners and cleri
cal workers, the C P i-u covers professional,
managerial, and technical workers, the selfemployed, short-term workers, the unem
70 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
(PPi) measure av
erage changes in prices received by domes
tic producers of commodities in all stages
of processing. The sample used for calcu
lating these indexes currently contains about
3,200 commodities and about 80,000 quo
tations per month, selected to represent the
movement of prices of all commodities pro
duced in the manufacturing; agriculture, for
estry, and fishing; mining; and gas and elec
tricity and public utilities sectors. The stageof-processing structure of PP i organizes
products by class of buyer and degree of
fabrication (that is, finished goods, interme
diate goods, and crude materials). The tra
ditional commodity structure of PPI orga
nizes products by similarity of end use or
March 2000
Producer Price Indexes
material composition. The industry and
product structure of p p i organizes data in
accordance with the Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) and the product code ex
tension of the SIC developed by the U.S. Bu
reau of the Census.
To the extent possible, prices used in
calculating Producer Price Indexes apply
to the first significant commercial trans
action in the United States from the pro
duction or central marketing point. Price
data are generally collected monthly, pri
marily by mail questionnaire. Most prices
are obtained directly from producing com
panies on a voluntary and confidential ba
sis. Prices generally are reported for the
Tuesday of the week containing the 13th
day of the month.
Since January 1992, price changes for the
various commodities have been averaged
together with implicit quantity weights
representing their importance in the total net
selling value of all commodities as of 1987.
The detailed data are aggregated to obtain
indexes for stage-of-processing groupings,
commodity groupings, durability-of-product
groupings, and a number of special composite
groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original
publication.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on pro
ducer prices, contact the Division of In
dustrial Prices and Price Indexes: (202)
691-7705.
International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The International Price Program produces
monthly and quarterly export and import
price indexes for nonmilitary goods traded
between the United States and the rest of the
world. The export price index provides a
measure of price change for all products sold
by U.S. residents to foreign buyers. (“Resi
dents” is defined as in the national income
accounts; it includes corporations, busi
nesses, and individuals, but does not require
the organizations to be U.S. owned nor the
individuals to have U.S. citizenship.) The
import price index provides a measure of
price change for goods purchased from other
countries by U.S. residents.
The product universe for both the import
and export indexes includes raw materials,
agricultural products, semifinished manufac
tures, and finished manufactures, including
both capital and consumer goods. Price data
for these items are collected primarily by
mail questionnaire. In nearly all cases, the
data are collected directly from the exporter
or importer, although in a few cases, prices
are obtained from other sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered
refer to prices at the U.S. border for exports
and at either the foreign border or the U.S.
border for imports. For nearly all products, the
prices refer to transactions completed during
the first week of the month. Survey respon
dents are asked to indicate all discounts, al
lowances, and rebates applicable to the re
ported prices, so that the price used in the cal
culation of the indexes is the actual price for
which the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices
for U.S. exports and imports, indexes are also
published for detailed product categories of
exports and imports. These categories are
defined according to the five-digit level of
detail for the Bureau of Economic Analysis
End-use Classification (SITC), and the four
digit level of detail for the Harmonized
System. Aggregate import indexes by coun
try or region of origin are also available.
bls
p u b l is h e s i n d e x e s f o r s e l e c t e d c a t e g o
r i e s o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l ly tr a d e d s e r v i c e s , c a l c u
la t e d o n a n in t e r n a t i o n a l b a s i s a n d o n a b a la n c e -o f-p a y m e n ts b a sis.
Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are
weighted indexes of the Laspeyres type. Price
relatives are assigned equal importance
within each harmonized group and are then
aggregated to the higher level. The values as
signed to each weight category are based on
trade value figures compiled by the Bureau
of the Census. The trade weights currently
used to compute both indexes relate to 1990.
Because a price index depends on the same
items being priced from period to period, it is
necessary to recognize when a product’s speci
fications or terms of transaction have been
modified. For this reason, the Bureau’s ques
tionnaire requests detailed descriptions of the
physical and functional characteristics of the
products being priced, as well as information
on the number of units bought or sold, dis
counts, credit terms, packaging, class of buyer
or seller, and so forth. When there are changes
in either the specifications or terms of trans
action of a product, the dollar value of each
change is deleted from the total price change
to obtain the “pure” change. Once this value
is determined, a linking procedure is em
ployed which allows for the continued repric
ing of the item.
For the export price indexes, the preferred
pricing is f.a.s. (free alongside ship) U.S. port
of exportation. When firms report export
prices f.o.b. (free on board), production point
information is collected which enables the
Bureau to calculate a shipment cost to the port
of exportation. An attempt is made to collect
two prices for imports. The first is the import
price f.o.b. at the foreign port of exportation,
which is consistent with the basis for valua
tion of imports in the national accounts. The
second is the import price c.i.f.(costs, insur
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Unit labor costs are the labor compen
sation costs expended in the production of
a unit of output and are derived by dividing
compensation by output. Unit nonlabor
payments include profits, depreciation,
interest, and indirect taxes per unit of out
put. They are computed by subtracting com
pensation of all persons from current-dollar
value of output and dividing by output.
Unit nonlabor costs contain all the
components of unit nonlabor payments ex
cept unit profits.
Unit profits include corporate profits
with inventory valuation and capital con
sumption adjustments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours
at work of payroll workers, self-employed
persons, and unpaid family workers.
Labor inputs are hours of all persons ad
justed for the effects of changes in the edu
cation and experience of the labor force.
Capital services are the flow of services
from the capital stock used in production. It
is developed from measures of the net stock
of physical assets—equipment, structures,
land, and inventories—weighted by rental
prices for each type of asset.
ance, and freight) at the U.S. port of importa
tion, which also includes the other costs as
sociated with bringing the product to the U.S.
border. It does not, however, include duty
charges. For a given product, only one price
basis series is used in the construction of an
index.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on inter
national prices, contact the Division of In
ternational Prices: (202) 691-7155.
Productivity Data
(Tables 2; 39-42)
Business sector and major
sectors
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real output
to real input. As such, they encompass a fam
ily of measures which include single-factor
input measures, such as output per hour, out
put per unit of labor input, or output per unit
of capital input, as well as measures of multifactor productivity (output per unit of com
bined labor and capital inputs). The Bureau
indexes show the change in output relative
to changes in the various inputs. The mea
sures cover the business, nonfarm business,
manufacturing, and nonfinancial corporate
sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly com
pensation, unit labor costs, unit nonlabor
payments, and prices are also provided.
Combined units of labor and capital
inputs are derived by combining changes in
Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor pro
ductivity) is the quantity of goods and ser
vices produced per hour of labor input. Out
put per unit of capital services (capital pro
ductivity) is the quantity of goods and ser
vices produced per unit of capital services
input. Multifactor productivity is the quan
tity of goods and services produced per com
bined inputs. For private business and pri
vate nonfarm business, inputs include labor
and capital units. For manufacturing, in
puts include labor, capital, energy, non-en
ergy materials, and purchased business ser
vices.
Compensation per hour is total compen
sation divided by hours at work. Total com
pensation equals the wages and salaries of
employees plus employers’ contributions for
social insurance and private benefit plans,
plus an estimate of these payments for the
self-employed (except for nonfinancial cor
porations in which there are no self-em
ployed). Real compensation per hour is
compensation per hour deflated by the
change in the Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers.
labor and capital input with weights which
represent each component’s share of total
cost. Combined units of labor, capital, energy,
materials, and purchased business services are
similarly derived by combining changes in
each input with weights that represent each
input’s share of total costs. The indexes for
each input and for combined units are based
on changing weights which are averages of the
shares in the current and preceding year (the
Tomquist index-number formula).
Notes on the data
Business sector output is an annually-weighted
index constructed by excluding from real gross
domestic product ( g d p ) the following outputs:
general government, nonprofit institutions,
paid employees of private households, and the
rental value of owner-occupied dwellings.
Nonfarm business also excludes farming. Pri
vate business and private nonfarm business
further exclude government enterprises. The
measures are supplied by the U.S. Department
of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analy
sis. Annual estimates of manufacturing sectoral
output are produced by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. Quarterly manufacturing output in
dexes from the Federal Reserve Board are ad
justed to these annual output measures by the
b l s . Compensation data are developed from
data of the Bureau of Economic Analysis and
the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Hours data are
developed from data of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
The productivity and associated cost mea-
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
71
Current Labor Statistics
sures in tables 39-42 describe the relation
ship between output in real terms and the la
bor and capital inputs involved in its pro
duction. They show the changes from period
to period in the amount of goods and ser
vices produced per unit of input.
Although these measures relate output to
hours and capital services, they do not mea
sure the contributions of labor, capital, or any
other specific factor of production. Rather,
they reflect the joint effect of many influences,
including changes in technology; shifts in the
composition of the labor force; capital invest
ment; level of output; changes in the utiliza
tion of capacity, energy, material, and research
and development; the organization of produc
tion; managerial skill; and characteristics and
efforts of the work force.
FOR A D D ITIO N A L INFORMATION on this
productivity series, contact the Division of
Productivity Research: (202) 691-5606.
Industry productivity measures
Description of the series
The b l s industry productivity data supplement
the measures for the business economy and
major sectors with annual measures of labor
productivity for selected industries at the
three- and four-digit levels of the Standard
Industrial Classification system. The
industry measures differ in methodology
and data sources from the productivity
measures for the major sectors because the
industry measures are developed indepen
dently of the National Income and Product
Accounts framework used for the major
sector measures.
indexes refer to the output per hour of all
employees. For some transportation indus
tries, only indexes of output per employee
are prepared. For some trade and service
industries, indexes of output per hour of
all persons (including self-employed) are
constructed.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION On this se
ries, contact the Division of Industry Produc
tivity Studies: (202) 691-5618.
International Comparisons
(Tables 43-45)
Labor force and
unemployment
Description of the series
Tables 43 and 44 present comparative meas
ures of the labor force, employment, and un
employment—approximating U.S. con
cepts—for the United States, Canada, Aus
tralia, Japan, and several European countries.
The unemployment statistics (and, to a lesser
extent, employment statistics) published by
other industrial countries are not, in most
cases, comparable to U.S. unemployment
statistics. Therefore, the Bureau adjusts the
figures for selected countries, where neces
sary, for all known major definitional differ
ences. Although precise comparability may
not be achieved, these adjusted figures pro
vide a better basis for international compari
sons than the figures regularly published by
each country.
Definitions
Definitions
Output per hour is derived by dividing an in
dex of industry output by an index of labor
input. For most industries, output indexes are
derived from data on the value of industry out
put adjusted for price change. For the remain
ing industries, output indexes are derived from
data on the physical quantity of production.
The labor input series consist of the hours
of all employees (production and nonproduc
tion workers), the hours of all persons (paid
employees, partners, proprietors, and unpaid
family workers), or the number of employees,
depending upon the industry.
For the principal U.S. definitions of the la
bor force, employment, and unemployment,
see the Notes section on Employment and
Unemployment Data: Household survey
data.
Notes on the data
The industry measures are compiled from
data produced by the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics, the Departments of Commerce, Inte
rior, and Agriculture, the Federal Reserve
Board, regulatory agencies, trade associa
tions, and other sources.
For most industries, the productivity
72 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Notes on the data
The adjusted statistics have been adapted to
the age at which compulsory schooling ends
in each country, rather than to the U.S. stan
dard of 16 years of age and older. Therefore,
the adjusted statistics relate to the popula
tion aged 16 and older in France, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom; 15 and older in
Canada, Australia, Japan, Germany, Italy
from 1993 onward, and the Netherlands; and
14 and older in Italy prior to 1993. The insti
tutional population is included in the de
nominator of the labor force participation
rates and employment-population ratios for
Japan and Germany; it is excluded for the
United States and the other countries.
March 2000
In the U.S. labor force survey, persons on
layoff who are awaiting recall to their jobs
are classified as unemployed. European and
Japanese layoff practices are quite different
in nature from those in the United States;
therefore, strict application of the U.S. defi
nition has not been made on this point. For
further information, see Monthly Labor Re
view, December 1981, pp. 8-11.
The figures for one or more recent years
for France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands,
and the United Kingdom are calculated us
ing adjustment factors based on labor force
surveys for earlier years and are considered
preliminary. The recent-year measures for
these countries, therefore, are subject to re
vision whenever data from more current la
bor force surveys become available.
There are breaks in the data series for the
United States (1990, 1994, 1997, 1998),
France (1992), Italy (1991,1993), the Neth
erlands (1988), and Sweden (1987).
For the United States, the break in series
reflects a major redesign of the labor force
survey questionnaire and collection method
ology introduced in January 1994. Revised
population estimates based on the 1990 cen
sus, adjusted for the estimated undercount,
also were incorporated. In 1996, previously
published data for the 1990-93 period were
revised to reflect the 1990 census-based
population controls, adjusted for the un
dercount. In 1997, revised population con
trols were introduced into the household sur
vey. Therefore, the data are not strictly
conparable with prior years. In 1998, new
composite estimation procedures and minor
revisions in population controls were intro
duced into the household survey. Therefore,
the data are not strictly comparable with data
for 1997 and earlier years. See the Notes sec
tion on Employment and Unemployment
Data of this Review.
For France, the 1992 break reflects the
substitution of standardized European Union
Statistical Office ( e u r o s t a t ) unemployment
statistics for the unemployment data esti
mated according to the International Labor
Office ( i l o ) definition and published in the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (O E C D ) annual yearbook and
quarterly update. This change was made be
cause the EUROSTAT data are more up-to-date
than the OECD figures. Also, since 1992, the
e u r o s t a t definitions are closer to the U.S.
definitions than they were in prior years. The
impact of this revision was to lower the un
employment rate by 0.1 percentage point in
1992 and 1993, by 0.4 percentage point in
1994, and 0.5 percentage point in 1995.
For Italy, the 1991 break reflects a revi
sion in the method of weighting sample data.
The impact was to increase the unemploy
ment rate by approximately 0.3 percentage
point, from 6.6 to 6.9 percent in 1991.
In October 1992, the survey methodology
was revised and the definition of unemploy
ment was changed to include only those who
were actively looking for a job within the 30
days preceding the survey and who were
available for work. In addition, the lower age
limit for the labor force was raised from 14
to 15 years. (Prior to these changes, b l s ad
justed Italy’s published unemployment rate
downward by excluding from the unem
ployed those persons who had not
actively sought work in the past 30 days.)
The break in the series also reflects the in
corporation of the 1991 population census
results. The impact of these changes was to
raise Italy’s adjusted unemployment rate by
approximately 1.2 percentage points, from
8.3 to 9.5 percent in fourth-quarter 1992.
These changes did not affect employment
significantly, except in 1993. Estimates by
the Italian Statistical Office indicate that em
ployment declined by about 3 percent in
1993, rather than the nearly 4 percent indi
cated by the data shown in table 44. This dif
ference is attributable mainly to the incorpo
ration of the 1991 population benchmarks in
the 1993 data. Data for earlier years have not
been adjusted to incorporate the 1991 cen
sus results.
For the Netherlands, a new survey ques
tionnaire was introduced in 1992 that al
lowed for a closer application of i l o guide
lines. e u r o s t a t has revised the Dutch series
back to 1988 based on the 1992 changes. The
1988 revised unemployment rate is 7.6 per
cent; the previous estimate for the same year
was 9.3 percent.
There have been two breaks in series in
the Swedish labor force survey, in 1987 and
1993. Adjustments have been made for the
1993 break back to 1987. In 1987, a new
questionnaire was introduced. Questions re
garding current availability were added and
the period of active workseeking was reduced
from 60 days to 4 weeks. These changes low
ered Sweden’s 1987 unemployment rate by
0.4 percentage point, from 2.3 to 1.9 percent.
In 1993, the measurement period for the la
bor force survey was changed to represent
all 52 weeks of the year rather than one week
each month and a new adjustment for popu
lation totals was introduced. The impact was
to raise the unemployment rate by approxi
mately 0.5 percentage point, from 7.6 to 8.1
percent. Statistics Sweden revised its labor
force survey data for 1987-92 to take into
account the break in 1993. The adjustment
raised the Swedish unemployment rate by 0.2
percentage point in 1987 and gradually rose
to 0.5 percentage point in 1992.
Beginning with 1987, BLS has adjusted
the Swedish data to classify students who
also sought work as unemployed. The impact
of this change was to increase the adjusted
unemployment rate by 0.1 percentage point
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in 1987 and by 1.8 percentage points in 1994,
when unemployment was higher. In 1998,
the adjusted unemployment rate had risen
from 6.5 to 8.4 percent due to the adjustment
to include students.
The net effect of the 1987 and 1993
changes and the b l s adjustment for students
seeking work lowered Sweden’s 1987 unem
ployment rate from 2.3 to 2.2 percent.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION On this se
ries, contact the Division of Foreign Labor
Statistics: (202) 691-5654.
Manufacturing productivity
and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 45 presents comparative indexes of
manufacturing labor productivity (output per
hour), output, total hours, compensation per
hour, and unit labor costs for the United
States, Canada, Japan, and nine European
countries. These measures are trend compari
sons—that is, series that measure changes
over time—rather than level comparisons.
There are greater technical problems in com
paring the levels of manufacturing output
among countries.
b l s constructs the comparative indexes
from three basic aggregate measures—out
put, total labor hours, and total compensa
tion. The hours and compensation measures
refer to all employed persons (wage and sal
ary earners plus self-employed persons and
unpaid family workers) in the United States,
Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Norway,
and Sweden, and to all employees (wage and
salary earners) in the other countries.
Definitions
Output, in general, refers to value added in
manufacturing from the national accounts of
each country. However, the output series for
Japan prior to 1970 is an index of industrial
production, and the national accounts mea
sures for the United Kingdom are essentially
identical to their indexes of industrial pro
duction.
The 1977-97 output data for the United
States are the gross product originating (value
added) measures prepared by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department
of Commerce. Comparable manufacturing
output data currently are not available prior
to 1977.
U.S. gross product originating is a chaintype annual-weighted series. (For more in
formation on the U.S. measure, see Robert
E. Yuskavage, “Improved Estimates of Gross
Product by Industry, 1959-94,” Survey of
Current Business, August 1996, pp. 133-55.)
The Japanese value added series is based
upon one set of fixed price weights for the
years 1970 through 1997. Output series for
the other foreign economies also employ
fixed price weights, but the weights are up
dated periodically (for example, every 5 or
10 years).
To preserve the comparability of the U.S.
measures with those for other economies, b l s
uses gross product originating in manufac
turing for the United States for these com
parative measures. The gross product origi
nating series differs from the manufacturing
output series that b l s publishes in its news
releases on quarterly measures of U.S. pro
ductivity and costs (and that underlies the
measures that appear in tables 39 and 41 in
this section). The quarterly measures are on
a “sectoral output” basis, rather than a valueadded basis. Sectoral output is gross output
less intrasector transactions.
Total labor hours refers to hours worked
in all countries. The measures are developed
from statistics of manufacturing employment
and average hours. The series used for France
(from 1970 forward), Norway, and Sweden
are official series published with the national
accounts. Where official total hours series are
not available, the measures are developed by
b l s using employment figures published with
the national accounts, or other comprehen
sive employment series, and estimates of
annual hours worked. For Germany, b l s uses
estimates of average hours worked developed
by a research institute connected to the Min
istry of Labor for use with the national ac
counts employment figures. For the other
countries, b l s constructs its own estimates
of average hours.
Denmark has not published estimates of
average hours for 1994-97; therefore, the BLS
measure of labor input for Denmark ends in
1993.
Total compensation Gabor cost) includes
all payments in cash or in-kind made directly
to employees plus employer expenditures for
legally required insurance programs and con
tractual and private benefit plans. The mea
sures are from the national accounts of each
country, except those for Belgium, which are
developed by b l s using statistics on employ
ment, average hours, and hourly compensa
tion. For Canada, France, and Sweden, com
pensation is increased to account for other sig
nificant taxes on payroll or employment. For
the United Kingdom, compensation is reduced
between 1967 and 1991 to account for em
ployment-related subsidies. Self-employed
workers are included in the all-employed-per
sons measures by assuming that their hourly
compensation is equal to the average for wage
and salary employees.
Notes on the data
In general, the measures relate to total manu
facturing as defined by the International Stan-
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
73
Current Labor Statistics
dard Industrial Classification. However, the
measures for France (for all years) and Italy
(beginning 1970) refer to mining and manu
facturing less energy-related products, and
the measures for Denmark include mining
and exclude manufacturing handicrafts from
1960 to 1966.
The measures for recent years may be
based on current indicators of manufactur
ing output (such as industrial production in
dexes), employment, average hours, and
hourly compensation until national accounts
and other statistics used for the long-term
measures become available.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on this se
ries, contact the Division of Foreign Labor
Statistics.
Occupational Injury
and Illness Data
(Tables 46-47)
Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses
Description of the series
The Survey of Occupational Injuries and Ill
nesses collects data from employers about their
workers’ job-related nonfatal injuries and ill
nesses. The information that employers provide
is based on records that they maintain under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970. Self-employed individuals, farms with
fewer than 11 employees, employers regulated
by other Federal safety and health laws, and
Federal, State, and local government agencies
are excluded from the survey.
The survey is a Federal-State coopera
tive program with an independent sample
selected for each participating State. A
stratified random sample with a Neyman al
location is selected to represent all private
industries in the State. The survey is strati
fied by Standard Industrial Classification
and size of employment.
Definitions
Under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act, employers maintain records of nonfatal
work-related injuries and illnesses that in
volve one or more of the following: loss of
consciousness, restriction of work or motion,
transfer to another job, or medical treatment
other than first aid.
Occupational injury is any injury such as
a cut, fracture, sprain, or amputation that re
sults from a work-related event or a single, in
stantaneous exposure in the work environment.
74 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Occupational illness is an abnormal con
dition or disorder, other than one resulting
from an occupational injury, caused by expo
sure to factors associated with employment. It
includes acute and chronic illnesses or disease
which may be caused by inhalation, absorp
tion, ingestion, or direct contact.
Lost workday injuries and illnesses are
cases that involve days away from work, or
days of restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workdays include the number of
workdays (consecutive or not) on which the
employee was either away from work or at
work in some restricted capacity, or both, be
cause of an occupational injury or illness, b l s
measures of the number and incidence rate of
lost workdays were discontinued beginning
with the 1993 survey. The number of days
away from work or days of restricted work
activity does not include the day of injury or
onset of illness or any days on which the em
ployee would not have worked, such as a Fed
eral holiday, even though able to work.
Incidence rates are computed as the
number of injuries and/or illnesses or lost
work days per 100 full-time workers.
Notes on the data
The definitions of occupational injuries and
illnesses are from Recordkeeping Guidelines
for Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics, September 1986).
Estimates are made for industries and em
ployment size classes for total recordable cases,
lost workday cases, days away from work cases,
and nonfatal cases without lost workdays.
These data also are shown separately for inju
ries. Illness data are available for seven catego
ries: occupational skin diseases or disorders,
dust diseases of the lungs, respiratory condi
tions due to toxic agents, poisoning (systemic
effects of toxic agents), disorders due to physi
cal agents (other than toxic materials), disor
ders associated with repeated trauma, and all
other occupational illnesses.
The survey continues to measure the num
ber of new work-related illness cases which
are recognized, diagnosed, and reported dur
ing the year. Some conditions, for example,
long-term latent illnesses caused by exposure
to carcinogens, often are difficult to relate to
the workplace and are not adequately recog
nized and reported. These long-term latent ill
nesses are believed to be understated in the
survey’s illness measure. In contrast, the over
whelming majority of the reported new ill
nesses are those which are easier to directly
relate to workplace activity (for example, con
tact dermatitis and carpal tunnel syndrome).
Most of the estimates are in the form of
incidence rates, defined as the number of in
juries and illnesses per 100 equivalent full
time workers. For this purpose, 200,000 em
March 2000
ployee hours; represent 100 employee years
(2,000 hours per employee). Full detail on the
available measures is presented in the annual
bulletin, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses:
Counts, Rates, and Characteristics.
Comparable data for more than 40 States
and territories are available from the b l s Of
fice of Safety, Health and Working Condi
tions. Many of these States publish data on
State and local government employees in ad
dition to private industry data.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to
BLS by the Mine Safety and Health Adminis
tration and the Federal Railroad Administra
tion. Data from these organizations are in
cluded in both the national and State data
published annually.
With the 1992 survey, BLS began publish
ing details on serious, nonfatal incidents re
sulting in days away from work. Included are
some major characteristics of the injured and
ill workers, such as occupation, age, gender,
race, and length of service, as well as the cir
cumstances of their injuries and illnesses (na
ture of the disabling condition, part of body
affected, event and exposure, and the source
directly producing the condition). In general,
these data are available nationwide for de
tailed industries and for individual States at
more aggregated industry levels.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on occu
pational injuries and illnesses, contact the
Office of Occupational Safety, Health and
Working Conditions at (202) 691-6180, or
access the Internet at:
http ://www.bls.gov/oshhome.htm
Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries
The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries
compiles a complete roster of fatal job-re
lated injuries, including detailed data about
the fatally injured workers and the fatal
events. The program collects and cross
checks fatality information from multiple
sources, including death certificates, State
and Federal workers’ compensation reports,
Occupational Safety and Health Administra
tion and Mine Safety and Health Adminis
tration records, medical examiner and au
topsy reports, media accounts, State motor
vehicle fatality records, and follow-up ques
tionnaires to employers.
In addition to private wage and salary
workers, the self-employed, family mem
bers, and Federal, State, and local govern
ment workers are covered by the program.
To be included in the fatality census, the
decedent must have been employed (that
is working for pay, compensation, or profit)
at the time of the event, engaged in a legal
work activity, or present at the site of the
incident as a requirement of his or her job.
Definition
lease that is available about 8 months after
the end of the reference year. The Census of
Fatal Occupational Injuries was initiated in
1992 as a joint Federal-State effort. Most
States issue summary information at the
time of the national news release.
F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n on the
Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries con
tact the b l s Office of Safety, Health, and
Working Conditions at (202) 691-6175, or
the Internet at:
related illnesses, which can be difficult
to identify due to long latency periods.
A fatal work injury is any intentional or unin
tentional wound or damage to the body result
ing in death from acute exposure to energy,
such as heat or electricity, or kinetic energy
from a crash, or from the absence of such es
sentials as heat or oxygen caused by a specific
event or incident or series of events within a
single workday or shift. Fatalities that occur
during a person’s commute to or from work
are excluded from the census, as well as work-
Notes on the data
Twenty-eight data elements are collected,
coded, and tabulated in the fatality program,
including information about the fatally in
jured worker, the fatal incident, and the ma
chinery or equipment involved. Summary
worker demographic data and event charac
teristics are included in a national news re
http ://ww w.bls.gov/oshhome.htm
Bureau of Labor Statistics Internet
The Bureau of Labor Statistics World Wide Web site on the Internet contains a range of
data on consumer and producer prices, employment and unemployment, occupational com
pensation, employee benefits, workplace injuries and illnesses, and productivity. The
homepage can be accessed using any Web browser:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
http://stats.bls.gov.
Also, some data can be accessed through anonymous f t p or Gopher at
stats.bls.gov
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
75
Current Labor Statistics:
Comparative Indicators
1. Labor market indicators
1998
Selected indicators
1999
1997
1998
I
IV
II
1999
III
IV
II
1
III
IV
E m p lo y m e n t d a ta
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized
population (household survey):1
Labor force participation rate..........................................................
67.1
67.1
67.1
67.2
67.0
67.0
67.1
67.2
67.1
67.0
67.0
Employment-population ratio...........................................................
64.1
64.3
64.0
64.1
64.3
64.2
4.5
64.0
4.7
64.1
Unemployment rate..........................................................................
63.9
4.7
4.4
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
64.2
4.2
64.3
4.1
Men..................................................................................................
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.7
4.6
4.3
4.5
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.1
4.0
16 to 24 years..............................................................................
11.1
10.3
11.5
11.4
10.7
11.5
10.6
10.4
10.4
10.0
10.4
3.2
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.1
4.3
4.8
4.6
4.5
4.6
3.0
4.4
3.0
4.4
3.0
4.4
2.9
4.6
3.4
4.7
3.3
Women............................................................................................
16 to 24 years..............................................................................
9.8
9.5
9.9
9.4
9.8
9.2
9.5
9.4
3.6
3.3
10.0
3.8
9.7
25 years and over........................................................................
10.1
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.1
4.2
Employment, nonfarm (payroll data), In thousands:1
124,771
105,094
125,462
126,113
126,865
127,640
128,246
128,936
129,609
105,707
106,260
106,920
107,596
108,153
109,333
25,181
18,805
25,363
25,393
25,306
25,319
25,310
25,222
108,743
25,194
18,876
18,851
18,645
18,542
98,765
99,409
100,070
18,719
100,807
101,545
102,331
18,433
103,024
125,826
128,616
123,946
106,007
108,455
104,311
Goods-produclng..........................................................................
Manufacturing...........................................................................
25,347
18,772
25,240
18,431
Service-producing........................................................................
100,480
103,376
Total....................................................................................................
25,243
18,398
18,357
103,743
104,365
Average hours:
34.7
34.4
34.5
41.7
4.6
34.6
42.1
4.9
42.0
4.8
34.6
41.7
4.6
34.6
41.7
34.6
41.7
34.6
41.6
41.7
34.5
41.8
34.5
41.7
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.7
4.7
3.4
3.5
3.4
.8
.9
.8
.9
.8
.9
1.2
.6
.6
.4
1.0
1.1
1.1
.9
.9
.9
Goods-producing3.....................................................................
2.8
3.4
.4
.7
.8
.7
.5
.8
.7
.9
1.0
Service-producing3....................................................................
3.8
3.0
3.4
3.4
1.1
.5
1.0
.6
.8
.3
1.3
1.5
.6
.6
.3
.5
1.3
.4
.9
1.5
.8
1.0
3.0
3.5
2.7
3.6
.2
.4
.7
1.1
.5
.6
.4
1.0
1.0
.8
1.1
1.0
.5
1.2
.9
.9
1.0
Private sector..................................................................................
Manufacturing...............................................................................
Overtime....................................................................................
34.6
41.7
4.6
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x 2
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household and Federal workers)......
Private industry workers................................................................
3.4
1.1
.4
Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
Union..................................................................................................
Nonunion............................................................................................
1 Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Annual changes are December-to-December changes. Quarterly changes are calculated using the last month of each quarter.
3 Goods-produclng Industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-producing industries include all other private sector industries.
76 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
.7
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
Selected measures
1999
1998
1997
1999
1998
IV
II
I
I
IV
III
IV
III
II
C o m p e n s a t i o n d a t a 1’2
Employment Cost Index— compensation (wages,
salaries, benefits):
Civilian nonfarm........................................................................
3.4
3.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.2
0.6
0.4
1.0
1.1
0.9
Private nonfarm....................................................................
3.5
3.4
.9
.9
.9
1.1
.6
.4
1.1
.9
.9
Employment Cost Index—wages and salaries:
3.7
3.5
.9
.9
.7
1.3
.7
.5
1.0
1.1
.8
3.9
3.5
1.0
1.1
.9
1.3
.6
.5
1.2
.9
.9
1.6
2.7
.1
.6
.5
.4
.2
.7
.7
1.0
.2
Finished goods...........................................................................
.0
3.0
-.5
-.8
.5
-.1
.4
.0
1.2
1.5
.2
Finished consumer goods.....................................................
.0
3.9
-.8
-1 .0
.8
.0
.2
.0
1.8
2.2
-.1
1.2
Private nonfarm....................................................................
P r ic e d a t a 1
Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers): All Items......
Producer Price Index:
Capital equipment...................................................................
.0
.3
.5
.0
-.5
- .4
.9
-.1
- .4
-.4
Intermediate materials, supplies, and components...............
-3 .3
3.9
-.8
-1 .4
.2
-.5
-1 .6
-.2
1.9
1.9
.2
Crude materials...........................................................................
-1 6 .7
15.7
-.6
-8 .8
-1 .8
-5 .6
-2 .5
-.1
9.4
10.2
-3 .2
2.8
3.0
1.2
4.6
.6
3.4
4.3
3.0
.8
4.7
4.8
2.8
2.9
1.2
4.4
.9
3.1
4.1
2.7
.6
5.0
5.0
2.8
3.7
3.9
5.9
3.2
4.2
3.3
4.1
-
P r o d u c tiv ity d a ta 3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business sector...........................................................................
4.0
1
Annual changes are December-to-December changes.
Quarterly changes are
cent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly indexes. The data are
seasonally adjusted.
calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price data are not
seasonally adjusted, and the price data are not compounded.
4
Output per hour of all employees.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages. Quarterly per
3. Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ending—
Quarterly average
III
1998
1999
1998
Components
I
IV
III
II
IV
1999
IV
III
I
III
II
IV
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector..............................................................
All persons, nonfarm business sector..............................................
6.1
6.2
4.9
4.6
4.9
4.2
5.1
4.8
4.5
4.7
3.6
4.0
5.8
5.7
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.1
5.3
4.9
4.9
4.6
4.5
4.4
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.5
.6
.6
.5
.6
.6
.4
.4
.4
.5
.5
1.0
1.1
.7
1.2
.4
1.1
.9
.9
.9
1.5
.9
.9
.7
1.0
1.0
3.7
3.8
2.7
4.0
3.0
3.4
3.5
3.0
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
3.2
3.3
2.7
3.4
3.0
3.1
3.1
2.5
3.2
2.9
3.4
3.4
2.7
3.6
3.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.6
.7
.6
.5
.7
.7
.5
.5
.4
.5
.4
1.0
1.2
.8
1.2
.4
1.1
.9
.7
.9
1.9
.8
.9
.6
.9
.9
4.0
4.3
3.2
4.4
3.0
3.7
3.9
3.3
4.0
3.1
3.3
3.3
3.1
3.3
2.9
3.6
3.6
3.1
3.7
3.1
3.3
3.2
2.5
3.3
3.3
3.5
3.5
2.6
3.6
3.6
Employment Cost Index— compensation:
Civilian nonfarm2..................................................................................
Union................................................................................................
Nonunion...........................................................................................
Employment Cost Index—wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2..................................................................................
Union................................................................................................
Nonunion..........................................................................................
State and local governments...........................................................
1 Seasonally adjusted. "Quarterly average" is percent change from a quarter ago, at an annual rate.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
77
Current Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Data
4. Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status
Annual average
1999
2000
1998
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
205,220
207,753
206,719
206,873
207,036
207,236
207,427
207,632
207,828
208,038
208 265
208 832
208 782
139,368
67.1
133,488
139,232
67.4
133,225
139,137
67.3
133,029
138,804
67.0
132,976
139,086
67.1
133,054
139,013
67.0
133,190
139,332
67.1
133,398
139,336
67.0
133,399
139,372
67.0
133,530
139,475
67.0
133,650
208 483
139,697
67.0
133,940
208 666
137,673
67.1
131,463
139,834
67.0
140,108
67.1
140,910
67.5
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor force.............
Participation rate.........
Employment-population ratio2.............
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate...
Not in the labor force.......
64.1
64.3
64.4
64.3
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.2
64.3
64.4
64.8
6,210
4.5
67,547
5,880
4.2
68,385
6,007
4.3
67,487
6,108
4.4
67,736
5,828
4.2
68,232
6,032
4.3
68,150
5,823
4.2
68,414
5,934
4.3
68,300
5,937
4.3
68,492
5,842
4.2
68,666
5,825
4.2
68,790
5,757
4.1
68,786
5,736
4.1
68,832
5,688
4.1
68,724
5,689
4.0
67,872
90,790
91,555
70,194
76.7
67,761
91,124
91,189
91,215
91,302
91,368
91,487
91,561
91,692
91 793
91 896
91 986
92 052
92 057
70,202
77.0
67,771
70,111
76.9
67,527
69,934
76.7
67,628
69,992
76.7
67,562
69,978
76.6
67,470
70,116
76.6
67,645
70,167
76.6
67,703
70,240
76.6
67,768
70,328
76.6
67,943
70,339
76.5
67,898
70,388
76.5
68,037
70,529
76.6
68,197
70,917
77.0
68,585
M e n , 2 0 y e a rs a n d o v e r
Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor force.............
Participation rate.........
Employed........................
Employment-pop-
69,715
76.8
67,135
73.9
74.0
74.4
74.1
74.1
74.0
73.8
73.9
74.0
73.9
74.0
74.1
74.5
2,244
2,304
2,231
2,239
2,305
2,224
73.9
2,246
73.9
2,350
2,256
2,237
2,189
2,206
2,262
2,227
2,303
64,785
2,580
3.7
65,517
2,433
3.5
65,467
2,431
3.5
65,296
2,584
3.7
65,389
2,306
3.3
65,257
2,430
3.5
65,246
2,508
3.6
65,399
2,471
3.5
65,447
2,464
3.5
65,531
2,472
3.5
65,754
2,385
3.4
65,692
2,441
3.5
65,775
2,351
3.3
65,970
2,332
3.3
66,282
2,332
3.3
98,786
100,158
99,686
99,746
99,833
99,923
100,008
100,131
100,203
100,285
100,385
100,458
100,573
100,666
100,579
59,702
60.4
57,278
60,840
60.7
58,555
60,691
60.9
58,373
60,591
60.7
58,261
60,554
60.7
58,216
60,765
60.8
58,336
60,708
60.7
58,483
60,988
60.9
58,647
60,852
60.7
58,477
60,904
60.7
58,648
60,860
60.6
58,630
60,955
60.7
58,800
61,052
60.7
58,838
61,154
60.7
58,958
61,576
61.2
59,280
58.0
58.5
58.6
58.4
58 4
58 5
58 5
58 fi
58 Q
822
820
851
798
58 5
780
58 4
802
58.4
803
58.6
803
58.3
821
58.5
768
778
800
768
791
826
56,510
2,424
4.1
57,752
2,285
3.8
57,571
2,318
3.8
57,439
2,330
3.8
57,395
2,338
3.9
57,533
2,429
4.0
57,663
2,225
3.7
57,796
2,341
3.8
57,679
2,375
3.9
57,868
2,256
3.7
57,852
2,230
3.7
58,000
2,155
3.5
58,070
2,214
3.6
58,167
2,196
3.6
58,454
2,297
3.7
population1..........................
Civilian labor force..............
Participation rate.........
Employed........................
Employment-pop-
15,644
16,040
15,909
15,939
15,988
16,011
16,051
16,014
16,065
16,061
16,086
16,129
16,107
16,114
16,147
8,256
52.8
7,051
8,333
52.0
7,172
8,339
52.4
7,081
8,435
52.9
7,241
8,316
52.0
7,132
8,329
52.0
7,156
8,327
51.9
7,237
8,228
51.4
7,106
8,317
51.8
7,219
8,228
51.2
7,114
8,287
51.5
7,077
8,403
52.1
7,242
8,394
52.1
7,223
8,425
52.3
7,265
8,416
52.1
7,356
ulation ratio2.............
Agriculture....................
Nonagricultural
industries...................
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
45.1
44.7
234
44.5
191
45.4
44.6
44.7
233
233
44.3
217
44.0
212
232
44.8
280
45.1
261
45.6
230
44.9
224
44.9
275
45.1
246
44.4
261
6,790
1,205
14.6
6,938
1,162
13.9
6,890
1,258
15.1
6,966
1,194
14.2
6,902
1,184
14.2
6,923
1,173
14.1
6,991
1,090
13.1
6,873
1,122
13.6
6,995
1,098
13.2
6,897
1,114
13.5
6,865
1,210
14.6
7,010
1,161
13.8
6,943
1,171
14.0
7,004
1,160
13.8
7,114
1,060
12.6
ulation ratio2.............
Agriculture....................
Nonagricultural
industries...................
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
W o m e n , 20 y e a rs a n d o v e r
Civilian noninstitutional
population1..........................
Civilian labor force.............
Participation rate.........
Employment-popAgriculture....................
Nonagricultural
industries...................
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
B o th s e x e s , 16 to 19 y e a rs
Civilian noninstitutional
242
W h ite
Civilian noninstitutional
population1..........................
Civilian labor force..............
Participation rate.........
Employed........................
Employment-pop-
171,478
173,085
172,394
172,491
172,597
172,730
172,859
172,999
173,133
173,275
173,432
173,585
173,709
173,821
173,812
115,415
67.3
110,931
116,509
67.3
112,235
116,356
67.5
111,978
116,455
67.5
112,017
116,237
67.3
112,030
116,344
67.4
111,886
116,193
67.2
111,898
116,518
67.4
112,115
116,492
67.3
112,193
116,619
67.3
112,308
116,495
67.2
112,303
116,654
67.2
112,548
116,703
67.2
112,611
117,008
67.3
112,951
117,716
67.7
113,704
ulation ratio2..............
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
64.7
4,484
3.9
64.8
4,273
3.7
65.0
64.9
4,438
3.8
64.9
64.8
64.7
64.8
64.8
64.8
64.8
4,207
3.6
4,458
3.8
4,295
3.7
4,403
3.8
4,299
3.7
4,311
3.7
64.8
4,192
3.6
64.8
4,378
3.8
4,106
3.5
4,092
3.5
65.0
4,057
3.5
4,011
3.4
population1..........................
Civilian labor force..............
Participation rate.........
Employed........................
Employment-pop-
24,373
24,855
24,665
24,697
24,729
24,765
24,798
24,833
24,867
24,904
25,019
25,051
25,047
16,365
65.8
15,056
16,337
66.2
15,056
16,250
65.8
14,924
16,231
65.6
14,925
16,288
65.8
15,011
16,290
65.7
15,053
16,308
65.7
15,069
16,366
65.8
14,962
16,321
65.5
15,047
24,946
16,474
66.0
15,114
24,985
15,982
65.6
14,556
16,489
66.0
15,124
16,508
66.0
15,187
16,513
65.9
15,204
16,622
66.4
15,254
ulation ratio2.............
Unemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
59.7
1,426
8.9
60.6
61.0
1,281
7.8
60.4
1,326
8.2
60.4
60.7
1,360
8.3
60.5
1,365
8.3
60.7
1,321
8.0
60.9
1,239
7.6
60.4
1,274
7.8
60.7
1,237
7.6
60.2
1,404
8.6
60.6
1,306
8.0
60.6
1,277
7.8
60.7
1,309
8.0
1,309
7.9
1,368
8.2
65.4
B la c k
Civilian noninstitutional
See footnotes at end of table.
78 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
4. Continued—Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
1999
Annual average
Employment status
2000
1998
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
21,070
21,650
21,296
21,355
21,414
21,483
21,548
21,618
21,684
21,752
21,820
21,881
21,947
22,008
22,047
14,317
67.9
13,291
14,665
67.7
13,720
14,448
67.8
13,473
14,520
68.0
13,536
14,542
67.9
13,673
14,535
67.7
13,541
14,555
67.5
13,574
14,624
67.6
13,655
14,617
67.4
13,696
14,710
67.6
13,759
14,766
67.7
13,795
14,809
67.7
13,879
14,887
67.8
13,979
14,984
68.1
14,095
15,251
69.2
14,395
63.1
1,026
7.2
63.4
63.3
975
6.7
63.4
63.8
869
6.0
63.0
994
6.8
63.0
981
6.7
63.2
969
6.6
63.2
63.3
951
6.5
63.2
63.4
63.7
971
6.6
930
6.3
908
6.1
64.0
889
5.9
65.3
856
5.6
Hispanic origin
Civilian noninstitutional
population1..........................
Civilian labor force.............
Participation rate.........
Employed........................
Employment-popUnemployed....................
Unemployment rate....
945
6.4
984
6.8
921
6.3
1 The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
data for the "other races" groups are not presented and Hispanics are included in both the
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
white and black population groups.
No te : Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals because
5.
Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Selected categories
Annual average
1999
2000
1998
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Employed, 16 years and over..
Men........................................
Women..................................
131,463
70,693
60,771
133,488
71,446
62,042
133,225
71,368
61,857
133,029
71,230
61,799
132,976
71,269
61,707
133,054
71,208
61,846
133,190
71,207
61,983
133,398
71,330
62,068
133,399
71,437
61,962
133,530
71,436
62,094
133,650
71,630
62,020
133,940
71,623
62,317
134,098
71,732
62,366
134,420
71,927
62,493
135,221
72,358
62,863
Married men, spouse
present.................................
42,923
43,254
43,440
43,077
43,164
43,210
42,997
43,279
43,350
43,368
43,367
43,206
43,273
43,283
43,951
Married women, spouse
present.................................
32,872
33,450
33,526
33,130
33,167
33,284
33,442
33,758
33,387
33,504
33,275
33,521
33,635
33,762
34,166
Women who maintain
families.................................
7,904
8,229
8,089
8,103
8,142
8,081
8,081
8,028
8,272
8,335
8,312
8,398
8,526
8,375
8,362
2,000
1,341
38
1,944
1,297
40
1,962
1,324
31
1,900
1,376
43
1,905
1,358
39
1,930
1,399
33
1,930
1,330
36
1,923
1,341
39
1,939
1,292
45
1,908
1,266
46
1,930
1,198
40
1,936
1,267
42
2,049
1,216
41
2,018
1,211
36
2,024
1,320
38
119,019
18,383
100,637
962
99,674
8,962
103
121,323
18,903
102,420
933
101,487
8,790
95
120,777
18,829
101,948
895
101,053
8,840
110
120,967
18,783
102,184
861
101,323
8,733
108
120,939
18,778
102,161
926
101,235
8,730
127
120,925
18,778
102,147
935
101,212
8,801
65
121,311
18,771
102,540
914
101,626
8,726
61
121,006
19,007
101,999
983
101,016
8,840
88
121,188
19,032
102,156
944
101,212
8,820
77
121,150
19,114
102,036
873
101,163
9,000
93
121,583
19,080
102,503
1,035
101,468
8,791
100
121,654
18,817
102,837
939
101,898
8,833
101
121,965
18,902
103,063
944
102,119
8,686
108
122,426
18,959
103,467
948
102,519
8,662
98
122,823
19,013
103,810
952
102,858
8,802
92
3,665
3,357
3,489
3,425
3,509
3,403
3,399
3,377
3,316
3,279
3,283
3,179
3,274
3,320
3,219
2,095
1,968
2,051
1,985
2,018
1,937
1,950
2,048
1,974
1,904
1,922
1,928
1,930
1,951
1,893
1,258
1,079
1,122
1,131
1,181
1,117
1,116
1,045
1,050
1,057
1,073
993
1,032
1,025
1,012
18,530
18,758
18,589
18,677
18,622
18,752
18,692
18,716
18,983
19,230
18,801
18,799
18,651
18,618
18,889
3,501
3,189
3,341
3,282
3,325
3,225
3,229
3,209
3,142
3,127
3,112
2,983
3,105
3,157
3,066
1,845
1,902
1,850
1,813
1,806
1,807
1,815
1,843
1,801
Characteristic
Class of worker
Agriculture:
Wage and salary workers.....
Self-employed workers........
Unpaid family workers..........
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary workers.....
Government..........................
Private industries.................
Private households........
Other...............................
Self-employed workers.......
Unpaid family workers.........
Persons at work part time1
All industries:
Part time for economic
reasons...............................
Slack work or business
conditions.......................
Could only find part-time
work................................
Part time for noneconomic
reasons..............................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic
reasons...............................
Slack work or business
conditions........................
Could only find part-time
work................................
Part time for noneconomic
reasons..............................
1,997
1,861
1,948
1,900
1,927
1,845
1,228
1,056
1,099
1,101
1,128
1,087
1,089
1,031
1,034
1,041
1,063
964
1,013
1,018
966
17,954
18,197
18,033
18.094
18,031
18,159
18,138
18,106
18,466
18,652
18,273
18,249
18.083
18,061
18,347
1 Excludes persons "with a job but not at work" during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
79
Current Labor Statistics:
6.
Labor Force Data
Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Unemployment rates]
2000
1999
Annual average
Selected categories
1998
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
C h a r a c te r is tic
Total, all workers...........................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.....................
Men, 20 years and over...........................
Women, 20 years and over.....................
4.5
14.6
3.7
4.1
4.2
13.9
3.5
3.8
4.3
15.1
3.5
3.8
4.4
14.2
3.7
3.8
4.2
14.2
3.3
3.9
4.3
14.1
3.5
4.0
4.2
13.1
3.6
3.7
4.3
13.6
3.5
3.8
4.3
13.2
3.5
3.9
4.2
13.5
3.5
3.7
4.2
14.6
3.4
3.7
4.1
13.8
3.5
3.5
4.1
14.0
3.3
3.6
4.1
13.8
3.3
3.6
4.0
12.6
3.3
3.7
White, total................................................
Men, 16 to 19 years.........................
Women, 16 to 19 years...................
Men, 20 years and over.....................
Women, 20 years and over...............
3.9
12.6
14.1
10.9
3.2
3.4
3.7
12.0
12.6
11.3
3.0
3.3
3.8
12.7
13.8
11.5
3.1
3.3
3.8
12.0
12.6
11.4
3.3
3.3
3.6
12.0
12.8
11.2
2.9
3.3
3.8
12.1
12.6
11.6
3.0
3.6
3.7
11.4
12.2
10.6
3.1
3.3
3.8
12.0
12.0
12.0
3.2
3.4
3.7
11.4
11.7
11.1
3.1
3.3
3.7
11.7
12.3
11.0
3.2
3.2
3.6
12.3
12.7
11.9
2.9
3.2
3.5
11.8
11.9
11.7
2.9
3.1
3.5
12.0
12.8
11.2
2.8
3.1
3.5
12.2
13.3
10.9
2.8
3.0
3.4
10.8
12.4
9.1
2.8
3.1
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years................
Men, 16 to 19 years.........................
Women, 16 to 19 years...................
Men, 20 years and over.....................
Women, 20 years and over...............
8.9
27.6
30.1
25.3
7.4
7.9
8.0
27.9
30.9
25.1
6.7
6.8
7.8
28.9
33.3
24.5
6.1
6.7
8.2
28.1
31.2
25.0
6.7
7.0
8.0
30.0
32.4
27.6
6.0
7.1
7.8
27.8
32.0
23.8
6.3
6.9
7.6
25.2
27.9
22.5
6.6
6.5
7.6
24.8
28.8
21.2
6.4
6.7
8.6
26.9
30.7
23.4
7.2
7.7
7.8
28.1
29.6
26.7
6.3
6.9
8.3
30.8
30.3
31.4
7.1
6.7
8.3
30.8
35.3
26.1
7.7
6.1
8.0
28.4
31.0
25.9
7.0
6.6
7.9
25.3
27.5
23.0
7.0
6.7
8.2
23.9
24.0
23.8
7.4
7.2
Hispanic origin, total.............................
7.2
6.4
6.7
6.8
6.0
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.3
6.5
6.6
6.3
6.1
5.9
5.6
Married men, spouse present.............
Married women, spouse present........
Women who maintain families............
Full-time workers...................................
Part-time workers...................................
2.4
2.9
7.2
4.3
5.3
2.2
2.7
6.4
4.1
5.0
2.3
2.8
6.3
4.1
5.2
2.4
2.8
6.5
4.3
4.9
2.1
2.7
6.6
4.0
5.0
2.3
2.9
7.1
4.2
5.0
2.3
2.6
6.0
4.0
5.2
2.2
2.7
6.5
4.0
5.3
2.3
2.8
6.4
4.1
4.9
2.3
2.7
6.3
4.1
4.6
2.2
2.6
6.4
4.0
5.0
2.2
2.5
6.0
4.0
4.7
2.1
2.5
6.0
3.9
4.9
2.2
2.5
6.2
3.9
4.9
2.0
2.6
6.2
3.9
4.6
4.6
3.2
7.5
3.9
3.4
4.7
3.4
5.5
2.5
4.5
2.3
8.3
4.3
5.7
7.0
3.6
3.5
3.9
3.0
5.2
2.3
4.1
2.2
8.9
4.3
6.3
7.3
3.5
3.3
3.9
2.6
5.3
2.4
4.2
2.2
9.1
4.4
7.1
7.4
3.7
3.3
4.3
3.1
5.2
2.4
4.1
2.3
10.8
4.3
5.5
7.0
3.5
3.1
4.2
2.9
5.4
2.0
4.2
2.1
9.4
4.4
8.4
7.3
3.4
3.2
3.9
2.9
5.4
3.2
4.1
2.4
9.5
4.3
5.9
7.2
3.5
3.4
3.8
3.2
5.3
2.2
4.0
2.5
10.1
4.4
4.8
7.3
3.7
3.5
4.0
2.9
5.3
2.4
4.2
2.3
9.3
4.4
6.0
6.9
3.5
3.7
3.1
3.4
5.2
2.4
4.4
2.2
9.0
4.2
4.2
7.6
3.8
3.7
4.1
3.0
4.8
2.4
4.0
2.1
9.6
4.3
6.7
6.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
2.8
5.2
2.3
4.1
2.0
5.7
4.2
5.0
6.7
3.7
3.5
4.0
3.1
4.9
2.3
4.0
2.1
7.7
4.2
4.6
5.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.3
5.3
2.3
3.9
2.0
8.3
4.1
4.1
6.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.0
5.2
2.1
3.8
2.1
7.1
4.2
2.6
6.4
3.2
2.8
3.9
3.7
5.1
2.5
4.2
2.1
5.0
7.1
4.0
6.7
3.5
7.2
3.5
7.4
3.5
6.3
3.5
6.8
3.6
6.8
3.6
6.8
3.8
6.8
3.6
7.0
3.5
6.8
3.5
6.6
3.3
6.5
3.3
6.0
3.5
6.6
3.5
3.0
1.8
2.8
1.8
2.9
1.8
3.1
1.9
2.8
1.9
2.9
2.0
2.8
1.8
2.6
2.0
3.0
1.8
3.1
1.6
2.7
1.7
2.7
1.7
2.7
1.7
2.5
1.8
2.6
1.8
In d u s try
Nonagricultural wage and salary
workers.........................................................
Mining........................................................
Construction..............................................
Manufacturing..........................................
Durable goods......................................
Nondurable goods...............................
Transportation and public utilities.........
Wholesale and retail trade.....................
Finance, insurance, and real estate......
Services.....................................................
Government workers...................................
Agricultural wage and salary workers.......
E d u c a tio n a l a t t a in m e n t 1
Less than a high school diploma................
High school graduates, no college.............
Some college, less than a bachelor's
degree...........................................................
College graduates.........................................
' Data refer to persons 25 years and over.
7.
Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Weeks of
unemployment
Annual average
1998
1999
Less than 5 weeks............................
5 to 14 weeks.....................................
15 weeks and over............................
2,622
1,950
1,637
15 to 26 weeks...............................
27 weeks and over.........................
763
875
1,480
755
725
Mean duration, in weeks..................
14.5
6.7
13.4
6.4
Median duration, in weeks...............
80 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2,568
1,832
1999
2000
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov,
Dec.
Jan.
2,397
2,012
1,491
2,585
1,925
2,741
2,502
1,832
2,540
2,640
2,599
2,582
2,545
2,601
1,775
1,634
1,372
667
680
735
1,760
1,401
725
676
1,388
693
715
1,805
1,412
708
704
2,447
1,754
785
1,798
1,463
747
716
1,811
1,434
806
828
1,778
1,511
779
732
2,620
1,694
1,539
754
2,521
1,884
1,467
752
695
705
13.8
6.9
13.6
6.8
13.2
6.1
13.4
6.6
14.3
6.3
13.5
5.8
13.2
6.4
13.0
5.9
13.2
12.9
13.2
5.7
March 2000
776
715
13.5
6.8
1,868
1,474
794
1,519
784
719
715
6.3
13.0
6.2
5.9
8.
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Reason for
unemployment
Job losers1..........................................
On temporary layoff.......................
Not on temporary layoff.................
Job leavers.........................................
Reentrants.........................................
New entrants......................................
Annual average
1999
1998
2,622
848
1,774
783
2,005
469
2,822
866
1,957
734
2,132
520
2000
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2,708
863
1,845
729
2,009
519
2,721
854
1,867
750
2,090
498
2,646
833
1,813
774
2,007
446
2,695
843
1,852
2,678
837
1,841
781
2,034
440
2,670
876
1,794
810
2,039
473
831
2,038
359
July
2,670
847
1,823
768
2,003
459
Aug.
2,629
893
1,736
793
1,942
481
Sept.
2,573
869
1,704
758
1,967
504
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
2,518
802
1,716
778
1,958
511
2,493
851
1,642
821
1,935
485
2,401
795
1,606
825
2,036
453
2,477
739
1,739
776
2,043
393
P e rc e n t o f u n e m p lo y e d
Job losers1.........................................
Not on temporary layoff................
Job leavers..........................................
New entrants......................................
45.5
44.6
45.4
44.9
45.1
44.8
45.1
45.3
45.3
45.0
44.3
43.7
43.5
42.0
43.5
13.9
31.5
11.8
34.3
8.4
14.4
30.2
13.3
34.1
8.0
14.5
30.9
12.2
33.7
8.7
14.1
30.8
12.4
34.5
8.2
14.2
30.9
13.2
34.2
7.6
14.0
30.8
13.5
33.9
7.9
14.1
31.0
13.2
34.3
7.4
14.9
30.4
14.1
34.6
6.1
14.4
30.9
13.0
33.9
7.8
15.3
29.7
13.6
33.2
8.2
15.0
29.4
13.1
33.9
8.7
13.9
29.8
13.5
34.0
8.9
14.8
28.6
14.3
33.7
8.5
13.9
28.1
14.4
35.6
7.9
13.0
30.6
13.6
35.9
6.9
2.1
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.8
.5
1.5
.4
.6
1.4
.3
.5
1.4
.4
.5
1.5
.4
.6
1.4
.3
.6
1.5
.3
.6
1.5
.3
.6
1.5
.3
.6
1.4
.3
.6
1.4
.3
.5
1.4
.4
.6
1.4
.4
.6
1.4
.3
.6
1.5
.3
.6
1.4
.3
P e rc e n t o f civilian
la b o r fo rce
New entrants.....................................
1 Includes persons who completed temporary jobs.
9.
Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Civilian workers]
Sex and age
1998
1999
2000
1999
Annual average
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Total, 16 years and over...................
16 to 24 years.................................
16 to 19 years.............................
16 to 17 years..........................
18 to 19 years..........................
4.5
10.4
14.6
17.2
12.8
7.9
3.4
3.5
2.7
4.2
9.9
13.9
16.3
12.4
7.5
3.1
3.2
2.8
4.3
10.1
15.1
17.9
12.9
7.1
3.2
3.3
2.9
4.4
10.2
14.2
15.8
13.0
7.7
3.3
3.4
2.9
4.2
10.0
14.2
16.6
12.7
7.4
3.1
3.2
2.8
4.3
10.0
14.1
16.6
12.4
7.5
3.3
3.3
2.9
4.2
9.6
13.1
16.1
11.2
7.5
3.2
3.2
2.7
4.3
9.8
13.6
16.3
11.8
7.6
3.2
3.3
3.0
4.3
9.7
13.2
15.4
11.7
7.6
3.2
3.3
2.9
4.2
9.6
13.5
15.9
12.1
7.3
3.2
3.2
2.7
4.2
10.0
14.6
16.1
13.8
7.2
3.1
3.2
2.6
4.1
10.0
13.9
15.9
12.4
7.7
3.0
3.1
2.7
4.1
10.0
14.0
16.5
12.3
7.7
3.0
3.1
2.6
4.1
9.8
13.8
16.5
12.1
7.4
3.0
3.0
2.7
4.0
9.3
12.6
14.0
11.4
7.4
3.0
3.1
2.8
Men, 16 years and over..................
16 to 24 years..............................
16 to 19 years...........................
16 to 17 years........................
4.4
11.1
16.2
19.1
14.1
8.1
3.2
3.3
2.8
4.1
10.3
14.7
17.0
13.1
7.7
3.0
3.0
2.8
4.2
10.7
16.4
19.3
14.3
7.3
3.0
3.1
2.8
4.3
10.3
14.9
16.0
13.9
7.6
3.2
3.2
2.9
4.0
10.1
15.0
17.3
13.5
7.2
2.8
2.9
2.6
4.1
10.5
14.8
18.3
12.6
7.9
3.0
3.0
2.7
4.2
10.2
13.9
17.6
11.5
8.0
3.1
3.1
2.8
4.1
10.5
14.3
16.8
12.7
8.3
3.0
3.0
2.7
4.1
10.2
13.8
16.1
12.2
8.1
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.1
9.9
13.9
16.2
12.6
7.6
3.1
3.1
2.9
4.0
9.9
14.6
16.6
13.2
7.2
3.0
3.0
2.9
4.1
10.4
14.2
15.5
13.2
8.2
2.9
3.0
2.8
4.0
10.2
14.9
16.9
13.6
7.5
2.8
2.9
2.6
4.0
10.6
15.2
17.7
13.5
7.8
2.8
2.9
2.5
3.9
9.7
14.0
14.3
13.7
7.2
2.8
2.9
2.5
Women, 16 years and over............
16 to 24 years..............................
16 to 19 years...........................
4.6
9.8
12.9
15.1
11.5
7.8
3.6
3.8
2.6
4.3
9.5
13.2
15.5
11.6
7.2
3.3
3.4
2.8
4.4
9.5
13.7
16.3
11.5
7.0
3.4
3.5
3.0
4.4
10.0
13.4
15.5
12.0
7.9
3.4
3.5
2.8
4.5
9.9
13.4
15.9
11.7
7.7
3.4
3.5
3.1
4.6
9.5
13.4
14.8
12.1
7.1
3.6
3.7
3.1
4.2
8.9
12.2
14.5
10.9
6.9
3.3
3.4
2.6
4.4
9.1
13.0
15.7
10.9
6.8
3.5
3.5
3.3
4.4
9.1
12.6
14.7
11.2
7.1
4.3
9.3
13.2
15.6
11.6
7.0
3.3
3.4
2.4
4.3
10.0
14.7
15.6
14.5
7.2
3.2
3.4
2.1
4.2
9.6
13.4
16.3
11.4
7.2
3.1
3.2
2.5
4.2
9.8
13.0
16.1
10.8
7.9
3.1
3.3
2.6
4.1
8.9
12.2
15.1
10.5
7.0
3.2
3.2
2.9
4.2
8.9
11.1
13.7
8.9
7.6
3.2
3.3
3.1
25 years and over........................
55 years and over.................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3.5
3.6
2.9
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
81
Current Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Data
10. Unemployment rates by State, seasonally adjusted
State
Dec.
Nov.
Dec.
1998
1999
1999p
State
Dec.
Nov.
Dec.
1998
1999
1999p
Alabama...................
Alaska......................
Arizona.................... .
Arkansas..................
California..................
4.0
5.6
3.9
5.2
5.9
4.4
5.9
4.0
4.3
4.9
4.8
5.7
4.1
4.3
4.9
Nebraska.......................................
Nevada...........................................
New Hampshire....................................
Colorado..................
Connecticut.............
Delaware..................
District of Columbia.
Florida......................
3.4
3.2
3.2
7.8
4.2
2.8
2.9
3.3
5.9
4.0
3.0
2.7
3.5
6.1
3.8
New Jersey.........................................
New Mexico.........................................
New York.........................................
North Carolina......................................
North Dakota................................
3.1
5.0
3.2
2.6
2.8
4.1
5.8
4.8
3.2
2.7
Georgia....................
Hawaii.......................
Idaho.........................
Illinois........................
Indiana.....................
3.9
6.1
4.9
4.2
3.0
3.7
5.4
4.6
4.2
3.0
3.5
5.1
4.4
4.1
2.9
Ohio......................................
Oklahoma.........................................
Oregon................................................
Pennsylvania........................................
Rhode Island.......................................
4.0
4.4
5.5
4.4
4.1
4.0
3.2
5.1
4.3
3.9
4.0
3.3
5.0
4.1
3.8
Iowa...........................
Kansas.....................
Kentucky..................
Louisiana..................
Maine........................
2.7
3.6
4.1
5.3
3.8
2.1
3.3
3.9
4.9
3.5
2.2
3.4
3.9
4.2
3.6
South Carolina.....................................
South Dakota.........................
Tennessee.........................................
Texas........................................
Utah.........................................
Maryland..................
Massachusetts........
Michigan...................
Minnesota.................
Mississippi................
3.9
3.1
3.8
2.4
5.2
3.3
3.2
3.8
2.4
4.6
3.2
3.2
3.6
2.4
5.3
Vermont...........................................
Virginia........................................
Washington.........................................
West Virginia........................................
Wisconsin...........................................
Wyoming.............................................
Missouri...............................................
3.2
5.4
2.5
3.3
2.8
4.4
6.4
5.4
2.8
2.7
4.8
4.9
2.7
4.0
2.5
2.6
4.5
2.7
4.4
6.0
3.9
4.7
2.6
2.6
4.1
4.8
3.3
3.7
4.4
2.9
4.4
2.4
3.8
4.6
2.9
3.0
2.9
4.9
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.8
4.0
4.2
6.0
6.6
6.1
3.6
4.5
2.9
4.4
3.0
4.4
p = preliminary
11. Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by State, seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Dec.
Nov.
Dec.
1998
1999
1999p
Alabama...................
Alaska.......................
Arizona.....................
Arkansas..................
California..................
1,923.0
276.1
2,117.7
1,131.4
13,782.9
1,932.1
278.8
2,180.5
1,146.7
14,121.0
1,934.3
279.4
2,187.3
1,151.1
14,184.7
Colorado..................
Connecticut..............
Delaware..................
District of Columbia.
Florida......................
2,076.2
1,660.3
406.1
615.4
6,791.4
2,119.5
1,678.8
416.0
620.9
7,037.2
Georgia....................
Hawaii......................
Idaho.........................
Illinois........................
Indiana.....................
3,796.3
527.2
532.8
5,947.1
2,940.7
Iowa...........................
Kansas.....................
Kentucky...................
Louisiana..................
Maine.........................
Maryland...................
Massachusetts.........
Michigan...................
Minnesota.................
Mississippi................
State
Dec.
Dec.
1998
Nov.
1999
Montana.........................................
Nebraska........................................
Nevada...........................................
New Hampshire.............................
2,717.6
376.8
886.7
946.7
591.5
2,709.0
385.4
879.1
989.9
600.8
2,704.8
385.7
882.3
992.6
603.4
2,124.5
1,683.2
416.2
621.1
7,068.1
New Jersey.....................................
New Mexico...................................
New York........................................
North Carolina...............................
North Dakota.................................
3,833.2
725.8
8,312.9
3,823.2
319.3
3,889.1
736.1
8,454.9
3.849.7
318.9
3,898.5
739.7
8.473.5
3,849.1
319.9
3,926.0
532.0
532.0
5,980.7
2,955.3
3,954.1
530.2
538.0
5,972.6
2,959.3
Ohio................................................
Oklahoma.......................................
Oregon.............................................
Pennsylvania.................................
Rhode Island..................................
5,501.3
1,454.2
1,573.6
5,526.4
461.0
5.531.8
1,487.5
1,596.8
5,544.3
468.7
5.545.6
1.489.3
1.597.3
5,532.3
466.8
1,466.9
1,330.6
1,765.6
1,918.3
577.1
1,495.9
1,350.8
1,800.9
1,927.8
590.0
1,503.7
1,351.9
1,801.9
1,926.5
590.0
South Carolina...............................
South Dakota.................................
Tennessee......................................
Texas...............................................
Utah................................................
1,812.0
364.9
2,655.8
9,063.9
1,036.9
1,849.9
365.8
2,678.6
9,293.6
1,062.4
1,855.3
369.0
2,679.7
9,311.0
1,064.0
2,346.3
3,198.5
4,547.1
2,592.3
1,134.9
2,388.3
3,233.6
4,575.1
2,633.1
1,131.0
2,393.6
3,248.2
4,589.6
2,636.7
1,134.4
Vermont...........................................
Virginia............................................
Washington.....................................
West Virginia..................................
Wisconsin.......................................
Wyoming.........................................
288.6
3,348.8
2,625.6
724.3
2,731.5
228.0
293.4
3,407.8
2,668.3
728.9
2,749.7
232.2
294.6
3,412.5
2,676.3
728.3
2,756.4
232.5
State
p = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the data base.
82 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
1999p
12. Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]______________________________________________________________________________________
Industry
Annual average
1999
2000
1998
1999”
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
T O TA L ......................................
PRIVATE SE C TO R .....................
125,826
106,007
128,616
108,455
127,378
107,386
127,730
107,676
127,813
107,726
128,134
108,035
128,162
108,085
128,443
108,338
128,816
108,663
128,945
108,735
129,048
108,830
129,332
109,095
129,589
109,320
129,905
109,584
130,292
109,936
G O O D S-PR O D U C IN G .....................
Mining ............................................
25,347
25,240
25,315
25,329
25,285
25,288
25,199
25,180
25,247
25,275
25,406
560
50
312
553
50
306
550
50
305
538
49
294
531
49
287
526
48
285
528
48
285
25,186
527
48
287
25,257
535
49
293
25,148
524
47
285
25,198
590
50
339
528
48
289
527
49
288
529
48
291
531
49
294
Oil and gas extraction................
Nonmetallic minerals,
except fuels..............................
General building contractors....
Heavy construction, except
Special trades contractors.........
M anufacturin g................................
Production workers..............
Durable g oo ds.............................
Production workers..............
Lumber and wood products....
Furniture and fixtures..............
Stone, clay, and glass
products.................................
Primary metal industries..........
Fabricated metal products.......
Industrial machinery and
equipment..............................
Computer and office
equipment............................
Electronic and other electrical
equipment..............................
Electronic components and
accessories..........................
Transportation equipment......
Motor vehicles and
equipment.............................
Aircraft and parts...................
Instruments and related
products................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing
industries................................
Nondurable go o d s......................
Production workers..............
Food and kindred products.....
Tobacco products....................
Textile mill products.................
Apparel and other textile
products.................................
Paper and allied products.......
Printing and publishing............
Chemicals and allied products.
Petroleum and coal products...
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products....................
Leather and leather products..
SE R V IC E-PR O D U C IN G ..................
109
109
109
109
108
109
109
109
110
109
109
109
108
108
107
5,985
1,372
6,273
1,434
6,170
1,410
6,238
1,426
6,232
1,429
6,277
1,428
6,239
1,427
6,258
1,430
6,270
1,432
6,246
1,426
6,293
1,440
6,314
1,445
6,369
1,450
6 391
1,454
6,507
1,471
838
3,744
862
3,978
871
3,889
869
3,943
864
3,939
874
3,975
854
3,958
857
3,971
857
3,981
852
3,968
857
3,996
861
4,008
870
4,049
879
4,058
899
4,137
18,772
12,930
18,431
12,661
18,585
12,773
18,538
12,730
18,503
12,714
18,473
12,696
18,429
12,662
18,396
12,623
18,449
12,691
18,378
12,622
18,366
12,617
18,356
12,608
18,361
12,613
18,355
12,608
18,368
12,628
11,170
7,643
10,985
7,510
11,050
7,548
11,027
7,529
11,014
7,527
10,993
7,519
10,971
7,504
10,960
7,487
11,015
7,549
10,975
7,513
10,959
7,496
10,952
7,489
10,954
7,487
10,954
7,482
10,964
7,503
813
530
826
540
826
534
827
535
827
535
824
536
824
537
824
538
826
546
826
543
827
544
829
546
829
544
829
543
830
542
563
712
1,501
569
690
1,489
569
696
1,495
571
695
1,491
569
693
1,490
570
691
1,489
569
689
1,487
568
687
1,485
571
692
1,493
568
688
1,484
569
685
1,486
568
685
1,487
571
686
1,489
573
686
1,490
574
685
1,489
2,203
2,129
2,148
2,146
2,139
2,132
2,129
2,128
2,131
2,122
2,117
2,116
2,118
2,117
2,114
379
360
362
362
360
361
362
364
360
359
358
358
358
359
356
1,704
1,661
1,663
1,659
1,659
1,658
1,658
1,657
1,667
1,662
1,662
1,665
1,661
1,663
1,671
660
1,884
639
1,855
637
1,884
636
1,871
636
1,873
635
1,864
635
1,853
637
1,849
639
1,863
641
1,859
640
1,848
643
1,838
643
1,834
645
1,831
646
1,837
990
524
1,000
490
996
517
989
510
992
511
996
503
996
498
998
491
1,014
488
1,012
483
1,006
476
1,001
471
1,000
467
1,001
464
1,009
461
868
839
849
847
844
842
839
837
840
836
833
830
833
832
831
393
387
386
385
385
387
386
387
386
387
388
388
389
390
391
7,602
5,287
7,446
5,151
7,535
5,225
7,511
5,201
7,489
5,187
7,480
5,177
7,458
5,158
7,436
5,136
7,434
5,142
7,403
5,109
7,407
5,121
7,404
5,119
7,407
5,126
7,401
5,126
7,404
5,125
1,686
41
598
1,685
39
562
1,699
40
579
1,695
40
575
1,693
39
571
1,689
38
567
1,688
38
563
1,680
39
560
1,681
39
559
1,666
36
557
1,679
38
553
1,680
38
551
1,686
39
553
1,689
38
551
1,693
39
548
763
675
1,565
1,043
140
684
659
1,553
1,035
137
718
664
1,561
1,041
139
707
664
1,559
1,041
139
702
662
1,557
1,037
139
698
662
1,555
1,038
139
691
661
1,551
1,036
138
686
659
1,552
1,033
137
679
659
1,554
1,032
138
672
658
1,553
1,030
136
669
657
1,552
1,033
137
666
655
1,552
1,033
136
663
655
1,549
1,033
136
659
655
1,548
1,030
135
656
655
1,548
1,034
137
1,009
83
1,019
74
1,016
78
1,015
76
1,014
75
1,019
75
1,018
74
1,016
74
1,021
72
1,022
73
1,017
72
1,021
72
1,022
71
1,025
71
1,023
71
100,480
103,376
102,063
102,401
102,528
102,846
102,963
103,263
103,569
103,797
103,862
104,134
104,332
104,630
104,886
6,600
4,276
231
6,792
4,426
230
6,708
4,356
233
6,723
4,367
233
6,732
4,378
235
6,750
4,397
234
6,758
4,402
233
6,781
4,423
233
6,799
4,438
230
6,813
4,445
226
6,831
4,455
227
6,841
4,458
227
6,862
4,474
226
6,896
4,506
227
6,912
4,519
228
468
1,745
180
1,183
14
455
482
1,813
181
1,238
13
469
474
1,786
182
1,204
14
463
475
1,789
181
1,213
14
462
476
1,796
177
1,218
14
462
483
1,800
180
1,220
14
466
480
1,802
180
1,226
13
468
483
1,810
181
1,234
13
469
483
1,817
182
1,240
13
473
488
1,817
182
1,246
13
473
486
1,825
182
1,250
13
472
486
1,828
182
1,251
13
471
487
1,839
180
1,257
13
472
486
1,846
182
1,278
13
474
491
1,850
179
1,287
13
471
2,324
1,469
2,366
1,522
2,352
1,502
2,356
1,507
2,354
1,506
2,353
1,508
2,356
1,513
2,358
1,513
2,361
1,519
2,368
1,525
2,376
1,533
2,383
1,541
2,388
1,546
2,390
1,550
2,393
1,553
Transportation and public
u tilities.........................................
Railroad transportation............
Local and interurban
passenger transit...................
Trucking and warehousing.....
Water transportation................
Transportation by air...............
Pipelines, except natural gas...
Transportation services..........
Communications and public
Communications......................
Electric, gas, and sanitary
855
844
850
849
848
845
843
845
842
843
843
842
842
840
840
W holesale tra d e.............................
6,831
7,004
6,924
6,937
6,947
6,965
6,977
6,993
7,012
7,031
7,041
7,064
7,070
7,086
7,105
Retail tra d e......................................
22,296
22,788
22,556
22,648
22,611
22,724
22,748
22,796
22,903
22,888
22,862
22,891
22,902
22,981
23,024
Building materials and garden
supplies...................................
General merchandise stores....
Department stores...................
948
2,730
2,426
987
2,775
2,472
972
2,773
2,470
979
2,781
2,475
982
2,794
2,489
982
2,799
2,499
979
2,784
2,486
982
2,782
2,482
986
2,778
2,476
988
2,774
2,468
992
2,762
2,460
1,001
2,756
2,455
1,004
2,753
2,450
1,005
2,795
2,481
1,010
2,778
2,448
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
83
Current Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Data
12. Continued—Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Industry
1998
Food stores.................................
Automotive dealers and
service stations........................
New and used car dealers.......
Apparel and accessory stores...
Furniture and home furnishings
stores........................................
Eating and drinking places........
Miscellaneous retail
establishments.........................
1999
Annual average
1999p
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
3,482
3,483
3,481
3,492
3,490
3,492
3,487
3,479
3,478
3,484
3,478
3,481
3,480
3,483
3,482
2,341
1,048
1,143
2,406
1,081
1,181
2,377
1,061
1,152
2,390
1,065
1,167
2,392
1,069
1,167
2,399
1,074
1,163
2,400
1,077
1,172
2,403
1,080
1,178
2,407
1,085
1,192
2,409
1,089
1,191
2,415
1,091
1,189
2,420
1,092
1,200
2,424
1,096
1,198
2,431
1,097
1,187
2,444
1,100
1,203
1,026
7,760
1,085
7,903
1,055
7,843
1,064
7,855
1,070
7,785
1,081
7,863
1,084
7,880
1,091
7,911
1,090
7,989
1,094
7,960
1,097
7,932
1,099
7,925
1,095
7,943
1,101
7,982
1,104
7,986
2,867
2,968
2,903
2,920
2,931
2,945
2,962
2,970
2,983
2,988
2,997
3,009
3,005
2,997
3,017
7,407
3,593
2,042
1,468
258
658
7,632
3,706
2,047
1,465
256
714
7,570
3,675
2,049
1,469
258
705
7,581
3,681
2,051
1,470
258
708
7,595
3,690
2,051
1,469
258
712
7,611
3,697
2,050
1,467
257
716
7,621
3,706
2,047
1,465
256
720
7,636
3,709
2,045
1,463
256
721
7,647
3,715
2,044
1,462
256
721
7,650
3,716
2,046
1,464
255
719
7,653
3,715
2,047
1,466
255
713
7,668
3,719
2,047
1,464
254
711
7,675
3,723
2,044
1,460
254
711
7,687
3,728
2,040
1,459
252
714
7,678
3,719
2,039
1,457
250
705
645
679
663
661
664
668
672
676
682
685
686
691
697
703
705
248
2,344
1,598
266
2,402
1,635
258
2,383
1,627
261
2,386
1,628
263
2,392
1,632
263
2,395
1,631
267
2,399
1,635
267
2,402
1,638
268
2,404
1,635
266
2,407
1,636
269
2,410
1,637
270
2,414
1,641
271
2,411
1,636
271
2,416
1,639
270
2,404
1,630
746
1,471
767
1,525
756
1,512
758
1,514
760
1,513
764
1,519
764
1,516
764
1,525
769
1,528
771
1,527
773
1,528
773
1,535
775
1,541
777
1,543
774
1,555
37,526
706
1,776
1,195
8,584
950
3,230
2,872
39,000
759
1,799
1,206
9,123
988
3,405
3,017
38,313
747
1,785
1,205
8,869
971
3,308
2,933
38,458
751
1,786
1,201
8,922
971
3,331
2,954
38,556
747
1,789
1,200
8,963
973
3,343
2,967
38,697
755
1,791
1,204
9,010
978
3,350
2,975
38,782
751
1,786
1,189
9,047
979
3,366
2,986
38,952
757
1,797
1,200
9,088
984
3,387
3,000
39,055
760
1,807
1,207
9,148
992
3,422
3,025
39,205
757
1,813
1,207
9,186
998
3,418
3,024
39,257
763
1,811
1,210
9,204
1,000
3,440
3,032
39,433
766
1,806
1,210
9,303
1,003
3,490
3,099
39,554
774
1,812
1,214
9,336
1,003
3,501
3,097
39,659
766
1,809
1,224
9,390
999
3,518
3,111
39,811
787
1,794
1,234
9,453
1,003
3,528
3,121
1,599
1,780
1,708
1,724
1,734
1,749
1,765
1,781
1,794
1,806
1,814
1,823
1,829
1,838
1,860
1,144
382
573
1,184
397
600
1,168
392
573
1,175
392
582
1,176
393
580
1,178
396
587
1,182
398
604
1,184
395
611
1,185
395
609
1,185
396
608
1,190
398
608
1,196
400
612
1,197
400
613
1,196
405
609
1,198
404
614
Finance, insurance, and
real e s ta te ......................................
Commercial banks.................
Savings institutions................
Nondepository institutions.......
Security and commodity
brokers....................................
Holding and other investment
Insurance.....................................
Insurance carriers.....................
Insurance agents, brokers,
Real estate..................................
S e rv ic e s ’ .........................................
Hotels and other lodging places
Business services.......................
Services to buildings................
Personnel supply services.......
Help supply services..............
Computer and data
processing services...............
Auto repair services
and parking..............................
Miscellaneous repair services...
Amusement and recreation
Health services...........................
Offices and clinics of medical
doctors.....................................
Nursing and personal care
facilities....................................
Hospitals....................................
Home health care services......
Legal services............................
Educational services...................
Social services............................
Child day care services...........
Residential care........................
Museums and botanical and
zoological gardens..................
Membership organizations........
Engineering and management
services....................................
Engineering and architectural
Management and public
relations..................................
Federal, except Postal
Service...................................
Education..................................
Local.............................................
Education..................................
Other local government...........
1,601
1,696
1,653
1,656
1,660
1,668
1,675
1,695
1,694
1,712
1,713
1,730
1,734
1,722
1,751
9,846
9,973
9,905
9,919
9,932
9,951
9,954
9,964
9,975
9,993
9,999
10,009
10,026
10,039
10,062
1,803
1,865
1,840
1,844
1,850
1,856
1,860
1,864
1,868
1,874
1,876
1,880
1,885
1,886
1,892
1,762
3,926
672
973
2,177
2,644
605
747
1,755
3,970
655
1,002
2,269
2,782
632
781
1,756
3,954
645
989
2,218
2,721
621
765
1,755
3,959
651
992
2,237
2,734
625
768
1,754
3,963
653
995
2,243
2,744
627
769
1,753
3,966
656
998
2,254
2,755
628
772
1,755
3,966
653
999
2,265
2,760
629
775
1,755
3,969
653
1,002
2,272
2,778
633
777
1,754
3,968
655
1,000
2,278
2,763
632
781
1,755
3,973
658
1,004
2,288
2,799
631
785
1,756
3,977
657
1,007
2,289
2,803
631
788
1,756
3,978
658
1,009
2,288
2,817
634
792
1,756
3,978
658
1,012
2,298
2,840
646
796
1,759
3,984
661
1,015
2,304
2,851
649
802
1,762
3,993
660
1,018
2,287
2,872
656
803
93
2,361
94
2,402
94
2,385
94
2,389
95
2,392
94
2,392
93
2,394
94
2,409
94
2,403
95
2,409
94
2,408
95
2,409
96
2,411
95
2,418
95
2,418
3,185
3,420
3,316
3,335
3,354
3,370
3,391
3,411
3,441
3,458
3,464
3,487
3,496
3,520
3,526
905
944
926
930
933
939
940
942
948
948
948
954
959
965
973
1,034
1,158
1,103
1,111
1,123
1,133
1,143
1,153
1,165
1,178
1,180
1,193
1,196
1,218
1,221
19,819
2,686
20,161
2,668
19,992
2,702
20,054
2,713
20,087
2,710
20,099
2,688
20,077
2,666
20,105
2,664
20,153
2,656
20,210
2,651
20,218
2,654
20,237
2,643
20,269
2,648
20,321
2,643
20,356
2,663
1,819
4,612
1,916
2,695
12,521
7,082
5,440
1,796
4,696
1,953
2,743
12,797
7,265
5,531
1,822
4,644
1,920
2,724
12,646
7,165
5,481
1,834
4,670
1,941
2,729
12,671
7,181
5,490
1,831
4,680
1,948
2,732
12,697
7,200
5,497
1,809
4,688
1,955
2,733
12,723
7,206
5,517
1,788
4,677
1,941
2,736
12,734
7,225
5,509
1,789
4,675
1,934
2,741
12,766
7,239
5,527
1,779
4,682
1,947
2,735
12,815
7,268
5,547
1,779
4,706
1,965
2,741
12,853
7,308
5,545
1,785
4,717
1,965
2,752
12,847
7,295
5,552
1,780
4,722
1,960
2,762
12,872
7,305
5,567
1,780
4,729
1,967
2,762
12,892
7,318
5,574
1,778
4,735
1,974
2,761
12,943
7,353
5,590
1,787
4,735
1,976
2,795
12,958
7,358
5,600
1 Includes other industries not shown separately.
p = preliminary.
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
Digitized for84
FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
13. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry, monthly
data seasonally adjusted
1998
Apr.
Mar.
June
May
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p Jan.p
1999p
Jan.
Feb.
34.5
34.6
34.6
34.5
34.4
34.4
34.5
34.5
34.5
34.4
34.5
34.5
34.5
34.6
41.0
40.8
40.9
41.0
41.2
41.2
41.1
41.1
41.1
41.3
40.9
41.1
43.0
42.9
43.8
44.1
44.0
45.1
44.2
44.3
44.1
44.2
44.2
45.0
41.6
4.7
41.7
4.6
34.6
PRIVATE SECTOR....................................
2000
1999
Annual average
Industry
GOODS-PRODUCING....................................
41.0
41.0
41.1
MINING............................................................
43.9
43.9
42.9
MANUFACTURING.......................................
Overtime hours.......................................
41.7
4.6
41.7
4.6
41.6
4.5
41.6
4.5
41.5
4.5
41.6
4.3
41.7
4.6
41.7
4.7
41.9
4.7
41.8
4.7
41.8
4.7
41.8
4.7
41.7
4.6
Durable goods............................................
Overtime hours......................................
Lumber and wood products...................
Furniture and fixtures.............................
Stone, clay, and glass products...........
Primary metal industries........................
Blast furnaces and basic steel
42.3
4.8
41.1
40.6
43.5
44.2
42.2
4.8
41.2
40.3
43.4
44.2
42.2
4.6
41.7
40.4
43.8
43.7
42.2
4.6
41.1
40.3
43.4
42.0
4.6
41.2
40.3
42.9
43.8
43.9
42.1
4.3
41.2
40.4
43.1
44.0
42.2
4.7
41.2
40.4
43.4
44.3
42.3
4.8
41.1
40.4
43.4
44.3
42.5
4.9
41.1
40.6
43.6
44.5
42.4
4.9
41.3
40.3
43.6
44.4
42.4
4.9
41.1
40.4
43.6
44.4
42.3
4.8
41.1
40.2
43.4
44.3
42.2
4.7
41.1
39.9
43.9
44.3
42.0
4.8
40.9
40.2
43.2
44.4
42.2
4.7
41.1
40.2
43.5
44.4
44.6
42.3
44.8
42.2
43.8
42.1
43.8
42.1
43.9
42.1
44.5
41.8
44.8
42.1
45.2
42.1
45.2
42.3
45.1
42.4
45.0
42.3
45.0
42.1
45.3
42.1
45.5
41.9
44.8
42.2
42.8
42.2
42.1
42.1
41.9
41.9
42.1
42.0
42.4
42.4
42.4
42.4
42.2
42.2
42.4
41.4
43.4
43.5
41.3
39.9
41.4
43.8
45.0
41.5
39.9
41.2
43.5
44.3
41.2
39.6
41.2
44.0
45.0
41.3
39.7
41.0
43.7
44.7
41.2
39.8
41.1
44.0
45.1
41.6
39.6
41.5
43.5
44.4
41.6
40.2
41.5
44.2
45.4
41.5
40.0
41.7
44.4
46.0
41.7
40.1
41.7
44.0
45.2
41.6
40.1
41.6
44.0
45.2
41.6
40.0
41.6
43.9
45.3
41.5
39.8
41.4
43.5
44.7
41.5
39.6
41.1
43.3
44.5
41.6
39.9
41.1
44.0
45.4
41.4
39.3
40.9
4.3
41.7
41.0
37.3
43.4
40.9
4.4
41.8
40.9
37.4
43.5
40.8
4.4
41.8
40.8
37.0
43.5
40.8
4.3
41.7
40.6
37.5
43.5
40.8
4.4
41.7
40.4
37.4
43.7
40.9
4.2
41.9
41.0
37.5
43.6
41.0
4.4
41.8
41.0
37.8
43.5
41.0
4.5
41.8
40.6
37.7
43.5
41.1
4.5
42.0
41.3
37.5
43.5
40.9
4.4
41.6
40.9
37.3
43.7
40.9
4.4
41.7
40.8
37.5
43.5
41.0
4.5
42.0
41.3
37.5
43.5
41.0
4.4
41.9
41.2
37.3
43.5
40.9
4.6
41.6
41.2
37.4
43.2
40.9
4.4
41.6
40.9
37.6
43.2
38.3
43.2
38.2
43.0
38.2
42.9
38.1
42.8
37.9
42.8
38.1
43.0
38.3
43.0
38.3
43.0
38.4
43.1
38.3
43.3
38.3
43.2
38.4
43.1
38.3
43.1
38.3
43.1
38.3
42.9
Leather and leather products................
41.7
37.6
41.7
37.7
41.4
37.3
41.7
37.7
41.8
37.7
41.5
38.1
41.9
38.4
41.8
37.9
41.7
37.9
41.6
38.2
41.7
37.2
41.5
37.5
41.5
37.6
41.3
37.2
41.9
38.0
SERVICE-PRODUCING.................................
32.9
32.8
32.9
33.0
32.8
32.8
32.8
32.8
32.9
32.9
32.8
32.8
32.8
32.9
32.9
TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC UTILITIES..................................
39.5
38.7
39.3
39.2
39.1
39.0
38.8
38.9
38.7
38.9
38.6
38.5
38.2
38.4
38.6
WHOLESALE TRADE.................................
38.4
38.4
38.4
38.5
38.4
38.4
38.3
38.4
38.4
38.4
38.5
38.6
38.4
38.5
38.6
RETAIL TRADE.............................................
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.2
29.0
29.0
29.1
29.1
29.1
29.0
28.8
28.9
28.9
29.1
29.0
Industrial machinery and equipment....
Electronic and other electrical
Transportation equipment.....................
Motor vehicles and equipment...........
Instruments and related products........
Miscellaneous manufacturing................
Apparel and other textile products.......
Printing and publishing...........................
Chemicals and allied products.............
Rubber and miscellaneous
p = preliminary.
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
14. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry,
seasonally adjusted
Industry
1998
PRIVATE SECTOR (in current dollars).. $ 12.78
2000
1999
Annual average
1999p
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
$ 13.24
$13.04
$13.06
$13.11
$13.14
$13.18
$13.24
$13.28
$13.29
$13.35
$13.39
$13.40
$13.44
$13.50
14.99
15.03
15.09
14.90
14.90
14.93
14.97
16.96
17.23
17.12
17.09
17.09
16.93
17.03
17.03
17.16
17.18
17.15
17.21
17.27
17.31
17.42
17.46
14.56
14.61
14.67
14.75
14.85
17.07
16.97
17.00
16.87
17.05
16.80
16.83
16.92
16.97
17.08
Goods-producing....................................
14.34
14.82
14.53
Mining......................................................
16.90
17.04
Construction...........................................
16.59
17.13
13.49
13.91
13.64
13.67
13.71
13.79
13.85
13.95
14.02
14.03
14.04
14.07
14.06
14.08
14.13
12.79
13.18
12.93
12.97
13.00
13.09
13.13
13.20
13.26
13.28
13.29
13.33
13.32
13.35
13.39
12.27
12.74
12.56
12.58
12.63
12.65
12.68
12.73
12.77
12.79
12.85
12.89
12.90
12.95
13.00
Transportation and public utilities.......
15.31
15.67
15.49
15.51
15.53
15.60
15.65
15.65
15.70
15.70
15.76
15.76
15.81
15.93
15.84
Wholesale trade.....................................
14.06
14.59
14.36
14.36
14.42
14.44
14.48
14.56
14.61
14.63
14.74
14.80
14.81
14.87
14.95
8.73
9.08
8.93
8.95
8.98
9.03
9.04
9.06
9.10
9.13
9.15
9.18
9.20
9.27
9.27
Finance, insurance, and real estate....
14.06
14.61
14.46
14.49
14.51
14.58
14.60
14.62
14.68
14.63
14.70
14.72
14.73
14.75
14.90
Services..................................................
12.85
13.38
13.17
13.22
13.27
13.28
13.33
13.38
13.42
13.44
13.49
13.55
13.55
13.59
13.65
7.75
7.86
7.83
7.84
7.86
7.83
7.85
7.89
7.88
7.87
7.86
7.87
7.87
7.87
-
Manufacturing........................................
Service-producing...................................
PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant (1982)
dollars)........................................................
-
Data not available.
p = preliminary.
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
85
Current Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Data
15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
Industry
Annual average
1999
2000
1998
1999”
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
P R IV A T E S E C T O R ..........................................
$12.78
$13.24
$13.11
$13.10
$13.12
$13.16
$13.19
$13.14
$13.15
$13.20
$13.38
$13.41
M IN IN G ................................................................
16.90
17.04
17.23
17.08
17.01
16.93
17.00
16.93
17.12
17.01
17.10
C O N S T R U C T IO N ............................................
16.59
17.13
16.74
16.66
16.79
16.85
17.02
17.08
17.22
17.26
17.41
M A N U F A C T U R IN G ........................................
13.49
13.91
13.66
13.66
13.73
13.80
13.85
13.91
13.92
13.95
14.11
Durable g o o d s ..............................................
13.98
11.10
10.90
13.60
15.49
14.40
11.46
11.23
13.90
15.85
14.11
11.28
11.10
13.66
15.39
14.12
11.26
11.06
13.64
15.41
14.20
11.31
11.10
13.70
15.53
14.27
11.37
11.14
13.75
15.62
14.34
11.42
11.14
13.87
15.75
14.40
11.45
11.16
13.94
15.91
14.38
11.52
11.24
14.00
16.03
14.47
11.53
11.28
13.97
15.99
18.43
13.06
18.87
13.46
18.41
13.29
18.50
13.29
18.56
13.33
18.59
13.36
18.79
13.45
19.05
13.46
19.12
13.45
14.47
15.01
14.69
14.72
14.81
14.85
14.95
14.99
13.09
17.53
17.86
13.81
10.89
13.45
18.10
18.48
14.17
13.25
17.50
17.71
13.94
11.17
13.27
17.66
17.98
13.97
11.19
13.31
17.88
18.31
14.07
11.33
13.26
17.47
17.65
13.91
11.16
11.25
13.38
17.98
18.40
14.10
11.25
12.76
11.80
18.55
10.39
8.52
15.51
13.17
12.10
19.07
10.71
8.86
15.97
12.99
11.94
17.14
10.63
8.68
15.73
12.97
11.91
17.80
10.60
8.65
15.70
13.03
11.93
19.33
10.62
8.78
15.78
13.09
12.07
19.99
10.68
8.83
15.83
13.45
17.12
20.92
13.83
17.48
21.46
13.66
17.24
21.22
13.67
17.20
21.43
13.73
17.18
21.59
11.87
9.32
12.31
9.69
12.19
9.64
12.16
9.56
Lumber and wood products.................
Furniture and fixtures............................
Stone, clay, and glass products..........
Primary metal industries......................
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products..............................................
Fabricated metal products...................
Industrial machinery and equipment...
Electronic and other electrical
equipment............................................
Transportation equipment....................
Motor vehicles and equipment..........
Instruments and related products.......
Miscellaneous manufacturing.............
N o n d u ra b le g o o d s ......................................
Food and kindred products..................
Tobacco products..................................
Textile mill products..............................
Apparel and other textile products......
Paper and allied products....................
Printing and publishing.........................
Chemicals and allied products............
Petroleum and coal products...............
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products..................................
Leather and leather products...............
Dec.p
Jan.p
$13.43
$13.46
$13.59
17.00
16.95
17.15
17.26
17.49
17.37
17.42
17.36
14.04
14.08
14.20
14.17
14.63
11.55
11.33
14.12
16.20
14.55
11.59
11.33
14.02
16.02
14.58
11.59
11.35
14.07
16.14
14.73
11.64
11.47
14.00
16.19
14.67
11.71
11.38
14.02
16.15
18.99
13.50
19.05
13.61
18.96
13.50
19.18
13.57
19.17
13.68
19.26
13.64
15.07
15.13
15.23
15.18
15.21
15.36
15.33
13.40
18.20
18.68
14.13
11.30
13.49
17.94
18.23
14.25
11.32
13.51
18.23
18.61
14.28
11.34
13.62
18.56
19.04
14.30
11.46
13.58
18.47
18.93
14.36
11.47
13.59
18.46
18.87
14.34
11.43
13.69
18.78
19.29
14.39
11.57
13.66
18.56
18.99
14.37
11.51
13.11
12.11
20.63
10.69
8.81
15.91
13.15
12.16
20.79
10.76
8.89
15.98
13.22
12.15
21.15
10.71
8.83
16.05
13.18
12.08
20.99
10.72
8.88
15.98
13.35
12.19
18.88
10.78
9.01
16.27
13.27
12.10
17.77
10.72
8.99
16.12
13.33
12.20
17.96
10.80
8.98
16.12
13.41
12.30
17.96
10.83
9.02
16.17
13.39
12.22
17.66
10.83
9.01
16.14
13.73
17.27
21.49
13.74
17.39
21.05
13.73
17.35
21.14
13.80
17.49
21.35
13.82
17.51
21.29
13.97
17.78
21.62
13.97
17.72
21.68
14.01
17.75
21.83
14.12
17.81
21.85
14.14
17.79
21.65
12.20
9.55
12.23
9.59
12.21
9.59
12.25
9.57
12.35
9.61
12.32
9.77
12.46
9.86
12.37
9.83
12.41
9.84
12.52
9.90
12.57
9.92
T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D
P U B LIC U T IL IT IE S ......................................
15.31
15.67
15.57
15.56
15.51
15.57
15.55
15.56
15.66
15.67
15.78
15.76
15.87
15.93
15.92
W H O L E S A L E T R A D E ....................................
14.06
14.59
14.42
14.38
14.34
14.48
14.53
14.44
14.55
14.65
14.73
14.78
14.82
14.90
15.02
R E T A IL T R A D E .................................................
8.73
9.08
9.00
8.98
9.00
9.03
9.03
9.02
9.02
9.04
9.18
9.20
9.21
9.26
9.34
F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E ,
A N D R E A L E S T A T E ....................................
14.06
14.61
14.48
14.55
14.53
14.61
14.72
14.50
14.53
14.61
14.63
14.68
14.73
14.75
14.99
S E R V IC E S ...........................................................
12.85
13.38
13.30
13.32
13.33
13.32
13.34
13.23
13.20
13.25
13.48
13.54
13.60
13.68
13.85
p = preliminary.
No t e : See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
86
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
16. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
Industry
2000
1999
Annual average
1999p
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.p
Jan.p
Current dollars.............................. $442.19
Seasonally adjusted................
268.32
Constant (1982) dollars.............
$456.78
271.25
$445.74
451.18
268.19
$449.33
451.88
270.19
$448.70
452.30
269.33
$451.39
452.02
268.84
$456.37
453.39
271.65
$454.64
456.78
270.62
$456.31
458.16
270.81
$463.32
458.51
274.15
$458.93
459.24
269.96
$463.99
461.96
272.45
$463.34
462.30
271.91
$465.72
463.68
273.31
$466.14
467.10
272.92
M IN IN G ...................................................
741.91
748.06
728.83
729.32
717.82
733.07
751.40
748.31
765.26
756.95
759.24
758.20
757.67
761.46
766.34
C O N S TR U C T IO N ................................
643.69
668.07
634.45
633.08
632.98
650.41
668.89
679.78
687.08
690.40
672.03
699.60
686.12
674.15
664.89
562.53
341.34
580.05
344.45
564.16
339.45
564.16
339.24
568.42
341.19
574.08
341.92
577.55
343.78
581.44
346.10
573.50
340.36
583.11
345.04
588.39
346.11
589.68
346.26
594.18
348.70
603.50
354.17
589.47
345.12
1998
PR IV ATE SECTO R
-
M AN U FA C TU R IN G
Constant (1982) dollars..............
D urable go o d s..................................
591.35
607.68
591.21
591.63
596.40
602.19
606.58
610.56
598.21
612.08
615.92
618.38
622.57
634.86
619.07
Lumber and wood products......
Furniture and fixtures................
Stone, clay, and glass
products...................................
456.21
442.54
472.15
452.57
459.10
445.11
453.78
440.19
461.45
444.00
468.44
447.83
472.79
443.37
476.32
449.75
473.47
451.85
480.80
459.10
472.40
457.73
479.83
458.87
479.83
458.54
480.73
473.71
476.60
456.34
591.60
684.66
603.26
700.57
580.55
674.08
576.97
673.42
578.14
681.77
594.00
688.84
607.51
699.30
611.97
706.40
613.20
698.91
616.08
705.16
621.28
717.66
616.88
709.69
620.49
721.46
604.80
733.41
593.05
718.68
821.98
552.44
845.38
568.01
810.04
555.52
808.45
555.52
814.78
557.19
829.11
562.46
843.67
566.25
861.06
569.36
854.66
558.18
852.65
571.05
855.35
568.90
851.30
572.40
868.85
579.44
881.82
590.98
866.70
575.61
619.32
633.42
619.92
619.71
623.50
626.67
630.89
631.08
628.42
635.46
635.09
642.11
646.43
663.55
649.99
541.93
760.80
556.83
792.78
543.66
756.45
544.58
768.25
541.42
775.27
547.04
790.30
551.26
789.32
556.10
802.62
551.74
757.07
562.02
796.65
562.51
816.64
567.64
814.53
572.14
814.09
579.09
843.22
564.16
816.64
776.91
831.60
776.60
796.95
810.90
834.94
831.68
848.07
780.24
831.87
866.32
857.53
852.92
893.13
858.35
570.35
434.51
588.06
452.07
573.09
435.24
578.51
442.33
578.36
447.60
583.91
448.88
583.74
451.13
586.40
450.87
584.25
444.88
591.19
453.60
587.73
454.96
594.50
461.09
600.85
459.49
611.58
467.43
597.79
448.89
Blast furnaces and basic
steel products........................
Fabricated metal products........
Industrial machinery and
equipment...............................
Electronic and other electrical
equipment................................
Transportation equipment.........
Motor vehicles and
equipment.............................
Instruments and related
products...................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing...
N o ndurable g o o d s .........................
521.88
538.65
527.39
525.29
529.02
532.76
536.20
539.15
538.05
540.38
547.35
548.05
551.86
557.86
544.97
Food and kindred products.......
492.06
710.47
425.99
505.78
764.71
438.04
495.51
639.32
432.64
489.50
662.16
426.12
490.32
736.47
427.99
497.28
767.62
436.81
503.78
821.07
437.22
505.86
833.68
441.16
507.87
854.46
434.83
506.15
841.70
440.59
513.20
753.31
438.75
513.04
753.45
444.88
518.50
775.87
449.28
521.52
793.83
452.69
504.69
688.74
442.95
317.80
673.13
331.36
694.70
318.56
684.26
322.65
675.10
328.37
684.85
332.01
690.19
333.02
688.90
338.71
695.13
326.71
690.15
333.00
693.53
331.57
712.63
338.92
706.06
337.65
707.67
342.76
714.71
335.17
698.86
515.14
739.58
912.11
528.31
751.64
924.93
514.98
737.87
931.56
515.36
734.44
927.92
520.37
735.30
943.48
523.11
737.43
917.62
522.12
744.29
896.73
520.37
746.05
909.02
525.78
746.82
924.46
530.69
754.68
906.95
539.24
769.87
931.82
539.24
763.73
936.58
543.59
770.35
938.69
550.68
780.08
946.11
535.91
761.41
917.96
494.98
350.43
513.33
365.31
503.45
353.79
503.42
355.63
509.96
359.08
511.21
363.46
511.60
367.30
513.28
367.49
506.35
359.41
510.05
377.12
517.09
367.78
514.59
370.59
519.98
373.92
529.60
374.22
522.91
371.01
Textile mill products...................
Apparel and other textile
products...................................
Paper and allied products.........
Printing and publishing.............
Chemicals and allied products..
Petroleum and coal products....
Rubber and miscellaneous
Leather and leather products....
TR A N S P O R TA TIO N AND
PU BLIC U T ILITIE S ..........................
604.75
606.43
602.56
606.84
601.79
601.00
603.34
606.84
609.17
617.40
607.53
605.18
607.82
610.12
611.33
W H O LE S A LE TR A D E .......................
539.90
560.26
547.96
550.75
547.79
554.58
560.86
554.50
558.72
566.96
564.16
570.51
569.09
573.65
578.27
RETAIL T R A D E ..................................
253.17
263.32
252.90
256.83
257.40
259.16
262.77
265.19
268.80
270.30
264.38
264.96
264.33
271.32
264.32
FINANCE, INSU RA NC E,
AN D REAL ES TA T E ......................
511.78
528.88
521.28
528.17
523.08
524.50
535.81
520.55
525.99
539.11
526.68
529.95
530.28
533.95
554.63
S E R V IC E S .............................................
418.91
436.19
429.59
432.90
431.89
431.57
436.22
431.30
432.96
439.90
435.40
442.76
444.72
445.97
451.91
p - preliminary.
No te : See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. Dash indicates data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
87
Current Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Data
17. Diffusion indexes of employment change, seasonally adjusted
[In percent]
Timespan and year
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Nov
Oct.
Dec.
Private nonfarm payrolls, 356 industries
Over 1-month span:
1997.............................................................
1998.............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
56.2
63.8
54.4
57.0
61.0
57.9
58.3
61.9
58.8
52.1
62.8
60.5
58.8
58.8
55.9
51.5
56.3
57.9
57.0
60.7
58.0
57.6
61.0
55.8
50.0
59.4
54.6
55.1
65.4
52.9
57.2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Over 3-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
63.8
66.7
60.7
63.6
66.2
55.9
67.7
64.5
59.6
67.3
63.9
54.6
62.6
61.4
56.3
61.7
58.7
56.2
61.4
60.0
56.2
66.2
58.4
59.0
Over 6-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
67.4
70.6
61.1
68.3
66.9
58.8
65.6
65.9
57.3
67.0
62.4
59.0
65.6
62.6
55.2
64.9
61.1
57.4
66.3
58.0
56.9
Over 12-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
69.0
70.4
60.1
67.3
68.3
57.3
68.3
67.1
57.0
69.7
64.0
57.6
69.5
62.1
58.7
70.1
61.7
58.7
70.1
61.8
58.7
-
63.6
59.1
57.9
-
62.1
58.6
56.6
-|
67.3
57.6
57.4
69.9
57.6
59.6
70.8
59.0
60.1
71.2
60.4
60.3
68.4
59.8
61.5
69.7
60.0
61.4
71.3
60.8
58.4
71.3
60.8
-
71.9
58.0
-
70.4
63.8
-
70.5
59.8
-
69.7
59.0
-
69.8
59.3
-
71.3
58.6
-
53.6
42.1
42.8
-
62.2
36.3
48.9
-
61.2
39.9
50.7
-
55.4
45.0
48.2
-
Manufacturing payrolls, 139 industries
Over 1-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
2000..............................................................
50.0
58.6
40.3
52.2
52.9
51.8
42.4
53.6
50.4
39.6
56.1
50.4
44.6
52.2
40.6
36.3
53.2
46.8
45.3
51.1
40.3
57.2
-
-
-
-
-
-
55.4
45.3
38.5
-
Over 3-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
51.8
59.4
37.4
51.4
57.9
31.7
57.6
51.8
37.1
56.8
44.2
30.2
54.3
41.7
33.8
51.8
34.9
43.9
53.6
37.4
43.2
55.4
37.1
44.6
59.7
38.1
38.5
68.3
34.2
46.4
65.8
35.6
49.3
64.4
35.3
50.4
Over 6-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
54.7
59.7
33.1
54.0
49.3
29.1
51.4
48.2
28.1
54.3
36.7
36.0
52.5
36.7
30.9
52.2
36.7
34.5
55.4
28.4
36.3
61.2
31.3
44.6
61.5
33.5
45.3
64.7
35.3
40.6
66.2
32.7
65.1
28.1
-
-
Over 12-month span:
1997..............................................................
1998..............................................................
1999..............................................................
54.7
54.0
32.7
52.5
49.3
25.9
54.0
46.0
28.4
54.0
40.6
29.5
55.4
35.6
29.9
56.8
33.8
30.6
57.2
30.9
34.5
57.9
32.0
58.3
26.6
56.5
26.6
55.4
25.5
57.2
26.3
- Data not available.
NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing
-
-
-
-
-
decreasing employment. Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each
span are preliminary. See the "Definitions" in this section. See "Notes on
plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50
percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and
the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision,
18. Annual data: Employment status of the population
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Civilian noninstitutional population...........
190,925
192,805
194,838
196,814
198,584
200,591
203,133
205,220
207,753
Civilian labor force....................................
126,346
128,105
129,200
131,056
132,304
133,943
136,297
137,673
139,368
Labor force participation rate...............
66.2
66.4
66.3
66.6
66.6
66.8
67.1
67.1
67.1
Employed.............................................
117,718
118,492
120,259
123,060
124,900
126,708
129,558
131,463
133,488
Employment-population ratio..........
61.7
61.5
61.7
62.5
62.9
63.2
63.8
64.1
64.3
Agriculture......................................
3,269
3,247
3,115
3,409
3,440
3,443
3,399
3,378
3,281
Nonagrlcultural industries............
114,499
115,245
117,144
119,651
121,460
123,264
126,159
128,085
130,207
Unemployed.......................................
8,628
9,613
8,940
7,996
7,404
7,236
6,739
6,210
5,880
6.8
7.5
6.9
6.1
5.6
5.4
4.9
4.5
4.2
64,578
64,700
65,638
65,758
66,280
66,647
66,837
67,547
68,385
Unemployment rate...........................
Not in the labor force...............................
88 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March
2000
19. Annual data: Employment levels by industry
[In thousands]
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999p
Total employment............................................
108,249
108,601
114,163
117,191
119,608
122,690
89,847
89,956
95,036
100,189
23,745
23,352
689
4,650
23,908
601
4,986
103,133
24,962
Mining......................................................
Construction...........................................
23,231
635
4,492
97,885
24,265
125,826
106,007
25,347
128,616
Private sector................................................
Goods-producing.......................................
110,713
91,872
596
5,691
590
5,985
Manufacturing.........................................
18,406
18,104
18,075
18,321
581
5,160
18,524
87,361
5,811
90,256
5,984
6,162
92,925
6,132
6,378
95,115
20,507
6,896
Industry
Service-producing.....................................
Transportation and public utilities........
84,504
85,370
5,755
Wholesale trade.....................................
6,081
19,284
5,718
5,997
Retail trade.............................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate....
610
4,668
5,981
19,773
6,646
28,336
19,356
6,602
29,052
6,757
30,197
24,493
580
5,418
18,495
108,455
25,240
535
6,273
18,675
18,772
18,431
100,480
6,253
6,482
97,727
6,408
6,648
103,376
6,792
7,004
21,187
21,597
21,966
6,911
34,454
7,109
22,296
7,407
22,788
6,806
33,117
36,040
37,526
39,000
19,819
20,161
2,686
4,612
2,668
4,696
12,797
31,579
18,402
18,645
18,841
19,128
Federal.................................................
2,966
19,305
2,822
19,419
2,757
19,557
2,699
4,576
11,682
4,635
11,849
4,606
Local.....................................................
2,915
4,488
11,438
2,870
4,355
11,081
2,969
4,408
11,267
4,582
12,276
12,056
6,600
6,831
12,521
7,632
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
20. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonfarm
payrolls, by industry______________________________________________________________ _
Industry
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999p
P rivate sector:
Average weekly hours..................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars).........................
34.3
10.32
353.98
34.4
10.57
363.61
34.5
10.83
373.64
34.7
11.12
385.86
34.5
11.43
394.34
34.4
11.82
406.61
34.6
12.28
424.89
34.6
12.78
442.19
34.5
13.24
456.78
44.4
43.9
14.54
44.8
14.88
666.62
44.7
15.30
683.91
45.3
15.62
707.59
45.4
16.15
733.21
43.9
16.90
741.91
43.9
17.04
748.06
M ining:
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars).......................
14.19
630.04
638.31
44.3
14.60
646.78
38.1
14.00
533.40
38.0
14.15
537.70
38.5
14.38
553.63
38.9
14.73
573.00
38.9
15.09
587.00
39.0
15.47
603.33
39.0
16.04
625.56
38.8
16.59
643.69
39.0
17.13
668.07
40.7
11.18
455.03
41.0
11.46
469.86
41.4
11.74
486.04
42.0
12.07
506.94
41.6
12.37
514.59
41.6
12.77
531.23
42.0
13.17
553.14
41.7
13.49
562.53
41.7
13.91
580.05
38.1
13.20
502.92
38.3
13.43
514.37
39.3
13.55
532.52
39.7
13.78
547.07
39.4
14.13
556.72
39.6
14.45
572.22
39.7
14.92
592.32
39.5
15.31
604.75
38.7
15.67
606.43
38.1
11.15
424.82
38.2
11.39
435.10
38.2
11.74
448.47
38.4
12.06
463.10
38.3
12.43
476.07
38.3
12.87
492.92
38.4
13.45
516.48
38.4
14.06
539.90
38.4
14.59
560.26
28.6
6.94
198.48
28.8
7.12
205.06
28.8
7.29
209.95
28.9
7.49
216.46
28.8
7.69
221.47
28.8
7.99
230.11
28.9
8.33
240.74
29.0
8.73
253.17
29.0
9.08
263.32
35.7
10.39
370.92
35.8
10.82
387.36
35.8
11.35
406.33
35.8
11.83
423.51
35.9
12.32
442.29
35.9
12.80
459.52
36.1
13.34
481.57
36.4
14.06
511.78
36.2
14.61
528.88
32.4
10.23
331.45
32.5
10.54
342.55
32.5
10.78
350.35
32.5
11.04
358.80
32.4
11.39
369.04
32.4
11.79
382.00
32.6
12.28
400.33
32.6
12.85
418.91
32.6
13.38
436.19
C o n s tru c tio n :
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
M an u factu rin g :
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
T ra n s p o rta tio n a n d p u b lic utilities:
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
W h o le s a le trade:
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)........................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
R e tail trade:
Average weekly hours................................................
F in a n c e , in s u ra n c e , an d real estate:
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars).......................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
S ervices:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Average weekly hours................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars).......................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)......................
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
89
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
21.
Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1997
1998
1999
Percent change
Series
Dec.
C ivilian w o rk e rs 2..................................................................................
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
3
12
months
months
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
135.2
136.3
137.4
139.0
139.8
140.4
141.8
143.3
144.6
0.9
3.4
136.5
136.7
137.3
136.9
132.4
135.6
137.7
137.5
139.1
138.0
133.2
136 9
138.7
138.3
139.7
139 3
134.3
137.9
140.6
140.0
141 7
140 4
135 3
139.4
141.4
141.0
141 8
141 3
141.9
141.3
143 5
142 5
137 1
143.3
142.2
145 4
143 4
133 3
145.0
143.9
147 3
144 7
139 5
146.3
145.3
148 fi
.9
1.0
g
3.5
3.0
4.8
141.3
142.4
143.1
144.8
1.2
3.4
Goods-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.........................................................................
Service-producing....................................................................
Services...................................................................................
Health services.....................................................................
Hospitals..............................................................................
134.1
135.3
135.5
137.6
137.9
136.7
137.0
135.1
136.4
136.8
138.3
138.0
137.1
137 5
136.3
137.2
137.7
139.0
138.5
138.2
137 7
137.2
138.2
139 6
140.8
139.1
139.4
140,2
140.0
140.9
142 4
141.2
142.1
144 0
142.5
143.6
145 3
.9
1.1
g
3.3
3.4
.3 fi
143.2
141.4
142.2
141 7
145.1
142.7
143.4
146.5
144.3
145.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
3.4
3.7
3.4
141 n
139.0
139.9
140 9
142.3
140.5
141.3
141 3
Public administration3.............................................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................................
135.1
136.4
137.4
138.9
139.9
140.8
141.5
142.4
144.4
1.4
3.2
135.1
136.2
137.3
139.0
139.9
140.5
141.9
143.4
144.7
.9
3.4
135.1
135.2
136.3
136.4
137.5
137.5
139.0
138.8
139.8
139.4
140.4
140.5
142.0
141.9
143.3
143.2
144.6
144.5
.9
.9
3.4
3.7
136.7
137.4
137.8
137.4
133.5
137.0
132.3
131.9
133.0
128.9
135.8
138.1
138.8
138.8
139.4
135.3
138.2
133.1
132.9
133.6
129.3
137.0
139.4
139.9
140.1
140.0
137.3
139.6
134.3
134.4
134.7
129.9
137.6
141.1
141.3
141.6
141.9
140.4
140.6
135.2
135.4
135.7
130.7
138.5
142.0
141.9
142.6
141.8
142.6
141.4
135.9
136.1
136.8
130.7
139.2
142.4
144.1
144.5
144.1
145.8
142.6
143.7
138.2
138.4
138.4
133.6
142.3
145.6
146.0
145.2
147.7
144.1
145.0
139.4
139.6
139.9
134.4
143.2
146.9
147.3
146.7
149.1
145.3
146.2
140.5
140.6
141.4
135.2
144.4
.9
.9
1.0
.9
.8
.8
.8
.7
1.1
.6
.8
3.5
3.8
2.9
5.1
1.9
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.4
3.7
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial..........................
Blue-collar workers..................................................................
136 1
140.0
8
Workers, by industry division:
Private in d u s try w o rk e rs ................................................................
Excluding sales occupations..............................................
137.9
138.9
140 4
141.7
139.1
140.2
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers...............................................................
Excluding sales occupations............................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations...........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations................................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...
Blue-collar workers................................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations.......
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors............
Transportation and material moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....
143.0
142.9
143.7
139.6
142.6
136.9
137.2
137.3
131.6
141.0
Service occupations...............................................................
134.1
135.3
136.0
137.3
138.0
139.5
140.6
141.0
142.6
1.1
3.3
Production and nonsupervisory occupations4..................
134.2
135.3
136.6
138.0
139.0
139.3
140.8
141.9
143.1
.8
2.9
135.1
134.5
137.7
136.3
133 5
130.6
136.4
138.2
136.5
135.0
136.5
135.9
136.2
135.6
138 8
137.4
134 6
132.7
137.2
139.1
137.3
135.9
137.4
136.7
137.1
136.5
139.7
138.3
135 5
133.4
138.2
140.1
138.3
136.8
138.5
137.6
137.8
137.2
140 2
138.8
136 3
134.3
138.9
140.5
138.7
137.7
141.1
140 5
143 9
142 5
139 4
142.5
141 8
145 5
143 9
140 7
1.0
g
3.4
136.9
140.9
143.0
141.3
139.4
137.9
142.1
144.3
142.5
140.5
138.7
143.6
145.8
143.8
142.1
.6
1.1
1.0
.9
1.1
139.2
138.2
138.9
138.3
141.7
140.4
137 1
135.6
139.9
141.8
140.1
138.5
139.9
139.6
139.9
139 3
142 7
141 3
138 3
Construction..........................................................................
Manufacturing.......................................................................
White-collar occupations..................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Blue-collar occupations....................................................
Durables.................................................................................
Nondurables.........................................................................
134.1
133.6
136.2
135.0
132.8
129.7
135.3
136.7
135.3
134.3
135.7
134.5
141.0
140.4
142.3
141.5
144.0
142.8
1.2
.9
3.3
3.4
3.8
3.7
3.2
3.4
3.3
Service-producing...................................................................
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
White-collar occupations..................................................
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
Blue-collar occupations....................................................
Service occupations..........................................................
Transportation and public utilities.....................................
Transportation.....................................................................
Public utilities......................................................................
Communications.............................................................
Electric, gas, and sanitary services.............................
Wholesale and retail trade..................................................
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
Wholesale trade.................................................................
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
Retail trade..........................................................................
General merchandise stores..........................................
Food stores.......................................................................
135.3
136.1
136.6
138.1
130.9
133.9
134.2
133.4
135.1
134.0
136.4
132.9
134.0
135.1
135.4
131.7
130.0
129.4
136.7
137.4
138.0
139.5
132.1
135.0
135.8
134.0
137.9
136.6
139.6
134.7
135.5
137.7
137.0
133.1
131.2
131.3
137.8
138.5
139.3
140.6
133.2
135.8
137.1
134.9
139.7
139.2
140.3
135.8
136.3
138.6
138.2
134.4
133.0
132.9
139.6
140.0
141.2
142.2
134.3
137.0
138.5
136.7
140.7
140.5
141.0
137.6
138.1
140.8
140.0
135.9
133.2
133.7
140.5
140.6
142.2
142.8
134.8
137.8
139.3
137.3
141.9
141.7
142.1
138.2
138.8
142.8
141.2
135.6
134.0
132.7
140.9
141.7
142.3
143.8
136.2
139.3
139.7
136.8
143.4
143.3
143.4
138.9
139.9
142.7
142.4
136.8
135.0
134.3
142.8
143.3
144.3
145.5
137.8
140.5
140.9
138.1
144.6
144.9
144.2
141.1
141.9
144.6
144.0
139.1
135.6
135.7
144.1
144.6
145.8
147.0
139.1
140.8
141.8
138.7
145.7
146.1
145.1
142.2
142.8
146.3
145.8
140.0
137.2
137.0
145.3
145.9
147.0
148.3
139.8
142.4
142.3
139.5
146.1
146.0
146.1
143.5
144.3
148.5
147.4
140.7
138.3
138.1
.8
.9
.8
.9
.5
1.1
.4
.6
.3
-.1
.7
.9
1.1
1.5
1.1
.5
.8
.8
3.4
3.8
3.4
3.9
3.7
3.3
2.2
1.6
3.0
3.0
2.8
3.8
4.0
4.0
4.4
3.8
3.2
4.1
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing....................................................................
White-collar occupations..................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
90 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
10
g
21. Continued—Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1997
Percent change
12
3
months
months
1999
1998
Series
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................
134.5
136.7
138.4
141.0
142.5
141.5
145.8
147.6
148.3
0.5
4.1
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance.............................................................................
Services.................................................................................
137.6
140.6
134.8
138.5
138.6
138.1
136.5
142.6
143.7
140.2
143.3
137.4
139.3
139.5
138.2
136.7
143.4
144.3
141.3
145.3
138.9
140.3
140.7
138.7
138.2
143.9
144.8
143.2
148.4
141.9
141.8
143.5
139.0
139.1
147.0
147.8
143.3
146.7
141.7
142.7
145.6
148.8
141.7
143.5
145.9
139.0
139.9
147.7
148.5
147.5
140.5
141.2
148.3
149.2
148.8
155.4
144.0
144.6
148.7
141.4
142.1
148.7
149.6
151.0
159.3
144.5
146.1
150.7
142.6
143.0
152.2
152.6
151.6
159.8
145.8
147.6
151.9
144.2
144.6
153.0
153.3
.4
.3
.9
1.0
.8
1.1
1.1
.5
.5
5.8
8.9
2.9
3.4
4.1
3.7
3.4
3.6
3.2
Health services...................................................................
Hospitals...........................................................................
Educational services.........................................................
Colleges and universities...............................................
134.7
136.0
137.2
138.9
139.7
140.3
142.0
143.4
144.5
.8
3.4
White-collar workers..........................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Blue-collar occupations.....................................................
Service occupations..........................................................
136.5
137.9
130.1
133.8
137.9
139.3
131.0
134.9
139.2
140.5
132.4
135.7
141.1
142.0
133.4
136.9
142.0
142.7
134.0
137.7
142.3
143.7
135.2
139.2
144.1
145.3
136.8
140.4
145.6
146.8
138.0
140.7
146.9
148.1
138.7
142.3
.9
.9
.5
1.1
3.5
3.8
3.5
3.3
S ta te a n d local g o v e rn m e n t w o rk e rs ..........................................
135.7
136.5
136.9
139.0
139.8
140.5
141.0
143.1
144.6
1.0
3.4
135.5
135.1
136.4
136.1
134.2
136.1
135.6
137.5
136.9
135.0
136.2
135.6
137.9
137.2
135.2
138.4
137.7
140.4
139.5
136.8
139.3
138.5
141.6
140.3
137.8
139.8
138.8
142.6
141.4
138.8
140.2
139.3
142.8
141.3
139.5
142.6
142.0
144.5
143.0
140.9
144.0
143.2
146.1
145.0
142.5
1.0
.8
1.1
1.4
1.1
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.4
3.4
Nonmanufacturing...............................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, administrative, and managerial.........................
Workers, by industry division:
Services....................................................................................
136.0
136.5
136.6
139.0
139.7
140.0
140.5
143.2
144.5
.9
3.4
Services excluding schools5................................................
Health services...................................................................
Hospitals..........................................................................
135.3
136.1
136.2
138.7
138.8
139.6
140.3
142.6
143.8
.8
3.6
Schools............................................................................
Elementary and secondary.........................................
Colleges and universities............................................
137.2
137.6
135.9
136.2
135.8
137.2
137.9
138.4
136.3
136.6
136.1
137.9
138.0
138.4
136.5
136.7
136.2
138.1
140.3
140.7
138.8
139.1
138.8
140.4
140.7
141.2
139.6
139.9
139.3
141.5
141.2
141.7
139.9
140.2
139.6
141.7
142.0
142.7
140.3
140.6
140.0
142.1
144.2
144.8
143.1
143.5
142.9
144.8
145.8
146.3
144.4
144.7
144.1
146.5
1.1
1.0
.9
.8
.8
1.2
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.5
Public administration3.............................................................
135.1
136.4
137.4
138.9
139.9
140.8
141.5
142.4
144.4
1.4
3.2
1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index consists of
wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consists of private Industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 This series has the same industry and occupational coverage as the Hourly
Earnings index, which was discontinued in January 1989.
5 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
91
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
22.
Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1997
1999
1998
Percent change
12
3
Series
Dec.
Civilian workers1..............................................................
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
months
months
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
132.8
134.0
135.0
136.8
137.7
138.4
139.8
141.3
142.5
0.8
3.5
White-collar workers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial...........................
Administrative support, including clerical............................
Blue-collar workers...................................................................
Service occupations.................................................................
134.3
135.0
135.6
133.7
129.3
132.6
135.6
135.8
137.4
135.0
130.4
133.7
136.7
136.6
138.3
136.2
131.4
134.5
138.8
138.5
140.5
137.5
132.6
136.1
139.7
139.4
140.3
138.6
133.3
137.0
140.1
140.1
141.6
140.0
134.5
138.3
141.6
141.0
143.8
140.9
135.8
139.4
143.3
142.6
145.9
142.3
137.0
140.1
144.6
144.0
147.2
143.5
137.9
141.7
.9
1.0
.9
.8
.7
1.1
3.5
3.3
4.9
3.5
3.5
3.4
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.........................................................................
Service-producing.....................................................................
Services...................................................................................
Health services.....................................................................
Hospitals..............................................................................
Educational services............................................................
130.6
132.2
133.6
136.0
135.4
133.6
135.9
132.0
133.7
134.8
136.9
136.2
134.2
136.3
133.3
134.6
135.7
137.6
136.5
135.1
136.5
134.4
136.0
137.8
139.6
137.6
136.4
139.1
135.2
136.8
138.7
140.5
137.6
137.1
140.0
136.3
137.9
139.2
141.5
138.8
138.1
140.2
137.4
139.0
140.7
142.3
139.7
138.8
140.6
138.6
140.2
142.3
144.1
140.9
140.1
143.7
139.7
141.5
143.5
145.5
142.5
141.6
144.7
.8
.9
.8
1.0
1.1
1.1
.7
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.3
3.4
131.4
132.8
132.7
134.0
133.2
135.1
134.8
137.0
135.9
137.8
136.9
138.4
137.8
139.9
139.5
141.5
141.5
142.6
1.4
.8
4.1
3.5
132.3
132.4
133.7
133.7
134.9
134.8
136.6
136.3
137.4
136.9
138.1
138.2
139.7
139.6
141.0
140.8
142.2
142.0
.9
.9
3.5
3.7
134.2
134.8
134.8
135.8
131.4
133.9
129.1
128.7
130.6
125.1
131.8
135.7
136.3
135.9
137.8
133.1
135.3
130.2
129.8
131.6
125.9
133.2
137.0
137.5
137.1
138.7
135.2
136.7
131.3
131.2
132.7
126.4
133.7
139.0
139.1
138.7
140.9
138.8
137.9
132.4
132.3
133.8
127.6
135.1
139.9
139.7
139.7
140.5
141.3
138.9
133.2
133.0
134.9
127.8
135.8
140.3
141.0
140.7
141.9
137.3
140.4
134.3
134.3
135.7
129.1
137.3
142.1
142.5
141.8
144.3
140.5
141.4
135.6
135.6
136.7
131.0
138.3
143.5
143.9
142.6
146.4
142.1
142.7
136.8
136.7
138.3
131.9
139.4
144.8
145.2
144.1
147.6
143.3
143.8
137.7
137.5
139.5
132.7
140.4
.9
.9
1.1
.8
.8
.8
.7
.6
.9
.6
.7
3.5
3.9
3.1
5.1
1.4
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.8
3.4
Workers, by occupational group:
Public administration2.............................................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................................
P r i v a t e i n d u s t r y w o r k e r s ...............................................................................
Excluding sales occupations................. ............................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers...............................................................
Excluding sales occupations............................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations...........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations................................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations........
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors............
Transportation and material moving occupations...........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....
Service occupations...............................................................
131.1
132.1
133.0
134.4
135.3
136.7
137.8
138.0
139.6
1.2
3.2
Production and nonsupervisory occupations3..................
131.2
132.3
133.6
135.2
136.4
136.8
138.2
139.3
140.4
.8
2.9
130.6
130.0
132.9
131.6
129.2
124.9
132.2
133.6
132.2
131.2
131.9
132.6
132.0
131.3
135.0
133.3
130.1
126.0
133.7
135.6
133.8
132.3
133.4
134.2
133.2
132.5
136.3
134.6
131.3
128.1
134.6
136.8
135.0
133.1
134.5
134.9
134.3
133.6
137.4
135.7
132.3
128.5
136.0
138.3
136.3
134.3
135.9
136.0
135.2
134.4
138.2
136.4
133.3
129.3
136.8
139.0
137.1
135.3
136.9
136.8
136.3
135.5
139.4
137.8
134.3
130.7
137.9
140.1
138.3
136.3
137.9
138.0
137.3
136.6
140.5
138.8
135.4
131.9
139.0
141.4
139.6
137.2
139.1
138.7
138.5
137.8
141.7
140.1
136.6
133.0
140.2
142.7
140.8
138.4
140.4
139.7
139.7
138.9
143.0
141.3
137.6
133.6
141.5
144.0
142.0
139.7
141.8
140.9
.9
.8
.9
.9
.7
.5
.9
.9
.9
.9
1.0
.9
3.3
3.3
3.5
3.6
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.6
3.6
3.3
3.6
3.0
133.1
133.9
134.3
135.9
128.9
131.0
131.3
129.5
133.5
134.0
132.9
131.6
133.2
133.6
135.0
130.6
128.4
127.0
134.4
135.2
135.7
137.3
130.2
132.1
132.1
130.1
134.5
134.4
134.7
133.3
134.7
136.2
136.5
131.9
129.4
129.0
135.6
136.2
137.0
138.4
131.1
133.0
132.8
130.4
135.7
135.8
135.6
134.6
135.6
137.1
137.8
133.3
131.5
130.5
137.6
137.9
139.2
140.2
132.4
134.2
134.3
132.4
136.5
136.7
136.3
136.6
137.6
139.3
139.6
135.2
132.2
131.7
138.4
138.5
140.1
140.7
132.9
135.2
135.1
132.9
137.8
138.0
137.4
137.0
138.2
141.3
140.8
134.8
133.0
130.5
138.9
139.8
140.3
142.0
134.4
136.7
135.4
132.3
139.2
139.4
138.9
137.7
139.5
140.7
141.9
136.2
133.7
131.8
140.8
141.4
142.3
143.7
135.9
137.8
136.8
133.7
140.6
141.1
140.0
139.6
141.1
142.3
143.0
138.3
134.3
132.8
142.1
142.6
143.8
145.1
137.0
138.0
137.5
134.4
141.5
141.9
140.9
140.7
141.8
144.3
144.8
138.9
135.6
133.9
143.3
143.8
145.0
146.4
137.8
139.6
137.9
134.9
141.8
142.2
141.3
142.0
143.3
146.5
146.4
139.6
136.7
134.9
.8
.8
.8
.9
.6
1.2
.3
.4
.2
.2
.3
.9
1.1
1.5
1.1
.5
.8
.7
3.5
3.8
3.5
4.1
3.7
3.3
2.1
1.5
2.9
3.0
2.8
3.6
3.7
3.7
4.0
3.6
2.8
3.4
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing....................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Construction..........................................................................
Manufacturing.......................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Service-producing...................................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Transportation and public utilities.....................................
Transportation....................................................................
Public utilities......................................................................
Communications............................................................
Wholesale and retail trade..................................................
Wholesale trade.................................................................
Food stores......................................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
92 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
22. Continued— Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1999
1998
1997
Series
Dec.
Mar.
Sept.
June
Dec.
Mar.
Sept.
June
Dec.
Percent change
12
3
months
months
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
Finance, insurance, and real estate..................................
Excluding sales occupations.........................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance.............................................................................
Services..................................................................................
Business services..............................................................
Health services...................................................................
Hospitals...........................................................................
Educational services..........................................................
Colleges and universities................................................
130.6
133.6
138.3
130.2
136.2
137.3
135.4
133.2
138.4
138.7
132.6
135.9
140.9
133.1
137.2
137.6
136.2
133.6
139.1
139.1
134.8
137.5
143.2
134.8
138.3
139.2
136.5
134.7
139.6
139.7
138.1
139.7
147.0
138.7
140.0
141.8
137.5
135.8
142.8
142.8
139.8
139.6
144.4
138.5
140.8
144.1
137.4
136.5
143.5
143.6
137.2
141.0
146.1
137.4
142.2
145.4
138.7
137.6
143.9
144.1
142.4
144.8
154.5
139.8
143.2
146.3
139.6
138.3
144.2
144.4
144.5
147.5
159.2
140.2
144.5
148.5
140.6
139.3
147.5
147.2
145.2
148.0
159.6
141.5
146.0
149.8
142.2
140.9
148.2
147.9
0.5
.3
.3
.9
1.0
.9
1.1
1.1
.5
.5
3.9
6.0
10.5
2.2
3.7
4.0
3.5
3.2
3.3
3.0
Nonmanufacturing................................................................
White-collar workers..........................................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Blue-collar occupations.....................................................
Service occupations..........................................................
132.1
134.1
135.5
127.1
130.9
133.4
135.5
136.9
128.2
132.0
134.7
136.8
138.1
129.5
132.9
136.5
138.9
139.8
130.5
134.1
137.4
139.8
140.3
131.1
135.1
137.9
140.1
141.6
132.4
136.5
139.7
142.0
143.2
134.0
137.7
141.0
143.5
144.6
135.1
137.9
142.1
144.7
145.9
135.8
139.5
.8
.8
.9
.5
1.2
3.4
3.5
4.0
3.6
3.3
S ta te a n d local g o v e rn m e n t w o rk e rs ..........................................
134.4
135.1
135.4
137.6
138.5
139.0
139.6
142.2
143.5
.9
3.6
134.5
135.1
134.1
132.3
132.3
135.0
135.5
135.1
133.0
133.1
135.2
135.6
135.6
133.3
133.5
137.6
137.9
138.0
135.4
135.1
138.5
138.7
139.3
136.5
136.0
138.9
138.9
140.1
137.4
136.9
139.3
139.4
140.5
137.5
137.6
142.1
142.5
142.7
139.6
139.4
143.4
143.6
144.3
141.7
140.7
.9
.8
1.1
1.5
.9
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.8
3.5
135.3
135.7
135.9
138.4
139.2
139.5
139.9
142.9
144.0
.8
3.4
137.8
138.7
138.6
138.4
138.5
138.7
137.7
138.2
139.2
139.1
139.3
139.5
139.3
139.6
139.0
139.7
139.7
139.5
139.6
139.5
139.6
139.6
140.4
140.6
139.8
140.0
139.9
139.8
142.1
142.8
142.8
142.9
143.1
143.1
142.6
143.2
144.2
144.1
144.0
144.2
144.1
144.4
.8
1.0
.9
.8
.8
.7
1.3
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
134.8
135.9
136.9
137.8
139.5
141.5
1.4
4.1
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.................................................................
Professional specialty and technical...................................
Executive, administrative, and managerial........................
Workers, by industry division:
Elementary and secondary.........................................
Colleges and universities...........................................
134.4
135.3
135.2
135.3
135.5
135.7
134.6
135.4
136.3
136.3
135.7
135.8
136.0
135.2
135.5
136.5
136.5
135.8
136.0
136.1
135.5
Public administration2............................................................
131.4
132.7
133.2
Services excluding schools4................................................
Health services...................................................................
3 This series has the same industry and occupational coverage as the Hourly
1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
Earnings index, which was discontinued in January 1989.
State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
23.
Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry workers by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
1999
1998
1997
Series
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Percent change
12
3
months
months
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
141.8
142.6
143.7
144.5
145.2
145.8
147.3
148.6
150.2
1.1
3.4
143.4
139.0
144.7
139.1
145.6
140.4
146.6
141.0
147.4
141.6
147.9
142.2
149.4
143.6
151.0
144.8
152.5
146.2
1.0
1.0
3.5
3.2
141.5
141.4
141.7
141.5
141.5
142.7
141.7
142.7
142.5
143.8
142.4
143.9
143.0
144.9
142.6
145.0
143.2
145.7
142.7
145.8
144.3
146.1
143.6
146.3
145.2
147.9
144.5
148.0
146.3
149.4
145.7
149.4
148.2
150.7
147.8
150.7
1.3
.9
1.4
.9
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
Workers, by occupational group:
Workers, by industry division:
Nonmanufacturing....................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
93
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
24.
Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers by bargaining status, region, and area size
[June 1989 = 100]
1998
1997
1999
Percent change
Series
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
3
12
months
months
ended
ended
Dec. 1999
C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o rkers, by b a rg a in in g s ta tu s 1
Union................................................................................................
Goods-producing........................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing................................................................
133.5
132.5
134.5
133.3
133 2
134.0
132.7
135.3
133.6
133 9
135.3
134.3
136.2
134.6
1 as a
136.8
135.6
138.0
136.0
13fi q
137.5
136.5
138.5
136.9
138.0
136.8
139.2
137.0
139.0
138.2
139.7
138.1
140.2
139.2
141.0
139.1
141.2
140.8
141.4
141.0
0.7
1.1
.3
1.4
2.7
3.2
2.1
3.0
Nonunion.........................................................................................
Goods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing.....................................................................
135.3
134.7
135.3
135.9
134.9
136.7
135.9
136.7
137.2
136 3
137.8
136.9
138.0
138.0
137.5
139.3
137.7
139.7
138.9
139.1
140.1
138.3
140.6
139.4
140.0
140.8
139.7
141.1
140.7
140.6
142.5
140.5
143.0
141.7
142.4
143.8
141.8
144.4
143.0
143.8
145.2
143.1
145.7
144.4
145.1
1.0
.9
.9
1.0
.9
3.6
3.5
3.6
3.5
3.6
135.0
134.6
136.9
133.4
136.0
135.5
138.3
135.2
137.0
136.4
139.5
138.1
141.4
140.0
140.5
139.1
141.7
140.3
141.5
140.7
139.6
136.6
138.7
137.6
140.9
138.5
143.6
142.1
143.2
141.8
145.0
143.3
144.3
143.0
146.3
144.7
.8
.8
.9
1.0
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.4
135.1
135.3
136.4
135.9
137.5
137.1
139.1
138.2
139.8
139.4
140.4
140.5
142.0
141.8
143.3
143.1
144.7
143.6
1.0
.3
3.5
3.0
Union................................................................................................
Goods-producing........................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing.....................................................................
128.9
127.1
131.2
128.6
129.1
129.6
127.9
131.8
129.6
129.6
130.7
129.4
132.2
130.4
130.8
132.4
131.0
134.1
132.2
132.4
133.1
131.7
134.8
133.0
133.1
133.6
132.3
135.4
133.6
133.7
134.7
133.8
135.8
134.7
134.6
135.7
134.9
136.8
135.8
135.6
136.5
136.1
137.2
137.5
135.9
.6
.9
.3
1.3
.2
2.6
3.3
1.8
3.4
2.1
Nonunion.........................................................................................
Goods-producing.......................................................................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing......................................................................
133.0
132.0
133.2
133.5
132.6
134.5
133.6
134.6
135.1
134.0
135.7
134.7
135.9
136.2
135.3
137.4
135.7
137.9
137.3
137.1
138.3
136.5
138.8
138.2
138.0
139.0
137.8
139.3
139.4
138.6
140.7
138.8
141.3
140.5
140.5
142.0
140.0
142.6
141.7
141.8
143.3
141.1
143.9
142.9
143.0
.9
.8
.9
.8
.8
3.6
3.4
3.7
3.4
3.6
131.6
133.0
133.0
131.2
132.6
134.0
134.7
132.9
133.8
134.9
136.0
134.5
135.4
136.5
137.5
136.7
136.4
136.7
138.0
138.4
137.1
137.9
138.9
138.2
138.2
139.4
141.0
140.2
139.9
140.2
142.4
141.3
140.9
141.5
143.6
142.6
.7
.9
.8
.9
3.3
3.5
4.1
3.0
132.3
132.0
133.8
132.5
135.1
133.4
136.9
134.7
137.7
136.0
138.3
137.1
139.9
138.4
141.2
139.8
142.5
140.2
.9
.3
3.5
3.1
W o rkers, by re g io n 1
Northeast........................................................................................
South...............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)...............................................
West................................................................................................
W o rk e rs , by area s iz e 1
Metropolitan areas........................................................................
Other areas....................................................................................
W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o rk e rs , b y b a rg a in in g s ta tu s 1
W o rkers, by re g io n 1
Northeast........................................................................................
South...............................................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)................................................
West.................................................................................................
W o rk e rs , by area s iz e 1
Metropolitan areas.........................................................................
Other areas.....................................................................................
1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry group 5. For a d etailed description >f the inde X calculât on, see the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w
Technical Note, "Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost Index," May 1982.
94 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
25. Percent of full-time employees participating in employer-provided benefit plans, and in selected features within plans,
medium and large private establishments, selected years, 1980-97_________________________________________________
Item
Number of employees (in 000's):
With medical care........................................................
With life insurance........................................................
1980
1984
1982
1988
1986
1989
1991
1995
1993
1997
21,352
21,043
21,013
21,303
31,059
32,428
31,163
28,728
33,374
38,409
20,711
20,498
17,936
20,412
20,201
17,676
20,383
20,172
17,231
20,238
20,451
16,190
27,953
28,574
19,567
29,834
30,482
20,430
25,865
29,293
18,386
23,519
26,175
16,015
25,546
29,078
17,417
29,340
33,495
19,202
10
75
-
9
25
76
25
9
26
73
26
11
29
72
26
85
3.2
96
9.4
10
26
71
26
84
3.3
97
9.2
8
30
67
28
80
3.3
92
10.2
9
29
68
26
83
3.0
91
9.4
80
3.3
89
9.1
81
3.7
89
9.3
24
3.3
22
3.1
21
3.3
21
3.1
22
3.3
20
3.5
T im e -o ff p la n s
Participants with:
Paid lunch time...............................................................
Average minutes per day...........................................
Paid rest time.................................................................
Average minutes per day...........................................
Average days per occurrence...................................
Paid holidays..................................................................
Average days per year...............................................
-
-
-
99
10.1
99
10.0
99
9.8
10
27
72
26
88
3.2
99
10.0
Paid personal leave.......................................................
Average days per year...............................................
20
-
24
3.8
23
3.6
25
3.7
Paid vacations................................................................
100
99
99
100
98
97
96
97
96
95
67
-
67
-
70
-
69
33
16
68
37
18
67
37
26
65
60
53
58
56
Unpaid maternity leave................................................
62
-
_
_
84
93
97
97
97
95
90
92
83
82
77
76
-
62
46
62
8
66
70
18
76
79
28
75
80
28
81
80
30
86
82
42
78
73
56
85
78
63
27
-
43
$12.80
63
$41.40
44
$19.29
64
$60.07
47
$25.31
66
$72.10
51
$26.60
69
$96.97
61
$31.55
76
$107.42
67
$33.92
78
$118.33
69
$39.14
80
$130.07
Unpaid family lea v e .....................................................
_
_
In s u ra n c e p lans
Participants in medical care plans................................
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care........................................................
58
Physical exam.............................................................
Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage..............................................................
Average monthly contribution.................................
Family coverage.........................................................
Average montmy contriDution.................................
Participants in life insurance plans...............................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance.....................................................................
Survivor income benefits............................................
Retiree protection available........................................
Participants in long-term disability
26
46
-
-
36
$11.93
58
$35.93
96
96
96
96
92
94
94
91
87
87
69
-
72
64
74
-
78
8
49
71
7
42
71
6
44
76
5
41
77
7
37
74
64
72
10
59
6
33
40
43
47
48
42
45
40
41
42
43
54
51
51
49
46
43
45
44
53
55
51
Participants in sickness and accident
Participants in short-term disability plans ' .................
R e tire m e n t p lans
Participants in defined benefit pension plans............
Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement prior to age 65............................
Early retirement available.........................................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years..................
Benefit coordinated with Social Security.................
Participants in defined contribution plans....................
Participants in plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements................................................................
84
84
82
76
63
63
59
56
52
50
55
98
53
45
58
97
-
64
98
35
57
62
59
98
26
55
62
62
97
22
64
63
55
98
7
56
54
52
95
6
61
48
52
96
52
45
63
97
47
54
56
58
51
52
95
10
56
49
-
-
-
60
45
48
48
49
55
57
-
-
-
33
36
41
44
43
54
55
4
O th e r b e n e fits
Employees eligible for:
Premium conversion plans..........................................
_
2
5
9
10
12
12
13
5
12
23
36
52
38
5
32
7
1 The definitions for paid sick leave and short-term disability (previously sickness and
fits at less than full pay.
accident insurance) were changed for the 1995 survey. Paid sick leave now includes only
2
plans that specify either a maximum number of days per year or unlimited days. Short-
specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan premiums with pretax
Prior to 1995, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans, which
terms disability now includes all insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans available
dollars.
on a per-disability basis, as well as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as
tabulated separately.
Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of flexible benefit plans were
sick leave. Sickness and accident insurance, reported in years prior to this survey, included
only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans providing per-disability bene
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
95
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
26. Percent of full-time employees participating in employer-provided benefit plans, and in selected features
within plans, small private establishments and State and local governments, 1987, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1996
State and local governments
Small private establishments
Item
1992
1990
1994
1987
1996
1992
1990
1994
Scope of survey (In 000's)............................................
32,466
34,360
35,910
39,816
10,321
12,972
12,466
12,907
Number of employees (In 000's):
With medical care.......................................................
With life insurance......................................................
With defined benefit plan...........................................
22,402
20,778
6,493
24,396
21,990
7,559
23,536
21,955
5,480
25,599
24,635
5,883
9,599
8,773
9,599
12,064
11,415
11,675
11,219
11,095
10,845
11,192
11,194
11,708
Average days per occurrence..................................
Paid holidays................................................................
8
37
48
27
47
2.9
84
9
37
49
26
50
3.0
82
50
3.1
82
51
3.0
80
17
34
58
29
56
3.7
81
11
36
56
29
63
3.7
74
10
34
53
29
65
3.7
75
62
3.7
73
Averaqe days per year1............................................
Paid personal leave.....................................................
Average days per year.............................................
Paid vacations..............................................................
9.5
11
2.8
88
9.2
12
2.6
88
7.5
13
2.6
88
7.6
14
3.0
86
10.9
38
2.7
72
13.6
39
2.9
67
14.2
38
2.9
67
11.5
38
3.0
66
Paid sick leave2..........................................................
47
53
50
50
97
95
95
94
Unpaid leave................................................................
Unpaid paternity leave................................................
Unpaid family leave.....................................................
17
8
18
7
47
48
57
30
51
33
59
44
93
69
71
66
64
93
93
90
87
80
84
28
-
-
Physical exam...........................................................
79
83
26
76
78
36
82
79
36
87
84
47
84
81
55
Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage............................................................
Average monthly contribution................................
Family coverage.......................................................
42
$25.13
67
47
$36.51
73
52
$40.97
76
52
$42.63
75
35
$15.74
71
38
$25.53
65
43
$28.97
72
47
$30.20
71
Averaqe monthly contribution................................
$109.34
$150.54
$159.63
$181.53
$71.89
$117.59
$139.23
$149.70
Participants in life Insurance plans..............................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance...................................................................
64
64
61
62
85
88
89
87
78
1
19
76
1
25
79
2
20
77
1
13
67
1
55
67
1
45
74
1
46
64
2
46
19
23
20
22
31
27
28
30
6
26
26
14
21
22
21
T im e - o f f p la n s
Participants with:
Paid lunch time.............................................................
Average minutes per day.........................................
Paid rest time...............................................................
Average minutes per day.........................................
In s u r a n c e p la n s
Participants in medical care plans...............................
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care.....................................................
Retiree protection available.......................................
Participants in long-term disability
insurance plans..........................................................
Participants in sickness and accident
_
29
Participants in short-term disability plans2.................
R e tir e m e n t p la n s
Participants in defined benefit pension plans............
20
22
15
15
93
90
87
91
Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement prior to age 65...........................
Early retirement available.........................................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years................
Terminal earnings formula.......................................
Benefit coordinated with Social Security.................
54
95
7
58
49
50
95
4
54
46
-
92
-
47
92
53
44
90
33
100
18
89
88
16
100
8
92
89
10
100
10
92
87
13
99
49
31
33
34
38
9
9
9
9
17
24
23
28
28
45
45
24
Participants In defined contribution plans...................
Participants in plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements..............................................................
O th e r b e n e fits
Employees eligible for:
Reimbursement accounts3........................................
Premium conversion plans ......................................
1
2
3
4
5
5
5
5
8
14
19
12
5
31
50
64
1 Methods used to calculate the average number of paid holidays were revised
in 1994 to count partial days more precisely. Average holidays for 1994 are
7
sick leave. Sickness and accident insurance, reported In years prior to this
survey, included only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans
not comparable with those reported in 1990 and 1992.
providing per-disability benefits at less than full pay.
2 The definitions for paid sick leave and short-term disability (previously
3 Prior to 1996, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans,
which specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan
sickness and accident insurance) were changed for the 1996 survey. Paid sick
leave now includes only plans that specify either a maximum number of days
per year or unlimited days. Short-term disability now includes all insured, selfinsured, and State-mandated plans available on a per-disability basis, as well
as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as
96 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
premiums with pretax dollars. Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of
flexible benefit plans were tabulated separately.
Note : Dash Indicates data not available.
27. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
1997
1998
1999
1998
Annual totals
Measure
Nov.
Oct.
Jan.p
Dec.
Feb.p
Mar.p
Apr.p
Mayp
Junep
Julyp
Aug.p Sept.p
Oct.p
Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period...............................
29
34
5
3
3
1
2
0
1
3
2
1
1
2
0
In effect during period...........................
34
34
7
7
6
5
5
2
3
6
6
6
3
5
2
Beginning in period (in thousands)....
339
387
8.0
7.1
3.8
1.4
4.1
.0
8.0
9.6
2.2
1.7
11.0
19.1
.0
In effect during period (in thousands).
351
387
10.6
13.7
10.4
9.2
10.3
4.4
12.4
22.0
21.6
16.3
15.4
34.5
10.1
4,497
5,116
148.7
160.3
171.0
129.0
104.1
101.2
256.8
314.8
309.4
266.4
118.8
176.2
67.1
Workers involved:
Days idle:
.00
.01
.00
.01
.01
.01
.00
.01
.00
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
Percent of estimated workina time1....
1 Agricultural and government employees are included in the total employed and total working time; private household, forestry, and fishery employees are excluded. An explanation of
the measurement of idleness as a percentage of the total time worked is found in " Total economy' measures of strike idleness," M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , October 1968, pp. 54-56.
p = preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
97
Current Labor Statistics:
28.
Price Data
Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city average,
by expenditure category and commodity or service group
[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]__________________________________
Series
Annual average
1998
1999
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS
All items..................................................................
All items (1967- 100)............................................
163.0
488.3
166.6
499.0
164.3
492.3
164.5
492.9
165.0
494.4
166.2
497.8
166.2
497.7
166.2
497.9
166.7
499.2
167.1
500.7
167.9
502.9
503.9
168.3
504.1
168.3
504.1
168.7
505.5
Food and beverages.............................................
161.1
160.7
161.1
181.1
147.3
164.6
164.1
163.8
163.3
163.8
183.8
147.0
163.7
163.3
163.4
183.5
146.8
163.9
163.4
164.2
163.7
164.1
163.5
184.8
146.7
163.9
185.1
146.7
163.6
163.7
185.7
147.2
164.2
163.8
163.7
186.3
147.3
164.7
164.2
164.1
184.9
148.5
165.1
164.6
164.5
185.2
149.2
165.5
165.1
165.1
185.2
149.2
165.7
165.2
165.1
184.8
150.5
165.9
165.4
165.4
185.9
149.8
166.6
166.1
164.2
185.0
147.9
163.9
163.6
164.3
184.2
146.4
150.8
198.2
159.6
203.1
161.2
208.6
162.3
200.3
161.5
199.9
156.1
203.3
156.2
207.2
156.1
203.2
155.7
202.0
156.5
202.1
158.7
202.6
164.1
202.2
164.6
201.2
162.1
204.5
160.4
208.4
133.0
150.8
134.3
153.5
152.3
148.3
168.9
133.5
153.0
151.7
150.5
167.7
134.5
153.3
134.5
152.9
134.2
153.4
151.0
149.4
168.1
134.3
153.6
152.4
147.5
169.2
134.3
153.7
152.4
148.1
169.3
134.5
154.2
152.7
148.6
169.9
134.2
153.9
153.5
148.5
169.2
134.6
153.7
151.3
150.9
168.2
134.3
153.6
151.7
149.0
169.2
133.9
153.0
152.1
145.3
169.0
134.7
153.3
152.3
145.1
169.4
137.1
154.3
154.8
147.0
169.8
104.3
Food......................................................................
Food at home.....................................................
Fruits and vegetables......................................
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage
materials........................................................
Other foods at home.......................................
Sugar and sweets...........................................
Fats and oils...................................................
Other foods....................................................
150.2
146.9
165.5
153.0
147.2
168.7
168.2
153.3
149.0
168.7
166.3
185.6
150.2
102.6
104.9
104.1
105.9
104.9
105.6
105.0
104.9
104.2
104.8
105.3
104.3
103.9
105.7
Food away from home1.......................................
161.1
165.1
163.5
164.2
164.5
164.6
164.6
165.1
165.6
165.8
166.2
166.5
166.8
167.2
Other food away from home1,2.......................
101.6
165.7
105.2
169.7
103.5
167.6
163.8
103.7
168.6
103.7
168.4
104.0
168.8
104.3
169.3
104.4
169.5
105.5
169.9
105.8
170.2
106.4
170.7
106.8
170.5
106.9
171.2
106.9
171.8
107.5
172.4
Housing..................................................................
160.4
182.1
163.9
187.3
161.8
184.7
162.3
185.5
162.8
186.3
163.0
186.6
163.0
186.5
164.1
187.2
164.7
188.0
165.0
188.3
165.2
188.3
165.0
188.5
164.9
188.6
164.8
188.6
165.8
189.8
Other miscellaneous foods1,2....................
Shelter................................................................
Lodqinq away from home2...............................
Owners' equivalent rent of primary residence3
172.1
177.5
175 3
175 6
176 0
176 4
176 7
177 1
109.0
187.8
112.3
192.9
107.1
114.5
114.6
111.8
191.5
191.9
192.2
113.8
192.6
117.1
191.0
110.5
191.3
193.0
117.1
193.4
113.8
193.9
113.1
194.2
108.5
194.9
105.8
195.2
111.3
195.7
100.5
126.5
111.0
87.7
118.4
126.7
102.2
130.2
115.1
87.3
123.0
126.8
102.1
131.1
116.0
87.5
124.0
126.8
102.2
131.4
116.2
89.2
124.1
126.8
102.3
132.7
117.6
93.9
125.3
127.0
102.2
130.3
115.0
97.6
122.0
126.6
102.1
130.0
114.6
100.7
121.4
126.4
102.2
129.6
114.1
106.3
120.3
126,4
102.4
129.9
114.3
114.4
119.8
127.0
127.3
128.3
116.1
127.5
127.1
117.9
131.8
130.5
125.4
134.6
133.6
133.2
126.6
130.1
131.5
121.8
126.8
129.2
116.0
Fuels and utilities............................................
Fuels..............................................................
Fuel oil and other fuels................................
Gas (piped) and electricity...........................
Household furnishings and operations............
Apparel.................................................................
Men's and boys' apparel.................................
Women's and girls' apparel.............................
99.8
128.5
113.7
90.0
121.2
126.6
101.3
128.8
113.5
91.4
120.9
126.7
99.7
126.2
110.9
86.6
118.3
126.8
100.1
126.0
110.6
86.2
118.0
126.7
100.2
125.9
110.5
86.2
117.9
126.7
100.3
125.7
110.2
87.7
117.5
127.2
133.0
131.8
126.0
131.3
131.1
123.3
127.9
129.7
134.2
129.9
120.6
132.7
131.4
126.3
135.2
128.1
117.7
133.5
128.7
133.8
127.3
130.9
131.4
122.6
Infants' and toddlers' apparel1.........................
Footwear..........................................................
Transportation.......................................................
Private transportation.........................................
126.1
129.0
130.0
126.4
128.0
141.6
137.9
125.7
144.4
140.5
125.6
140.4
136.7
124.8
139.8
135.9
125.6
126.4
128.2
129.2
127.6
127.4
126.8
125.4
140.6
136.4
144.3
140.1
144.2
140.2
100.1
143.4
100.1
142 9
100.6
144 4
99.9
143,8
99.6
143 4
99.7
143 3
Gasoline (all types)........................................
Motor vehicle parts and equipment.................
Motor vehicle maintenance and repair............
Public transportation..........................................
150.6
92.2
91.6
101.1
167.1
190.3
152.0
100.7
100.1
100.5
171.9
197.7
150.6
85.0
84.5
101.2
169.8
190.4
148.3
83.6
83.1
100.9
170.4
193.1
147.4
86.3
85.8
100.1
170.6
198.8
148.3
100.9
100.4
100.3
170.9
201.4
Medical care.........................................................
Medical care commodities.................................
Medical care services.........................................
Professional services.......................................
Hospital and related services..........................
242.1
221.8
246.8
222.2
287.5
250.6
230.7
255.1
229.2
247.7
299.5
246.6
225.9
251.3
225.8
294.4
226.8
252.6
226.8
296.2
248.3
227.7
253.1
227.4
296.6
229.3
253.5
228.2
296.3
Recreation2..........................................................
101.1
102.1
101.7
101.8
101.8
102.0
Video and audio1,2............................................
101.1
100.7
101.4
101.6
101.2
101.0
Education and communication2...........................
100.3
101.2
100.9
100.9
100.8
100.7
Education2........................................................
Educational books and supplies....................
102.1
250.8
107.0
261.7
105.0
258.4
105.3
261.3
105.4
261.4
105.5
261.2
Tuition, other school fees, and child care......
294.2
98.7
308.4
96.0
302.4
97.3
303.3
96.9
303.5
96.6
303.8
96.3
304.1
95.7
98.5
100.7
95.5
96.9
100.7
96.5
100.4
96.1
100.2
95.8
100.1
100.0
other than telephone services1,4..............
Personal computers and peripheral
39.9
30.5
33.8
33.3
32.4
32.1
30.9
equipment1,2........................................
Other goods and services.....................................
Tobacco and smoking products........................
78.2
237.7
274.8
53.5
61.4
59.7
57.6
56.8
258.3
355.8
255.4
354.2
255.0
348.7
253.3
335.9
256.1
349.9
Personal care1...................................................
Used cars and trucks1....................................
Motor fuel.........................................................
Communication1,2.............................................
Information and information processing1,2....
Telephone services1,2.................................
Information and information processing
249.1
134.0
128.4
127.4
128.3
129.9
132.4
143.4
139.7
125.2
144.7
140.6
123.8
145.7
141.9
124.7
146.5
142.9
126.1
147.3
143.3
132.6
126.4
147.6
143.6
133.0
123.7
148.3
144.4
121.6
148.3
144.4
99.7
99.7
99.8
99.7
100.1
100.5
100.9
101.1
100.8
149.6
101.4
150.9
99.2
98.6
100.1
171.7
192.6
152.3
102.5
101.9
100.0
172.1
200.8
153.8
107.8
107.2
100.1
172.1
197.1
155.7
110.3
109.7
100.6
172.8
194.7
156.4
110.0
109.4
100.5
173.2
201.5
156.1
109.3
108.7
101.2
173.6
202.2
155.0
112.2
111.5
100.8
173.8
201.2
153.9
112.6
111.9
100.8
174.6
199.5
251.1
231.7
255.5
229.8
299.3
251.9
232.5
256.2
230.1
252.8
233.2
257.1
230.9
302.9
254.2
301.3
252.3
233.1
256.6
230.4
302.1
253.3
233.7
257.7
231.4
297.0
250.2
230.5
254.6
229.3
297.6
303.9
234.6
258.5
231.7
306.3
255.5
235.2
260.1
233.1
308.4
102.2
102.2
102.2
102.2
101.7
101.8
101.9
102.0
102.3
100.9
100.7
100.6
100.9
100.1
100.1
100.1
100.1
100.5
100.4
100.3
100.4
101.2
101.9
102.1
102.2
102.3
102.7
105.6
261.6
105.7
262.1
106.0
262.3
107.5
264.5
109.4
267.0
109.6
269.0
109.3
255.7
109.3
256.0
110.2
273.9
304.4
95.5
305.4
95.5
309.9
95.6
315.3
95.3
315.9
95.3
316.3
95.9
316.3
95.9
317.3
96.0
95.2
94.9
94.9
95.0
94.7
94.7
95.3
95.4
95.5
99.6
99.7
99.5
99.8
99.6
99.8
100.6
100.7
100.9
29.8
30.0
29.8
29.3
28.7
28.2
28.2
28.0
55.7
54.5
50.9
257.6
350.1
49.7
262.6
373.8
48.2
263.2
373.3
47.2
46.4
255.9
343.2
52.9
258.3
356.0
47.0
255.8
345.5
263.0
369.8
263.0
369.1
264.7
375.1
163.4
100.8
100.2
171.3
198.4
249.5
229.4
254.0
228.6
133.3
156.7
161.1
158.9
159.4
160.0
160.2
160.7
161.1
161.1
161.4
161.8
162.4
162.8
162.9
Personal care products1..................................
148.3
151.8
149.9
149.8
150.8
150.9
150.9
152.6
152.0
152.3
153.0
153.4
153.3
152.5
152.8
Personal care services1..............................
166.0
171.4
168.8
169.3
169.9
170.3
171.0
170.9
171.4
171.9
172.1
172.9
173.9
174.3
174.9
98 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
28. Continued—Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city average,
by expenditure category and commodity or service group
[1 9 8 2 -8 4 = 100, u nless otherwise indicated]___________________________________
1998
1999
2000
1999
Annual average
Series
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Miscellaneous personal services.....................
234.7
243.0
238.9
240.6
241.1
241.4
242.1
242.4
242.9
243.9
244.6
245.6
246.0
246.6
247.6
Commodity and service group:
Commodities..........................................................
141.9
144.4
142.5
142.2
146.2
165.1
165.7
130.5
132.6
132.5
137.5
131.3
131.9
136.6
130.9
131.9
136.7
127.9
132.8
138.2
134.2
127.3
132.5
138.0
127.5
134.3
141.0
131.8
165.5
134.9
146.1
165.9
134.4
146.2
164.2
144.5
164.7
146.4
163.8
129.6
131.9
129.7
143.9
164.1
145.8
163.9
129.9
131.8
144.6
163.9
133.2
138.6
143.9
164.6
142.6
163.7
144.5
161.1
126.1
145.6
125.8
144.8
125.7
146.8
125.6
148.8
125.4
Food and beverages...........................................
Commodities less food and beverages..............
Nondurables less food and beverages............
Apparel...........................................................
133.0
130.2
133.2
132.7
135.2
164.2
166.6
134.0
140.5
141.9
134.6
141.3
134.6
133.6
140.9
130.1
126.8
151.2
125.7
151.2
125.9
150.7
126.0
152.1
125.9
153.1
125.7
Nondurables less food, beverages,
and apparel....................................................
137.4
Durables.............................................................
127.6
146.0
126.0
138.8
127.1
138.0
126.4
138.5
126.0
Services..................................................................
184.2
188.8
186.3
186.9
187.6
187.8
187.9
188.6
189.5
189.9
190.1
190.2
190.5
190.5
191.4
Rent of shelter3..................................................
Transportation services...................................
189.6
187.9
195.0
190.7
192.3
188.8
193.9
190.7
194.3
191.0
196.3
192.7
196.3
192.8
220.5
221.3
221.7
195.7
191.0
222.6
196.3
191.9
223.1
194.9
189.3
222.2
196.1
189.9
216.9
194.2
190.4
221.9
196.1
190.2
Other services.....................................................
Special indexes:
193.1
189.3
221.1
223.9
224.5
225.1
226.0
226.5
197.6
193.0
227.4
All items less food...............................................
All Items less shelter...........................................
163.4
157.2
167.0
160.2
164.5
158.1
164.7
158.1
165.3
158.5
166.7
159.9
166.7
159.7
167.2
160.1
167.7
160.6
158.6
162.0
162.5
134.0
139.4
161.6
133.4
168.8
162.1
163.6
132.0
134.6
139.2
146.9
135.8
147.5
151.2
147.9
160.0
131.1
134.0
140.0
147.9
168.8
162.0
163.6
Commodities less food......................................
Nondurables less food.......................................
Nondurables less food and apparel..................
159.8
131.4
168.5
161.6
163.2
168.8
162.1
All Items less medical care................................
166.6
159.9
161.6
136.1
143.1
151.9
153.7
135.9
142.8
153.2
153.6
191.8
195.8
193.3
178.4
102.9
182.7
106.6
174.4
177.0
144.1
Nondurables.......................................................
Services less rent of shelter3.............................
Services less medical care services.................
Energy.................................................................
All items less energy..........................................
170.9
173.4
143.2
145.7
160.5
161.6
131.7
134.6
140.4
138.6
146.3
162.0
133.4
138.7
148.2
142.8
152.3
153.2
136.3
143.7
152.3
154.0
163.6
169.2
162.3
164.0
135.6
142.4
154.2
148.5
147.0
151.4
134.3
140.1
147.0
151.4
150.5
150.6
134.0
139.9
150.0
151.5
193.8
194.2
194.5
194.7
195.6
196.5
196.9
197.3
197.4
197.9
198.0
198.6
180.3
98.1
172.9
180.9
97.3
173.2
181.5
98.4
173.7
181.8
105.0
174.2
181.8
105.6
174.1
183.4
108.7
183.8
111.3
174.5
183.9
113.2
175.1
184.1
111.6
175.7
185.1
112.5
176.2
176.2
176.8
143.7
83.9
194.0
143.9
86.4
194.7
144.9
99.9
195.0
176.6
144.5
177.1
143.0
177.7
144.6
100.3
195.0
98.3
195.3
101.3
196.1
106.3
196.5
109.1
196.6
178.3
145.3
109.1
197.2
184.3
111.2
175.8
178.4
184.3
112.2
175.7
175.7
182.6
106.8
174.0
176.6
143.7
163.8
487.8
490.5
133.9
140.7
135.3
140.5
174.3
176.9
143.2
178.2
144.2
153.7
178.7
92.1
190.6
100.0
195.7
175.3
143.7
85.2
193.2
All Items....................................................................
All items (1967 - 100).............................................
159.7
475.6
163.2
486.2
161.0
479.7
161.1
479.8
161.4
480.9
162.7
484.7
162.8
484.9
162.8
485.0
163.3
486.3
Food and beverages..............................................
160.4
163.8
163.4
162.9
162.6
162.3
183.2
146.4
163.3
162.8
163.4
163.9
163.0
163.5
164.3
163.9
164.7
164.4
163.0
184.7
147.6
163.0
162.6
162.6
183.5
146.7
163.3
162.9
Cereals and bakery products...........................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs..........................
163.1
162.8
163.1
184.0
146.0
163.0
160.0
160.0
180.9
147.0
162.6
184.8
146.1
162.5
185.5
146.9
162.5
186.1
146.8
162.9
184.8
148.2
163.5
185.0
148.9
164.0
185.0
148.8
164.5
164.0
184.5
150.1
150.4
197.0
159.4
201.8
161.1
207.3
162.2
199.3
161.5
198.7
155.7
201.7
155.8
205.3
155.7
201.9
155.3
201.0
156.0
201.2
158.4
201.6
164.0
201.0
164.6
199.8
161.9
202.8
159.9
207.0
131.8
150.2
150.1
146.5
165.4
133.2
132.5
152.4
133.4
133.6
152.3
133.2
133.1
152.6
133.2
152.8
152.0
147.2
133.2
133.0
153.3
153.3
148.1
169.2
133.4
132.7
153.5
152.6
148.3
169.7
152.9
153.2
148.6
168.5
152.3
152.0
144.9
133.5
152.7
136.0
153.7
154.8
146.8
169.8
Other miscellaneous foods1,2......................
102.6
Food away from home1.......................................
All items less food and energy........................
Commodities less food and energy..............
Energy commodities....................................
Services less energy.....................................
145.0
108.7
197.5
111.8
197.7
143.6
112.8
198.7
165.0
491.5
165.1
491.7
165.1
491.8
165.5
492.9
164.9
165.2
164.7
164.2
185.7
149.4
165.9
165.4
CO NSUM ER PRICE INDEX FOR URBAN
W AG E EARNERS AND CLERICAL W ORKERS
Fruits and vegetables.......................................
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage
materials.........................................................
Other foods at home........................................
Sugar and sweets..........................................
Fats and oils....................................................
Other foods.....................................................
162.6
162.2
184.5
146.3
164.7
165.1
185.5
149.8
151.8
150.1
167.7
152.6
151.3
150.6
168.1
151.1
148.9
168.0
148.6
169.0
152.8
147.0
168.5
169.0
133.1
153.0
152.0
147.8
169.2
104.6
104.2
105.9
105.0
105.2
104.7
104.4
103.9
104.4
105.1
103.8
103.4
105.2
103.9
161.1
165.0
163.5
164.1
164.4
164.5
164.4
164.9
165.5
165.8
166.1
166.5
166.8
167.1
Other food away from home1,2.......................
101.6
164.6
105.1
168.8
103.6
166.5
163.8
103.7
167.6
103.8
167.3
104.1
167.8
104.2
168.5
104.5
168.7
105.3
169.1
105.8
169.2
106.2
169.8
106.6
169.5
106.8
170.4
106.9
171.0
107.4
171.6
Housing...................................................................
156.7
176.6
160.0
181.6
158.1
179.3
158.4
179.9
158.8
180.5
159.1
180.8
159.2
180.9
160.2
181.5
160.7
182.0
161.0
182.4
161.3
182.6
161.0
182.8
161.1
183.1
161.1
183.3
161.8
184.1
176.0
176.4
176.8
177.1
177.5
178.0
178.4
112.0
113.8
116.7
116.8
113.8
179.9
105.7
175.1
175.4
175.7
176.1
176.5
113.1
176.8
179.3
108.4
180.3
114.5
174.8
177.4
177.8
178.2
100.6
125.5
109.7
100.9
126.3
110.6
102.3
130.2
114.7
102.3
131.4
102.4
130.1
114.4
102.4
129.2
113.5
93.9
124.9
124.8
130.5
130.3
123.3
97.7
121.5
124.5
133.1
134.0
126.0
102.3
129.8
114.0
100.7
102.6
129.5
113.6
114.0
119.4
128.6
114.4
115.9
89.3
123.7
124.7
126.4
127.2
116.0
102.5
132.6
117.2
87.8
122.6
124.8
102.2
131.1
115.7
87.6
Shelter..................................................................
152.8
152.2
147.9
168.8
153.0
151.7
171.7
177.1
174.9
175.3
Lodqlnq away from home2...............................
109.0
122.2
107.1
110.3
175.6
114.2
Owners' equivalent rent of primary residence3
171.1
175.7
173.9
174.2
174.5
Fuels and utilities.............................................
100.0
128.4
101.6
128.7
113.0
91.7
120.4
124.7
100.4
125.8
110.2
100.6
125.8
113.3
90.3
120.8
125.0
131.6
131.4
100.1
126.0
110.4
87.1
117.7
85.8
117.3
124.9
131.1
131.6
123.9
88.1
116.9
88.0
117.9
125.2
133.7
133.6
126.5
124.8
133.0
134.0
125.5
110.0
168.8
152.3
144.7
169.4
120.9
124.2
132.3
133.3
124.4
106.0
119.8
124.2
129.C
131.6
119.8
110.8
123.9
130.1
131.2
121.3
125.0
127.1
128.1
116.4
86.8
117.5
124.8
128.5
129.9
118.8
Infants' and toddlers’ apparel1.........................
Footwear...........................................................
126.7
128.7
140.5
138.0
130.3
126.2
143.4
140.7
130.8
126.1
139.1
136.5
127.2
125.4
138.3
135.6
126.5
126.8
139.1
136.2
129.3
129.5
142.9
140.1
128.9
127.9
143.1
140.3
128.0
125.8
142.4
139.9
128.4
125.8
143.7
140.9
129.6
124.4
145.0
142.4
131.4
125.1
146.0
143.6
134.1
126.6
146.6
143.9
134.3
126.9
146.9
144.2
134.8
124.2
147.6
145.0
134.9
122,3
147.7
145.1
New and used motor vehicles2........................
100.3
100.4
100.6
99.9
99.5
99.7
99.8
100.0
100.1
100.2
100.7
101.2
101.5
101.5
101.2
Fuel oil and other fuels.................................
Gas (piped) and electricity...........................
Household furnishings and operations............
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
129.6
131.6
120.6
123.6
124.9
126.4
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
124.5
125.9
129.3
114.2
99
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
28. Continued—Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city average,
by expenditure category and commodity or service group
[1 9 8 2 -8 4 - 100, u n less otherw ise indicated]___________________________________
Series
Annual average
1998
1999
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
144.6
144.0
145.5
145.0
144.5
144 5
144 0
143 6
143 2
142 6
142 8
143,5
144 3
144 7
144 5
Used cars and trucks1.....................................
152.0
153.3
151.8
149.6
148.7
149.6
150.9
152.2
153.7
155.2
157.0
157.7
157.3
156.3
155.3
Motor fuel............................................................
92.2
100.8
85.0
86.4
110.0
109.5
112.3
112.9
84.5
85.9
98.7
102.6
102.1
110.6
100.2
101.3
100.8
107.8
91.7
100.8
100.3
99.2
Gasoline (all types)..........................................
83.5
83.0
107.3
110.0
109.4
108.9
111.7
112.3
Motor vehicle parts and equipment..................
100.5
100.0
100.5
99.8
99.6
99.7
99.6
99.5
99.6
99.9
99.8
100.6
100.2
100.3
Motor vehicle maintenance and repair............
Public transportation.............................................
168.2
172.0
194.1
172.3
196.4
173.1
173.5
173.5
174.3
174.7
175.1
175.2
186.8
171.8
189.1
172.7
187.1
173.3
193.1
100.6
171.2
193.9
189.0
195.7
192.5
190.7
196.3
197.0
196.0
176.1
194.8
Medical care.............................................................
241.4
249.7
251.0
251.4
253.2
254.5
226.6
227.8
228.4
229.0
251.9
229.1
252.5
223.9
248.7
225.7
250.3
226.8
248.2
225.7
249.4
218.6
246.9
223.2
247.5
Medical care commodities...................................
245.8
222.4
229.5
230.2
230.7
Medical care services...........................................
246.6
254.9
251.0
252.3
252.8
253.3
253.8
254.5
256.4
257.0
257.6
258.4
259.9
223.7
230.8
227.3
228.3
228.9
229.7
230.2
283.6
295.5
290 4
292 4
292 8
292 3
293 0
231.0
293 6
255.3
231.4
256.0
Professional services.........................................
231.7
297 3
232.0
298 2
232.5
298 9
233.1
299 8
233.4
302 1
234.8
304 1
295 3
100.9
101.3
101.2
101.3
101.3
101.4
101.5
101.6
101.6
101.5
101.0
101.1
101.0
101.2
101.4
101.1
100.5
101.3
101.4
101.0
100.8
100.6
100.5
100.4
100.7
99.8
99.9
99.9
99.8
100.2
Education and communication2............................
100.4
101.5
101.2
101.2
101.0
100.9
100.7
100.7
100.8
101.5
102.1
102.3
102.5
102.5
103.0
Education2............................................................
Educational books and supplies.....................
102.1
105.1
260.8
105.5
263.9
105.6
264.0
105.7
106.0
264.8
106.3
265.0
107.7
267.2
109.5
269.9
109.7
271.8
109.4
263.9
105.9
264.3
109.4
253.1
107.2
264.1
256.5
256.9
110.5
276.6
311.7
Tuition, other school fees, and child care......
288.5
302.8
296.6
297.8
298.0
298.3
298.7
299.2
300.2
304.1
309.5
310.0
310.4
310.4
Communication1'2...............................................
99.1
96.9
98.1
97.7
97.4
97.0
96.5
96.4
96.3
96.5
96.2
96.3
96.9
97.0
97.1
Information and information processing1,2....
99.0
96.5
97.8
97.4
97.1
96.7
96.2
96.0
96.0
96.1
95.8
95.9
96.6
96.6
96.7
Telephone services1,2..................................
Information and information processing
100.7
100.2
100.8
100.5
100.4
100.0
99.8
99.9
99.7
99.9
99.7
100.0
100.8
100.9
101.1
other than teleohone services1,4...............
Personal computers and peripheral
41.2
31.6
35.0
34.4
33.5
33.0
31.8
30.8
31.1
30.8
30.3
29.9
29.3
29.3
28.9
77.9
53.1
61.1
59.3
56.9
55.9
55.1
54.0
52.5
50.6
49.4
48.1
46.9
46.9
45.7
Other goods and services.......................................
Tobacco and smoking products.........................
236.1
274.8
261.9
356.2
259.2
354.5
258.3
348.9
255.6
259.5
258.8
258.7
260.7
350.5
345.9
343.5
350.6
267.3
374.4
267.9
336.0
262.0
356.6
374.0
267.4
370.4
267.3
369.7
269.3
375.7
Personal care1......................................................
156.8
161.3
159.1
159.6
160.3
160.4
160.8
161.3
161.3
161.6
161.9
162.6
163.0
163.1
163.5
Personal care products1...................................
149.3
152.5
150.7
150.8
151.6
151.7
151.6
153.3
152.7
153.1
153.7
154.1
154.0
153.1
153.4
166.3
171.7
169.1
169.6
170.2
170.6
171.4
171.2
171.8
172.2
172.4
173.2
174.4
174.7
175.3
234.0
243.1
239.1
240.8
241.4
241.7
242.3
242.6
243.2
243.8
244.5
245.5
245.9
246.7
247.6
141.8
144.7
142.5
142 2
142 5
144.7
144.6
144 0
144 2
144 8
146 3
146 8
146 6
146 6
160.4
130.6
163.8
133.2
.163.1
130.4
163 0
162 9
163 3
163 3
130.3
133.1
133 4
132 5
163 4
132 7
163 9
133 4
164 3
135 4
164 7
165 9
164 9
135 6
165 2
135 4
165 9
135 1
132.0
127.1
129 9
131.8
163 0
133 6
139.1
138.8
137.0
131.1
133.7
133.0
129.6
137.5
126.4
138.8
126.4
142.1
128.5
130.5
142.9
133.1
142.2
132.3
142.0
129.0
125.9
Miscellaneous personal services.....................
Commodity and service group:
Nondurables less food and beverages............
Apparel.............................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages,
132.1
138.1
131.6
130.1
137.0
147.2
139.2
138 2
138 7
146 7
146 6
145 7
148 1
150 2
153 2
153 1
152 5
153 9
155 0
Durables..............................................................
127.3
126.0
126.9
126.1
125.7
125.8
125.6
125.6
125.7
125.7
126.1
126.3
126.4
126.3
126.0
Services...................................................................
181.0
185.3
183.0
183.5
184.0
184.2
184.4
185.2
185.9
186.3
186.6
186.7
187.1
187.2
187.9
Rent of shelter3...................................................
Transportation services....................................
Other services.....................................................
170.1
185.4
213.7
174.9
187.9
173.2
186.8
173.8
187.8
174.1
187.9
175.3
188.0
175.6
187.4
177.3
190.2
218.1
218.8
219.2
220.3
176.1
189.0
221.6
176.5
189.9
217.8
175.8
187.3
220.9
176.3
189.8
217.7
174.2
187.5
218.4
174.7
186.7
219.6
172.7
186.4
217.1
222.3
222.9
223.8
165.4
141.7
Special indexes:
All items less food...............................................
159.5
163.1
160.5
162.6
157.7
164.7
165.0
165.1
165.1
155.9
162.6
157.7
163.7
158.1
161.1
156.1
163.2
155.0
160.6
155.8
162.7
All items less shelter...........................................
157.6
158.0
158.6
159.7
160.1
160.1
160.1
160.3
All items less medical care.................................
155.8
159.2
157.1
157.1
157.5
158.8
158.8
158.8
159.2
159.7
160.7
161.0
161.1
161.1
161.4
Commodities less food.......................................
Nondurables less food........................................
132.0
134.1
138.7
134.6
140.0
131.8
134.1
131.3
134.0
131.8
135.1
135.0
134.8
133.9
134.2
137.2
137.0
136.8
143.8
154.7
147.8
148.3
150.5
150.8
151.7
154.0
153.6
144.0
153.4
151.3
140.0
147.7
144.6
153.8
136.5
143.6
140.9
139.4
149.3
143.8
148.4
138.9
147.0
146.5
140.6
147.9
151.4
134.8
140.7
151.2
136.7
140.8
147.9
151.4
154.3
154.0
154.0
Nondurables less food and apparel...................
Nondurables........................................................
140.5
155.8
154.2
Services less rent of shelter3.............................
Services less medical care services..................
Energy..................................................................
170.7
174.1
171.9
172.3
172.6
172.7
173.0
174.0
174.7
175.0
175.5
175.4
175.8
175.9
176.4
175.4
102.1
179.5
106.1
177.3
97.0
177.8
96.1
179.4
106.2
180.1
108.4
180.4
111.1
180.7
113.1
180.8
111.4
181.9
112.5
171.1
169.8
170.0
170.7
170.9
171.1
171.8
172.4
172.5
172.8
All items less food and energy.........................
169.6
142.7
173.1
171.6
171.9
172.2
172.9
172.8
170.6
172.7
181.1
111.0
172.6
181.2
112.1
167.6
178.4
104.5
170.7
178.6
105.2
All items less energy...........................................
178.2
97.5
170.2
172.9
173.1
173.9
174.7
174.5
174.8
144.3
144.0
143.7
143.7
143.5
143.3
83.8
86.6
191.5
191.8
191.9
101.8
192.8
106.8
193.2
109.4
190.9
98.6
192.2
109.1
194.4
144.6
112.1
194.7
144.1
85.2
190.3
145.0
109.7
145.4
100.3
192.6
144.5
100.6
143.8
92.3
187.7
144.8
100.2
174.5
145.7
Commodities less food and energy...............
Energy commodities.....................................
Services less energy......................................
1 Not seasonally adjusted.
193.4
194.0
4 Indexes on a December 1988 = 100 base.
2 Indexes on a December 1997 = 100 base.
3 Indexes on a December 1982 = 100 base.
100 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
No
March 2000
t e
:
In d e x a p p lie s to a m o n th a s a w h o le , n o t t o a n y s p e c if ic d a t e .
113.1
195.5
29.
Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
[1 9 8 2 -8 4 = 100, u n less oth erw ise indicated]
Area
Pricing
schedule1
Urban Wage Earners
All Urban Consumers
1999
1998
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Dec.
2000
1998
Jan.
Dec.
2000
1999
Jan.
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
168.3
168.3
168.7
160.7
161.0
164.7
165.0
165.1
165.1
165.5
173.0
M
163.9
164.3
167.9
168.2
Northeast urban.........................................................................
M
171.2
171.4
174.8
175.5
175.5
175.5
176.1
168.2
168.4
171.9
172.5
172.6
172.6
Size A— More than 1,500,000.............................................
M
172.2
172.5
175.7
176.4
176.5
176.3
176.9
168.2
168.5
171.8
172.5
172.7
172.4
172.8
Size B/C— 50,000 to 1,500,0003........................................
M
102.5
102.6
105.1
105.3
105.1
105.4
105.8
102.3
102.4
104.7
105.0
105.0
105.2
105.5
U.S. city average................................................................
Region and area size2
M
159.8
160.4
164.3
164.3
164.6
164.4
164.8
156.0
156.6
160.6
160.6
160.9
160.7
161.2
Size A— More than 1,500,000.............................................
M
161.0
161.6
165.7
165.7
165.6
165.5
166.1
156.5
157.1
161.1
161.1
161.0
161.1
161.6
Size B/C— 50,000 to 1,500,0003........................................
Size D— Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)....................
M
102.3
102.6
105.1
105.0
105.6
105.3
105.5
102.0
102.3
105.1
105.0
105.5
105.3
105.5
M
155.0
155.5
158.6
158.7
159.3
158.9
159.0
153.3
153.6
157.1
157.2
157.6
157.3
157.6
South urban...............................................................................
M
159.6
159.9
163.2
163.6
163.5
163.6
164.0
157.8
157.9
161.5
161.9
161.8
162.0
162.2
Size A— More than 1,500,000.............................................
M
158.3
158.9
162.7
163.2
162.9
163.0
163.5
156.0
156.4
160.4
160.9
160.6
160.9
161.2
Size B/C—50 000 to 1 500 0003........................................
Size D— Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)....................
M
102.8
102.9
104.8
105.1
105.1
105.2
105.3
102.5
102.5
104.6
104.9
104.9
105.0
105.1
M
160.4
160.8
164.1
164.1
164.1
163.5
164.4
160.8
161.1
164.8
164.8
165.0
164.6
165.1
West urban................................................................................
M
165.8
166.4
170.0
170.4
170.4
170.5
171.0
161.8
162.4
165.8
166.2
166.2
166.4
166.7
Size A— More than 1,500,000.............................................
M
166.5
167.3
171.2
171.6
171.6
171.7
172.3
160.8
161.6
165.3
165.6
165.7
165.8
166.3
Size B/C— 50 000 to 1 500,0003........................................
M
103.4
103.6
105.2
105.5
105.5
105.7
105.7
103.3
103.4
105.1
105.4
105.3
105.5
105.5
M
M
M
148.4
102.7
160.2
148.9
102.9
160.6
152.2
105.0
163.7
152.6
105.2
163.8
152.5
105.3
164.2
152.5
105.3
163.7
153.0
105.5
164.3
146.9
102.5
159.2
147.4
102.6
159.6
150.8
104.8
163.0
151.2
105.0
163.1
151.2
105.0
163.5
151.2
105.2
163.1
151.6
105.3
163.5
164.5
4
Size classes:
A5
D
..............................................................................
Selected local areas6
M
165.1
166.1
169.7
169.7
169.3
169.2
170.1
159.6
160.5
164.1
164.0
163.7
163.7
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA.......................
M
163.5
164.2
167.2
167.2
167.1
167.3
167.9
157.2
157.8
160.7
160.7
160.6
160.9
161.2
New York, NY-Northern NJ-Long Island, NY-N J-CT-PA .
M
174.7
178.2
178.9
178.6
170.5
170.8
173.9
174.5
174.6
174.3
174.6
1
174.1
176.8
_
178.8
179.2
_
175.0
179.2
_
180.2
_
172.2
175.2
-
177.8
-
178.6
Cleveland-Akron, OH...............................................................
1
-
160.6
164.2
-
-
164.4
-
152.7
156.4
-
156.8
159.8
160.1
_
160.4
-
154.6
159.6
-
156.1
155.0
_
163.8
159.8
-
160.3
105.3
Atlanta, GA.................................................................................
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA -N J-DE-M D....
1
_
1
-
102.8
105.4
-
105.0
-
105.3
-
102.7
105.3
-
104.9
-
2
161.6
-
-
166.5
-
167.0
-
158.8
-
-
164.0
-
164.6
-
2
161.2
165.9
_
165.6
_
155.9
-
-
160.4
-
160.4
-
2
146.1
151.2
_
150.3
144.8
-
_
149.9
_
149.2
_
158.7
_
_
161.9
_
162.7
-
168.5
-
-
174.3
-
172.8
-
2
161.1
2
169.0
_
-
_
_
_
-
164.1
_
174.4
-
164.8
_
_
172.9
-
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA ............................................
2
167.4
-
-
175.2
-
174.5
-
163.7
-
-
171.2
-
170.9
-
Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA ..........................................................
2
169.4
-
-
174.7
-
174.4
-
164.9
-
-
170.2
-
170.1
-
1 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas; most other goods
and services priced as indicated:
MO-KS; Milwaukee-Racine, Wl;
FL.
M— Every month.
1— January, March, May, July, September, and November.
7
2—
- Data not available.
February, April, June, August, October, and December.
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI; Pittsburgh, PA; Port-
land-Salem, OR-WA; St Louis, MO-IL; San Diego, CA; Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater,
Indexes on a November 1996 = 100 base.
2 Regions defined as the four Census regions.
3 Indexes on a December 1996 = 100 base.
4 The "North Central" region has been renamed the "Midwest" region by the Census Bureau.
It is composed of the same geographic entities.
5 Indexes on a December 1986 = 100 base.
6 In addition, the following metropolitan areas are published semiannually and appear in
tables 34 and 39 of the January and July issues of the c p i D e ta ile d R e p o rt : Anchorage, AK;
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local
index has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling and
other measurement error. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the
national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI for use in their
escalator clauses. Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific date.
Cindnnati-Hamilton, O H-KY-IN; Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO; Honolulu, HI; Kansas City,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
101
Current Labor Statistics:
30.
Price Data
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups
[ 1 9 8 2 -8 4 = 100]
___________________________________________
1991
Series
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
Food and beverages:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
Housing:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
Apparel:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
Transportation:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change............................................................
Medical care:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change............................................................
Other goods and services:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners
and Clerical Workers:
All items:
Index...............................................................................
Percent change.............................................................
102
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
136.2
4.2
140.3
3.0
144.5
3.0
148.2
2.6
152.4
2.8
156.9
3.0
160.5
2.3
163.0
1.6
166.6
2.2
136.8
3.6
138.7
1.4
141.6
2.1
144.9
2.3
148.9
2.8
153.7
3.2
157.7
2.6
161.1
2.2
164.6
2.2
133.6
4.0
137.5
2.9
141.2
2.7
144.8
2.5
148.5
2.6
152.8
2.9
156.8
2.6
160.4
2.3
163.9
2.2
128.7
3.7
131.9
2.5
133.7
1.4
133.4
-.2
132.0
-1 .0
131.7
-.2
132.9
.9
133.0
.1
131.3
-1 .3
123.8
2.7
126.5
2.2
130.4
3.1
134.3
3.0
139.1
3.6
143.0
2.8
144.3
0.9
141.6
-1 .9
144.4
2.0
177.0
8.7
190.1
7.4
201.4
5.9
211.0
4.8
220.5
4.5
228.2
3.5
234.6
2.8
242.1
3.2
250.6
3.5
171.6
7.9
183.3
6.8
192.9
5.2
198.5
2.9
206.9
4.2
215.4
4.1
224.8
4.4
237.7
5.7
258.3
8.7
134.3
4.1
138.2
2.9
142.1
2.8
145.6
2.5
149.8
2.9
154.1
2.9
157.6
2.3
159.7
1.3
163.2
2.2
March 2000
31.
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
[1982 = 100]
Grouping
Annual average
1998
Finished goods......................................
1999p
1999
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
130.7
128.9
134.3
133.1
132.1
135.1
131.4
129.7
135.6
130.8
129.0
134.1
131.1
129.4
134.7
131.9
130.4
133.4
132.4
131.2
134.5
132.7
131.7
135.1
132.9
132.1
134.6
133.7
133.2
135.9
134.7
134.6
136.7
135.0
134.4
135.6
135.0
134.5
135.4
135.0
134.4
135.7
134.7
134.0
135.0
126.4
122.2
132.9
137.6
130.6
127.9
133.0
137.6
127.1
122.9
133.3
137.8
126.6
122.2
133.5
138.0
127.0
122.9
133.1
137.7
129.0
125.7
133.1
137.8
129.6
126.6
132.8
137.6
130.0
127.5
132.3
137.2
130.8
128.9
131.7
137.0
131.9
130.4
131.6
136.9
133.5
132.8
131.2
136.7
133.7
131.6
134.8
138.5
133.9
132.0
134.6
138.3
133.7
131.8
134.6
138.3
133.3
131.3
134.2
138.4
123.0
123.2
120.9
120.4
120.7
121.6
122.2
123.0
123.9
124.6
125.3
125.2
125.4
125.6
125.9
126.1
123.2
126.7
128.0
125.9
124.5
120.9
124.8
125.1
125.7
123.9
124.3
123.0
123.5
125.8
123.5
122.2
122.5
123.2
125.7
123.4
121.4
122.6
123.2
125.7
123.2
118.1
122.7
123.2
125.7
123.8
119.6
123.3
124.3
125.6
124.1
120.0
123.8
124.8
125.7
124.6
119.0
124.8
126.1
125.6
125.0
121.1
125.5
126.2
125.6
125.4
122.0
126.5
126.2
125.7
125.9
122.4
127.3
126.5
125.9
126.0
121.4
127.8
126.8
125.7
126.1
118.5
128.4
127.4
125.7
126.5
117.9
129.0
128.4
125.8
146.8
81.1
140.8
134.8
148.9
84.9
142.5
134.2
146.9
76.1
138.3
134.1
147.3
74.9
138.0
133.8
147.8
76.2
138.5
133.7
148.0
80.6
140.4
133.8
148.5
82.5
141.6
133.7
149.5
84.9
142.2
133.9
150.5
87.6
142.1
133.9
150.4
90.0
143.6
134.2
149.6
92.5
145.7
134.4
149.2
90.3
146.6
134.9
149.3
91.2
146.5
135.1
149.7
91.7
146.5
135.2
150.4
91.7
147.2
135.2
96.8
103.9
88.4
98.2
98.8
94.3
90.1
101.2
79.2
88.2
98.2
78.1
89.0
98.8
79.1
91.1
95.4
84.8
97.4
99.6
92.3
97.4
99.5
92.5
97.9
96.2
95.5
103.1
100.1
101.5
107.3
100.1
108.3
104.9
99.6
104.7
108.6
99.5
110.9
103.9
96.8
105.0
106.3
96.4
109.2
goods, excluding foods................
energy goods.................................
goods less energy........................
consumer goods less energy......
goods less food and energy........
129.5
75.1
141.1
142.5
143.7
132.3
78.9
143.0
145.2
146.1
130.0
71.3
143.0
145.1
145.9
129.7
70.1
142.7
144.6
146.0
129.9
71.2
142.7
144.7
145.8
131.3
75.9
142.3
144.2
145.8
131.6
77.5
142.5
144.6
145.6
131.8
78.6
142.6
144.8
145.5
132.3
80.7
142.3
144.5
145.3
133.0
83.5
142.5
144.9
145.2
134.0
85.8
143.1
145.8
145.7
134.7
83.6
144.2
146.5
147.5
134.8
84.0
144.0
146.4
147.4
134.7
83.8
144.0
146.5
147.4
134.5
83.8
143.6
145.8
147.0
Finished consumer goods less food
and energy...................................................
147.7
151.7
151.2
151.3
151.2
151.2
151.0
151.0
150.9
150.7
151.7
153.5
153.5
153.4
152.8
Consumer nondurable goods less food
and energy................................................
159.1
166.3
165.2
165.2
165.3
165.2
165.2
165.7
165.9
165.7
167.9
168.0
168.3
168.1
167.2
and feeds.....................................................
Intermediate foods and feeds......................
Intermediate energy goods..........................
Intermediate goods less energy..................
123.4
116.2
80.8
132.4
123.9
111.1
84.6
131.7
121.2
114.6
75.9
130.9
120.9
112.6
74.7
130.6
121.2
111.0
76.0
130.6
122.3
109.0
80.3
130.7
122.9
109.8
82.2
131.1
123.7
110.2
84.6
131.5
124.7
109.1
87.2
131.9
125.4
110.9
89.6
132.3
126.0
111.8
92.1
132.5
125.9
112.5
90.0
132.9
126.2
112.0
90.9
133.0
126.5
110.0
91.4
133.1
126.9
109.5
91.4
133.5
Intermediate materials less foods
and energy...................................................
133.5
133.1
131.9
131.8
131.9
132.1
132.5
132.9
133.4
133.7
133.9
134.2
134.4
134.6
135.1
Crude energy materials................................
Crude materials less energy........................
Crude nonfood materials less energy........
68.6
113.6
142.1
78.4
108.0
135.3
61.0
108.1
128.8
58.8
106.4
130.9
60.5
106.6
129.9
68.1
103.9
129.1
77.1
107.6
131.4
77.1
107.7
132.2
80.4
105.8
134.2
87.3
109.4
136.8
95.4
110.0
139.1
89.6
110.6
142.5
97.5
110.6
142.8
89.0
109.3
145.5
92.9
110.4
150.6
Finished consumer goods........................
Finished consumer foods.......................
Finshed consumer goods
excluding foods......................................
Nondurable goods less food.................
Durable goods.......................................
Capital equipment....................................
Intermediate materials,
supplies, and components..................
Materials and components
for manufacturing........................................
Materials for food manufacturing.............
Materials for nondurable manufacturing..
Materials for durable manufacturing........
Components for manufacturing...............
Materials and components
for construction...........................................
Processed fuels and lubricants...................
Containers......................................................
Supplies.........................................................
Crude materials for further
processing..........................................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs.............................
Crude nonfood materials.............................
Special groupings:
Finished
Finished
Finished
Finished
Finished
Intermediate materials less foods
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
103
Current Labor Statistics:
32.
Price Data
Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major industry groups
[December 1984 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
1998
_
10
12
13
14
_
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1999
Annual average
Industry
SIC
1999p
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Total mining industries...............................
70.8
78.0
64.1
62.5
63.4
68.9
76.5
76.3
78.7
84.7
91.5
88.4
93.9
87.5
90.0
Metal mining.....................................................
Coal mining (12/85 - 100)..............................
Oil and gas extraction (12/85 - 100)..............
Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic
minerals, except fuels....................................
73.2
89.5
68.3
70.5
87.2
78.5
68.2
85.5
60.3
69.3
89.2
57.3
68.3
89.3
58.6
69.8
89.9
65.7
69.7
87.8
76.3
67.3
88.2
76.2
68.8
86.9
79.6
69.3
86.9
87.6
70.4
85.9
96.9
77.8
86.9
91.9
73.5
86.5
99.8
72.6
85.1
91.6
73.7
85.9
94.7
132.2
133.9
133.0
133.5
133.6
133.8
133.8
134.2
134.2
134.2
134.3
134.0
134.2
134.4
134.7
126.2
126.3
243.1
118.6
128.3
126.3
325.7
116.3
126.2
126.6
316.5
117.1
125.9
125.8
316.3
116.6
126.3
125.6
315.8
117.0
127.4
124.3
316.0
116.4
127.7
125.3
316.1
116.4
127.8
126.0
316.2
116.3
128.3
125.9
316.1
115.9
129.0
126.8
316.5
116.0
129.7
127.5
344.5
115.9
130.1
127.4
344.4
116.1
130.3
127.2
344.6
116.0
130.6
126.7
345.0
116.1
130.8
126.6
329.5
116.0
124.8
125.3
125.0
125.1
125.2
125.3
125.3
125.1
125.1
125.5
125.6
125.5
125.6
125.6
125.2
157.0
139.7
136.2
161.8
141.2
136.4
156.7
140.5
133.0
158.3
140.5
132.6
160.1
140.6
133.3
160.2
140.7
134.2
161.9
140.9
134.8
165.2
141.1
135.8
168.5
141.3
136.3
166.9
141.6
137.3
163.1
141.8
138.7
159.9
141.8
139.8
160.0
141.8
140.2
160.9
142.2
140.3
161.8
142.3
141.0
174.0
148.7
66.3
122.1
137.1
129.3
120.9
177.5
176.4
176.5
177.0
177.1
177.2
177.2
177.4
177.7
178.1
178.3
178.8
179.2
180.3
149.5
76.8
122.2
136.5
132.6
115.7
147.5
58.6
121.5
135.8
130.7
115.9
147.3
56.2
121.4
136.1
131.5
115.1
147.5
59.9
121.3
136.1
131.7
114.8
147.7
73.7
121.7
136.1
132.1
114.7
148.2
75.4
121.6
136.0
132.5
114.9
149.0
74.2
121.9
136.5
132.7
115.0
149.9
79.6
122.1
136.7
132.7
115.4
150.0
85.3
122.5
136.7
133.1
115.7
151.0
90.2
122.8
136.9
133.2
116.4
151.9
86.8
122.8
137.1
133.5
117.0
152.2
89.6
123.2
137.2
133.7
116.9
152.5
92.8
123.3
137.3
133.6
117.2
153.1
94.2
123.9
137.3
134.2
118.1
Total manufacturing industries...................
Food and kindred products..............................
Tobacco manufactures....................................
Textile mill products.........................................
Apparel and other finished products
made from fabrics and similar materials......
Lumber and wood products,
except furniture..............................................
Furniture and fixtures.......................................
Paper and allied products...............................
27
Printing, publishing, and allied industries.......
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Chemicals and allied products........................
Petroleum refining and related products........
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products.
Leather and leather products..........................
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products.....
Fabricated metal products,
except machinery and transportation
transportation equipment.............................
128.7
129.1
128.8
128.8
128.7
128.9
128.9
129.1
129.1
129.1
129.2
129.4
129.4
129.6
129.8
35
Machinery, except electrical...........................
117.7
117.3
117.4
117.4
117.4
117.5
117.5
117.5
117.3
117.2
117.1
117.2
117.2
117.2
117.2
36
Electrical and electronic machinery,
equipment, and supplies................................
Transportation.................................................
Measuring and controlling instruments;
photographic, medical, and optical
goods; watches and clocks...........................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries
industries (12/85 = 100).................................
110.4
133.6
109.6
134.4
110.0
134.5
109.9
134.8
109.8
134.4
109.7
134.5
109.7
134.1
109.5
133.6
109.5
133.0
109.5
132.9
109.2
132.6
109.2
136.5
109.4
136.1
109.4
136.0
108.9
136.1
126.0
125.7
126.6
126.6
126.4
126.4
125.9
125.3
125.1
125.0
124.9
125.6
125.3
125.4
125.7
129.7
130.3
130.2
130.3
130.4
130.4
130.5
130.5
130.5
130.1
130.0
130.4
130.2
130.6
130.9
111.6
132.3
105.6
124.5
99.2
114.7
135.3
113.3
130.8
98.4
113.6
135.4
106.0
126.6
98.4
113.9
135.4
106.0
128.4
98.2
114.1
135.4
105.8
128.9
98.2
114.2
135.4
106.0
129.6
98.4
114.3
135.4
114.4
130.0
98.5
114.6
135.2
116.8
130.9
98.6
114.8
135.2
117.4
131.4
98.2
115.1
135.2
117.2
131.7
98.2
115.8
135.2
117.3
131.8
98.3
115.4
135.2
117.5
132.4
98.5
115.3
135.2
116.3
133.0
98.4
115.8
135.2
117.2
133.7
98.4
116.5
135.2
116.1
135.4
102.1
37
38
39
Service industries:
42
43
44
45
46
33.
Motor freight transportation
and warehousing (06/93 = 100).....................
Water transportation (12/92 = 100).................
Pipelines, except natural aas (12/92 = 100)....
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
[1982 = 100]
Index
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999p
Finished goods
121.7
124.1
78.1
131.1
123.2
123.3
77.8
134.2
124.7
125.7
78.0
135.8
125.5
126.8
77.0
137.1
127.9
129.0
78.1
140.0
131.3
133.6
83.2
142.0
131.8
134.5
83.4
142.4
130.7
134.3
75.1
143.7
133.1
135.1
78.9
146.1
114.4
115.3
85.1
121.4
114.7
113.9
84.3
122.0
116.2
115.6
84.6
123.8
118.5
118.5
83.0
127.1
124.9
119.5
84.1
135.2
125.7
125.3
89.8
134.0
125.6
123.2
89.0
134.2
123.0
123.2
80.8
133.5
123.2
120.9
84.6
133.1
101.2
105.5
80.4
97.5
100.4
105.1
78.8
94.2
102.4
108.4
76.7
94.1
101.8
106.5
72.1
97.0
102.7
105.8
69.4
105.8
113.8
121.5
85.0
105.7
111.1
112.2
87.3
103.5
96.8
103.9
68.6
84.5
98.2
98.8
78.4
91.1
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components
Crude materials for further processing
104 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
34.
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
[1995 = 100, u n less oth erw ise indicated]
SITC
Rev. 3
1999
Industry
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
0 Food and live a n im a ls .................................................................
01
Meat and meat preparations..............................................
04
Cereals and cereal preparations.......................................
05
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry...........
90.4
90.2
79.3
103.2
89.2
93.3
77.8
97.9
87.8
90.0
75.8
94.9
88.2
88.9
76.7
94.8
89.2
89.9
76.2
97.6
89.2
91.5
75.9
98.5
87.4
94.2
70.9
99.8
87.6
97.3
73.3
97.8
86.6
97.5
72.7
94.3
86.4
97.4
69.5
96.6
86.3
97.7
70.1
94.3
85.6
100.9
68.5
91.2
86.1
99.8
71.0
90.6
2 C rud e m aterials, inedible, exc e p t fu e ls ..............................
21
Hides, skins, and furskins, raw..........................................
22
Oilseeds and oleaginous fruits...........................................
24
Cork and wood.....................................................................
25
Pulp and waste paper.........................................................
26
Textile fibers and their waste.............................................
27
28
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap...................................
75.6
82.7
91.4
81.4
59.7
70.4
93.4
67.7
75.0
81.4
84.9
81.5
61.3
70.8
93.4
68.8
74.0
81.5
78.3
81.5
62.0
69.7
93.6
69.8
74.1
78.9
80.4
81.8
61.9
69.8
93.5
68.6
74.6
79.0
79.5
81.7
62.9
70.1
93.5
70.6
74.9
79.0
79.2
82.0
66.0
68.6
93 5
70.7
74.7
80.3
72.8
82.9
71.5
65.2
93 6
72.3
76.5
83.4
80.1
83.0
73.5
65.1
93 0
73.0
77.7
86.5
85.0
82.8
75.2
64.4
93 3
73.5
78.1
88.6
82.3
83.5
77.1
64.5
93 1
75.1
77.8
87.8
78.1
83.8
78.7
63.4
93 8
77.3
78.9
91.6
79.6
85.0
80.9
62 5
94 1
78.4
80.1
92.3
80.5
86.6
84.2
61 2
94 3
80.1
3 M ineral fuels, lubrica nts , and related p ro d u cts...............
32
Coal, coke, and briquettes.................................................
33
Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials...
93.3
99.3
91.4
93.4
99.3
91.4
93.1
99.3
90.9
99.6
98.3
103.3
100.7
98.4
105.3
102.0
98 3
107.6
109.0
98 2
119.8
113.8
98 3
126.4
115.3
97 6
128.6
119.5
97 6
131.3
121.4
97 6
133.4
126.6
97 5
140.1
128.2
96 7
143.5
98.0
90 6
82 6
82 8
81 9
76 6
76 8
77 1
78 8
81 9
79 0
78 0
75 5
90.6
100.1
101.3
84.6
95.9
100.4
90.6
100.2
101.4
84.4
95.4
100.8
90.5
100.4
101.5
84.4
96.4
100.4
90.4
100.6
101.4
85.5
96.1
99.9
90.7
100.6
101.8
86.6
96.3
99.5
91.2
100.6
101.9
88.4
97.2
99.6
91.6
100.3
101.9
89.7
97.4
99.4
91.8
99.9
101.8
90.6
97.4
99.3
92.3
99.8
102.1
92.1
97.6
99.2
93.3
99.8
102.3
94.4
97.9
98.9
93.3
99.8
103.5
95.1
97.8
98.8
93.5
100.3
103.4
95.2
98.0
99.1
93.2
99.7
103.4
94.7
97.8
99.2
4
5 C h em ica ls and related products, n .e .s ................................
54
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products...........................
55
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations.........
57
Plastics in primary forms (12/92 = 100)...........................
58
Plastics in nonprimary forms (12/92 = 100).....................
59
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s...........................
6 M an u factu red g o o d s classified ch ie fly by m aterials.....
62
64
66
68
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s...............................................
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,
and paperboard..................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s.........................
Nonferrous metals...............................................................
7 M achinery and tra n s p o rt e q u ip m e n t....................................
71
72
74
75
76
Power generating machinery and equipment..................
Machinery specialized for particular industries...............
General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,
and machine parts............................................................
Computer equipment and office machines.......................
Telecommunications and sound recording and
77
78
Electrical machinery and equipment.................................
Road vehicles......................................................................
96.7
96.8
96.4
96.5
96.6
96.8
97.1
97.3
97.5
97.8
98.0
98.3
98.2
106.5
107.6
106.8
105.9
105.9
105.5
105.6
105.8
106.9
108.2
108.4
108.7
104.7
80.3
106.9
84.5
80.8
106.9
85.4
80.9
106.5
84.0
81.9
106.6
84.3
82.9
106.3
84.7
83.4
106.3
85.0
84.4
106.3
85.3
85.4
106.3
87.0
86.3
106.1
88.0
87.2
106.0
90.2
87.6
106.0
90.7
87.2
105.8
92.1
87.3
105.8
93.0
98.1
98.1
97.9
98.0
97.8
97.6
97.3
97.3
97.2
97.4
97.5
97.3
97.3
109.1
105.7
109.3
105.6
109.4
105.7
109.6
105.9
109.5
105.9
109.6
106.1
110.1
105.8
110.1
105.8
110.1
105.9
110.2
106.0
111.0
106.1
110.4
106.1
111.0
106.2
107.0
73.6
107.4
73.3
107.2
73.0
107.3
72.7
107.2
72.2
107.3
71.6
107.5
71.0
107.5
71.0
107.6
70.2
107.7
70.5
107.7
70.4
107.9
70.3
107.9
70.2
97.6
89.9
102.1
97.4
89.9
102.3
97.5
89.3
102.2
97.3
89.6
102.2
97.1
89.0
102.3
96.9
88.6
102.5
97 0
87.7
102.4
96 9
87.5
102.3
96 9
87.6
102.4
96 6
87.4
103.1
96 6
87 3
103.1
96 7
86 8
103.1
96 3
86 4
103.4
104.8
104.8
105.0
105.2
105.4
105.2
105.4
105.4
105.4
105.5
105.6
105.3
105.3
87 Profess iona l, scientific, and controlling
instru m e nts and a p p a ra tu s ....................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
105
Current Labor Statistics:
35.
Price Data
U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
[1995 = 100, u n less otherw ise indicated]
SITC
1999
Industry
Rev. 3
Jan.
0 Food and live a n im a ls .................................................................
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
96.3
93.2
93.2
94.5
94.9
93.3
92.6
92.0
91.5
91.0
92.4
94.7
93.4
Meat and meat preparations..............................................
Fish and crustaceans, mollusks, and other
aquatic Invertebrates.........................................................
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry...........
Coffee, tea, cocoa, spices, and manufactures
thereof.................................................................................
91.9
92.2
94.0
94.5
93.7
94.5
94.3
96.7
99.4
98.4
97.7
98.4
97.9
100.9
112.8
102.7
102.1
103.3
101.7
106.0
104.9
106.0
108.1
104.3
103.2
104.2
103.5
103.8
102.6
103.1
101.6
105.0
96.5
107.5
97.2
106.8
103.4
107.0
101.0
76.2
72.3
71.0
69.5
68.4
69.4
64.3
63.2
61.4
62.0
66.0
70.6
67.2
1 B e verages and to b a c c o .............................................................
110.4
110.0
110.4
110.6
110.4
110.4
110.6
111.2
112.2
111.5
111.5
112.0
111.8
106.7
106.7
106.9
107.2
107.2
107.2
107.6
107.7
109.1
108.5
108.5
108.7
108.7
84.3
87.4
86.3
86.1
88.5
90.3
93.1
92.7
91.7
90.8
90.2
92.1
93.3
Cork and wood.....................................................................
Pulp and waste paper.........................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap...................................
Crude animal and vegetable materials, n.e.s...................
108.6
57.2
90.9
103.4
113.7
57.9
90.4
120.7
113.2
57.6
89.9
109.4
113.6
57.3
89.5
108.6
118.3
58.1
90.9
107.8
122.3
60.6
91.9
101.7
131.9
61.4
91.9
102.8
128.9
61.1
93.8
105.0
121.7
66.0
94.3
111.1
116.7
63.9
98.4
112.1
114.9
66.7
98.0
106.5
118.7
68.0
99.0
111.9
117.7
69.6
101.9
119.2
3 M ineral fuels, lubrica nts , and related p ro d u cts...............
33
Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials....
34
Gas, natural and manufactured........................................
67 5
61.7
113.5
66 6
61.3
107 3
73 2
70.2
97 4
86 3
84.9
99 3
93 1
91.1
112 1
92.7
105 3
117 1
12fi 5
12R n
134 fi
91.3
106 5
103.8
123 1
115.9
134 1
125.7
142 2
127.4
141 1
132.5
1R1 fi
142.0
iRn 3
143.9
143 3
5 C h em ica ls and related produ cts, n .e .s ................................
52
Inorganic chemicals.............................................................
53
Dying, tanning, and coloring materials.............................
54
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products...........................
55
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations.........
57
Plastics in primary forms (12/92 = 100)............................
58
Plastics in nonprimary forms (12/92 = 100).....................
59
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s...........................
91.4
90.1
94.7
97.0
94.6
91.8
73.5
98.8
91.1
88.7
94.0
97.4
94.3
92.2
73.0
98.1
90.8
88.6
94.3
96.7
93.5
92.0
73.1
97.9
90.6
86.9
92.6
96.1
93.1
92.5
73.5
98.5
90.6
86.8
91.7
95.6
92.7
93.4
74.0
98.0
90.6
86.7
91.9
96.2
92.4
93.6
75.6
97.4
90.6
86.4
90.6
96.2
91.7
93.7
75.8
98.0
90.4
86.2
90.5
96.3
91.8
93.1
76.1
98.1
91.3
86.6
90.2
97.0
92.3
93.8
77.9
98.1
91.8
87.2
90.6
97.4
91.8
93.8
78.9
98.6
92.1
87.7
91.4
97.8
92.3
93.9
79.4
98.4
91.9
88.0
89.7
97.3
90.2
94.0
79.7
98.8
92.2
88.3
88.9
98.7
89.4
93.7
79.3
99.1
01
03
05
07
11
Beverages............................................................................
2 C rud e m aterials, inedible, exc ept fu e ls ................................
24
25
28
29
6 M an u factu red go o d s classified c h ie fly by m aterials.....
91.6
91.8
91.8
91.7
91.8
92.0
91.9
92.4
92.6
93.3
93.9
94.0
94.6
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s...............................................
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,
and paperboard.................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s.........................
Nonferrous metals...............................................................
Manufactures of metals, n.e.s............................................
94.6
94.7
94.5
94.2
94.7
94.3
94.4
94.5
95.0
94.9
94.4
94.4
91.7
85.6
100.7
82.9
97.1
85.7
100.9
84.4
96.8
85.8
101.3
85.9
95.9
85.1
100.9
85.7
95.9
85.2
100.8
85.8
96.4
83.7
100.9
87.7
96.1
83.6
100.8
87.6
95.8
83.5
100.9
89.9
95.6
83.7
101.1
91.1
95.8
84.4
101.2
94.8
95.6
87.4
101.6
95.4
95.9
86.2
101.2
95.6
95.8
86.1
100.9
99.0
95.7
7 M achinery and tra nsport e q u ip m e n t.....................................
91.2
91.3
90.9
90.6
90.6
90.3
89.9
89.9
89.9
89.9
89.8
89.7
89.7
98.5
98.8
98.3
98.1
97.8
97.6
97.3
97.2
97.6
97.8
98.2
97.8
97.7
62
64
66
68
69
72
74
Machinery specialized for particular industries...............
General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,
and machine parts............................................................
Computer equipment and office machines.......................
Telecommunications and sound recording and
reproducing apparatus and equipment..........................
Electrical machinery and equipment.................................
Road vehicles.......................................................................
98.6
66.6
99.1
65.9
98.4
64.4
97.9
63.7
97.7
63.6
97.6
63.1
97.3
62.0
97.3
61.8
97.4
61.6
97.3
61.4
97.3
61.4
97.0
61.7
97.0
61.6
88.3
83.7
101.9
88.5
84.1
102.0
88.4
83.8
101.9
87.9
83.5
102.0
87.8
83.3
102.3
87.6
82.7
102.3
87.3
81.9
102.4
87.0
82.1
102.4
87.1
82.5
102.2
86.0
82.6
102.4
85.9
82.2
102.4
85.6
82.0
102.3
85.2
82.0
102.4
85
Footwear.............................................................................
101.3
101.4
101.1
101.2
100.5
100.7
100.7
100.6
100.8
100.8
100.8
100.8
100.9
88
Photographic apparatus, equipment, and supplies,
and optical qoods, n.e.s....................................................
91.9
92.1
91.8
91.4
91.4
91.3
91.2
91.1
91.4
92.2
92.5
92.5
92.1
75
76
77
78
- Data not available.
106 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
36.
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category
[1995 = 100]
1999
Category
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
2000
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
A L L C O M M O D I T I E S ...............................................................................
94.8
94.6
94.2
94.4
94.5
94.5
94.4
94.7
94.8
95.1
95.3
95.3
95.3
Foods, feeds, and beverages.......................................
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages.................
Nonagricultural (fish, beverages) food products.....
91.5
91.1
97.5
89.4
88.7
98.7
87.3
85.9
103.5
88.2
86.4
108.5
89.0
86.8
114.2
88.9
86.8
113.1
86.7
85.0
106.8
87.9
86.9
99.5
87.6
86.7
98.2
87.4
86.4
99.7
86.7
85.6
99.2
86.0
84.9
99.5
86.2
85.2
98.3
Industrial supplies and materials...................................
86.8
86.8
86.5
86.8
87.2
87.5
88.3
89.0
89.5
90.4
91.2
91.7
91.8
Agricultural industrial supplies and materials...........
82.4
81.9
79.9
79.6
79.5
78.4
76.2
76.3
76.6
77.5
76.6
76.8
75.3
Fuels and lubricants.....................................................
Nonagricultural supplies and materials,
excluding fuel and building materials......................
Selected building materials.........................................
92.8
92.7
92.4
97.8
98.4
99.8
106.1
110.5
111.8
114.4
115.9
120.4
121.9
85.7
86.3
85.7
86.8
85.5
87.3
85.3
87.5
85.7
87.5
86.0
87.8
86.6
88.0
87.0
88.4
87.5
87.4
88.3
87.8
89.2
87.7
89.3
88.6
89.4
89.3
97.1
99.1
93.6
97.1
99.1
93.6
96.9
99.1
93.4
97.0
99.1
93.5
96.7
98.9
93.2
96.5
99.0
92.9
96.2
98.2
92.6
96.2
98.0
92.6
96.1
98.3
92.4
96.2
98.3
92.4
96.3
98.4
92.5
96.1
98.4
92.1
96.0
98.1
92.1
Capital goods...................................................................
Electric and electrical generating equipment...........
Nonelectrical machinery.............................................
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines.....................
102.9
103.1
103.0
102.9
103.0
103.2
103.2
103.2
103.3
104.0
104.0
104.0
104.0
Consumer goods, excluding automotive......................
Nondurables, manufactured......................................
Durables, manufactured..............................................
101.9
102.1
100.6
101.9
102.3
100.3
101.8
102.1
100.3
101.8
102.0
100.4
101.8
102.0
100.3
102.0
102.1
100.5
101.9
102.0
100.6
102.0
102.0
100.8
101.9
102.1
100.7
102.2
102.4
100.8
102.2
102.5
100.9
102.4
102.9
100.8
102.4
102.6
101.0
Agricultural commodities.................................................
Nonagricultural commodities..........................................
89.2
95.4
87.1
95.5
84.5
95.3
84.9
95.5
85.2
95.5
85.0
95.6
83.1
95.7
84.7
95.8
84.6
95.9
84.5
96.3
83.7
96.6
83.1
96.6
83.1
96.7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
107
Current Labor Statistics:
37.
Price Data
U.S. import price indexes by end-use category
[1995 = 100]
2000
1999
Category
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
May
June
Aug.
July
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
A L L C O M M O D I T I E S ...............................................................................
90.8
90.7
90.9
91.9
92.5
92.4
93.3
94.3
95.2
95.4
96.2
96.8
96.9
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages.................
Nonagricultural (fish, beverages) food products.....
95.9
93.3
102.6
93.3
89.2
103.8
93.0
88.7
104.4
94.0
89.1
106.5
94.8
90.3
106.5
93.7
89.3
105.2
92.8
88.0
105.4
92.5
87.7
105.0
92.3
87.6
104.9
91.4
86.1
106.3
93.0
87.2
108.2
94.7
89.8
107.7
93.5
88.1
107.9
Industrial supplies and materials...................................
82.6
82.5
84.8
89.0
91.5
91.8
96.1
99.9
103.1
104.3
106.9
109.5
110.2
Fuels and lubricants.....................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products.......................
68.1
62.0
67.2
61.7
73.9
70.3
86.7
84.6
93.4
90.8
93.2
91.2
105.4
103.5
116.7
115.6
126.0
125.2
128.1
127.3
132.4
132.4
141.2
141.4
141.9
143.7
Paper and paper base stocks....................................
Materials associated with nondurable
supplies and materials...............................................
Selected building materials.........................................
Unfinished metals associated with durable goods..
Nonmetals associated with durable goods..............
78.3
78.6
78.4
77.5
77.7
77.0
77.0
76.9
78.4
78.5
81.7
81.2
81.5
87.5
104.2
86.6
88.8
87.3
107.6
86.6
88.6
87.5
107.9
86.9
88.2
87.4
108.3
86.7
87.3
87.3
110.5
87.3
87.3
87.4
114.2
88.3
87.0
87.0
120.6
87.7
86.7
86.9
118.9
89.0
86.7
87.7
113.4
89.7
87.3
88.3
110.0
93.0
87.5
88.8
108.3
94.4
87.5
89.0
111.1
94.8
87.3
89.3
110.6
97.6
86.8
84.5
93.5
81.5
84.5
93.6
81.5
83.7
92.8
80.7
83.3
92.5
80.2
83.0
92.3
79.9
82.6
91.5
79.5
81.9
91.1
78.7
81.9
91.2
78.7
82.0
91.6
78.8
81.9
91.7
78.6
81.8
91.8
78.5
81.6
91.1
78.4
81.6
91.2
78.3
101.4
101.5
101.4
101.5
101.8
101.7
101.8
101.9
101.9
102.0
102.0
102.0
102.1
98.1
101.0
95.2
97.7
98.4
101.1
95.2
100.9
98.0
101.0
94.8
99.0
97.7
100.8
94.4
98.9
97.6
100.5
94.5
98.8
97.5
100.4
94.4
98.0
97.4
100.2
94.3
98.3
97.4
100.3
94.1
99.1
97.7
100.8
94.2
99.9
97.5
100.5
94.1
100.0
97.5
100.5
94.2
98.8
97.4
100.4
94.1
99.8
97.3
100.1
93.9
101.1
Electric and electrical generating equipment...........
Consumer goods, excluding automotive.....................
Nonmanufactured consumer goods..........................
38.
U.S. international price Indexes for selected categories of services
[1990 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
1999
1998
Category
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Air freight (inbound) (9/90 - 100)......................................
Airfreight (outbound) (9/92 - 100)...................................
82.9
97.2
83.4
96.0
81.8
95.8
87.4
95.2
88.0
92.7
86.2
92.8
87.9
92.7
90.7
89.5
Air passenger fares (U.S. carriers)...................................
Air passenger fares (foreign carriers)..............................
Ocean liner freight (inbound)............................................
99.3
97.6
93.0
107.8
102.4
103.2
107.3
104.0
105.0
103.1
101.1
104.2
104.5
98.9
102.6
112.3
106.3
133.7
114.2
108.6
148.0
106.8
102.2
139.4
108 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
39.
Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
[1992 = 100]_________________________
Quarterly indexes
Item
1996
1997
1998
□
1999
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
105.9
111.6
99.8
105.3
113.9
108.5
106.3
112.5
100.1
105.9
114.5
109.1
107.1
113.2
100.4
105.7
115.9
109.5
108.1
114.6
101.2
106.0
116.0
109.7
108.4
116.4
102.4
107.4
114.1
109.9
109.7
117.8
103.4
107.5
114.2
110.0
109.8
119.4
104.4
108.8
112.6
110.2
110.7
121.2
105.6
109.5
112.1
110.4
111.9
122.7
106.5
109.6
112.1
110.5
112.7
124.2
107.4
110.2
112.1
110.9
113.0
125.7
107.8
111.3
110.9
111.2
114.3
127.1
108.3
111.3
111.5
111.4
115.6
128.3
108.5
110.9
113.5
111.9
105.8
111.2
99.5
105.0
114.4
108.4
106.1
112.2
99.8
105.7
115.0
109.1
106.9
112.9
100.1
105.6
116.6
109.6
107.8
114.1
100.8
105.8
117.0
109.9
108.1
115.9
101.9
107.2
115.3
110.1
109.3
117.2
102.9
107.3
115.8
110.4
109.5
118.8
103.9
108.5
114.1
110.5
110.4
120.6
105.1
109.3
113.1
110.7
111.5
122.0
105.9
109.4
112.7
110.6
112.2
123.3
106.6
109.8
113.1
111.0
112.4
124.7
106.9
111.0
112.2
111.4
113.8
126.1
107.5
110.9
112.9
111.6
115.2
127.4
107.8
110.6
114.9
112.2
109.6
110.3
98.7
100.4
100.6
99.9
153.9
113.0
104.8
110.1
111.2
98.9
100.7
101.0
99.8
155.6
113.4
105.3
110.7
112.0
99.3
100.8
101.1
99.9
156.2
113.6
105.4
112.4
113.3
100.0
100.3
100.7
99.2
161.1
114.3
105.4
113.2
115.1
101.2
100.8
101.6
98.6
155.3
112.4
105.3
114.2
116.4
102.2
100.8
101.9
98.0
153.7
111.5
105.2
115.3
118.0
103.2
101.2
102.3
98.2
150.1
110.8
105.2
117.0
119.8
104.4
101.2
102.4
98.0
152.6
111.3
105.5
117.9
121.3
105.3
101.8
102.9
99.2
145.3
110.4
105.5
119.1
122.7
106.1
101.7
103.0
98.3
149.4
110.8
105.7
120.1
124.2
106.5
102.1
103.4
98.7
148.4
110.8
105.9
121.3
125.5
107.0
102.4
103.5
99.6
144.7
110.6
105.9
115.7
110.3
98.7
95.4
116.9
111.8
99.5
95.7
118.4
112.6
99.9
95.1
120.9
113.6
100.3
94.0
122.0
115.5
101.5
94.6
122.7
117.0
102.7
95.3
123.9
118.6
103.7
95.7
126.3
120.6
105.1
95.5
128.2
121.4
105.4
94.7
130.4
122.8
106.2
94.1
132.2
124.5
106.8
94.2
133.6
126.3
107.6
94.5
Business
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................
Nonfarm business
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs.................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................................
Nonfinancial corporations
Output per hour of all employees.....................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Total unit costs.................................................................
Unit labor costs..................................................................
Unit nonlabor costs...........................................................
Unit profits................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................................
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
Manufacturing
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour......................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
-
137.1
127.7
108.0
93.1
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
109
Current Labor Statistics:
40.
Productivity Data
Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
[1992 = 100]__________________________________________
1960
Item
1970
1980
1989
1990
1991
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
Private business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output....................................................................................
Inputs:
Labor input..........................................................................
Capital services.................................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input....................
Capital per hour of all persons..........................................
50.8
117.3
70.7
34.0
70.1
117.1
86.5
51.6
83.8
107 3
95.3
72.6
95.5
103 8
100.0
97.8
96.1
102 1
96.7
98 8
100.1
mn 7
100.6
102 3
101.0
101 9
99.6
98.6
98.1
96.9
100.1
102.7
100.6
107.0
60.6
29.0
48.1
43.3
68.3
44.1
59.7
59.9
80.5
67.7
76.2
78.1
99.6
94.2
97 8
92.0
100.2
96.5
99 0
94.1
99.0
98.3
98 7
98.1
102.9
102.0
102 6
54.3
126.1
74.9
33.7
72.2
124.1
89.4
51.8
85.6
111.4
97.6
73.1
95.9
104.6
100.5
98.1
96.3
102.6
99.8
98.8
56.4
26.7
45.0
43.0
66.6
41.8
58.0
58 2
79.3
65.6
74.9
76.8
99.5
93.9
97.7
91.7
42.1
125.6
72.9
38.7
54.5
116.3
84.2
56.8
70.4
101.5
87.3
75.7
92.0
30.9
51.5
39.1
27.3
53.1
104.2
48.8
85.4
46.0
47.4
67.4
107.5
74.6
92.5
74.5
71.9
86.7
105.2
100.7
110.0
103.7
102 3
102.4
114.7
107.1
104.6
108 3
109.8
108.0
109 3
112.0
112.2
112 1
116.2
117.1
99.4
98.3
99.2
101.4
102.6
96.9
98.8
98.4
97.0
100.1
100.8
100.1
103.0
100.6
102.1
100.5
107.1
101.2
101.8
100.8
110.4
103.7
102.1
102.3
115.0
104.9
102.1
102.7
120.2
100.2
96.3
99.0
93.8
98.8
98.2
98.6
98.1
103.1
102.2
102.9
99.3
107.2
104.8
106.5
98.5
109.9
108.4
109.5
99.4
112.3
112.6
112.4
101.6
116.6
117.7
117.0
102.8
90.7
103.5
100.4
97.1
93.0
101.3
99.8
97.5
95.1
97 3
102.2
101 8
105.3
105 2
109.4
108 8
113.8
107 0
-
98.6
95.5
101.2
103.6
104.4
109.1
108.4
113.8
110.7
118.0
_
107.1
93.8
96.8
88.3
88.9
96.7
104.8
96.3
99.9
91 3
100.4
98.2
100.1
93 1
101.4
101.7
103.7
103 0
103.6
103.6
107.3
104 4
104.0
106.6
109.5
103.7
110.3
107.0
-
91.8
97.7
91.9
96.9
104.3
102.3
107.8
104.5
111.0
105.0
111.6
106.6
-
103.1
120.1
Private nonfarm business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons........................................
Output per unit of capital services.................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output....................................................................................
Inputs:
Labor input.........................................................................
Capital services.................................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input....................
Manufacturing
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons.......................................
Multifactor productivity.....................................................
Output....................................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons..........................................................
Capital services.................................................................
Energy.................................................................................
Purchased business services.........................................
Combined units of all factor inputs.................................
-
no
Data not available.
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
_
-
_
41.
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
[1992 = 100]
Item
1960
1970
1980
1989
1990
1991
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Business
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................
48.0
13.6
59.9
28.4
25.5
27.3
66.2
23.5
79.0
35.6
32.0
34.3
79.8
54.3
89.7
68.1
62.1
65.9
93.3
85.7
95.8
91.9
92.5
92.1
94.5
90.6
96.4
95.9
94.6
95.4
95.9
94.9
97.4
99.0
97.4
98.4
100.1
102.4
99.9
102.3
102.9
102.5
101.4
104.5
99.7
103.0
106.9
104.4
102.2
106.7
99.1
104.4
109.8
106.4
105.2
110.1
99.6
104.7
113.5
107.9
107.5
114.2
101.1
106.2
115.1
109.5
110.5
120.3
105.1
108.8
112.7
110.3
113.9
126.3
108.1
110.9
112.0
111.3
51.2
14.3
62.8
27.9
24.9
26.8
68.0
23.7
79.7
34.9
31.7
33.7
81.3
54.7
90.3
67.2
61.1
65.0
93.5
85.8
95.8
91.7
91.9
91.8
94.6
90.5
96.3
95.7
94.2
95.1
96.1
94.9
97.4
98.8
97.5
98.3
100.1
102.1
99.6
102.1
103.4
102.6
101.4
104.3
99.5
102.9
107.4
104.5
106.5
98.9
104.0
110.8
106.5
102.4
105.2
109.8
99.3
104.4
113.8
107.8
107.2
113.8
100.7
106.1
115.9
109.7
110.2
119.7
104.5
108.6
113.9
110.5
113.4
125.4
107.3
110.6
113.3
111.6
52.6
15.6
68.6
28.9
29.7
26.8
53.2
33.2
30.9
66.3
25.3
85.1
37.4
38.2
35.4
47.1
38.3
38.2
76.9
56.6
93.6
72.5
73.7
69.4
72.6
70.2
72.5
93.8
87.0
97.2
93.6
92.7
95.9
99.0
96.6
94.1
94.9
91.4
97.2
97.1
96.4
99.0
95.5
98.1
97.0
96.9
95.5
98.0
99.8
98.6
102.9
94.0
100.7
99.3
101.5
102.1
99.5
100.3
100.6
99.6
112.5
102.7
101.3
104.3
104.3
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.2
130.5
107.6
102.6
105.6
106.2
98.6
100.6
100.5
100.9
137.5
109.8
103.7
108.4
109.0
98.6
100.4
100.5
100.1
151.5
112.6
104.7
111.7
113.0
100.0
100.6
101.1
99.4
157.1
113.4
116.2
119.0
103.9
101.3
102.4
98.4
150.4
111.0
105.3
42.1
14.9
65.4
35.3
26.7
30.1
54.4
23.7
79.7
43.6
29.4
34.9
70.4
55.6
91.8
78.9
79.9
79.5
90.7
86.6
96.8
95.5
95.2
95.3
93.0
90.8
96.6
97.6
99.6
98.8
95.1
95.6
98.0
100.4
98.9
99.5
102.2
102.7
100.2
100.5
101.1
100.9
105.3
105.6
100.8
100.3
102.9
101.9
109.4
107.9
100.2
98.6
107.2
103.9
113.8
109.3
98.9
96.0
110.2
104.7
119.6
113.4
100.4
94.8
-
125.3
119.4
104.3
95.3
-
133.3
125.3
107.2
94.0
-
-
-
-
Nonfarm business
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator..........................................................
Nonfinancial corporations
Compensation per hour.....................................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs..................................................................
Unit nonlabor costs...........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................
105.3
_
-
_
-
_
-
Manufacturing
Output per hour of all persons..........................................
Real compensation per hour.............................................
Unit labor costs....................................................................
Unit nonlabor payments.....................................................
Implicit price deflator...........................................................
-
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
111
Current Labor Statistics:
42.
Productivity Data
Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit sic industries
[1987 = 100]
SIC
Industry
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
Mining
102
104
122
131
142
109.2
101.5
111.7
101.0
101.3
106.6
113.3
117.3
98.0
98.7
102.7
122.3
118.7
97.0
102.2
100.5
127.4
122.4
97.9
99.8
115.2
141.6
133.0
102.1
105.0
118.1
159.8
141.2
105.9
103.6
126.0
160.8
148.1
112.4
108.7
117.2
144.2
155.9
119.4
105.4
116.5
138.3
168.0
123.7
107.2
118.9
158.0
176.8
126.1
114.8
Meat products.............................................................
Dairy products.............................................................
Preserved fruits and vegetables...............................
Grain mill products.....................................................
Bakery products..........................................................
201
202
203
204
205
100.1
108.4
97.0
101.3
96.8
99.3
107.8
97.8
107.6
96.1
97.1
107.3
95.6
105.3
92.7
99.7
108.4
99.2
104.9
90.6
104.6
111.5
100.6
107.7
93.8
104.3
109.7
106.8
109.1
94.4
101.2
111.9
107.6
108.4
96.4
102.4
116.6
109.1
115.3
97.3
97.7
115.9
109.4
107.7
95.4
-
Sugar and confectionery products...........................
Fats and oils...............................................................
Beverages...................................................................
Miscellaneous food and kindred products..............
Cigarettes....................................................................
206
207
208
209
211
99.4
108.9
106.0
107.0
101.2
101.5
116.4
112.7
99.3
109.0
102.8
118.1
117.7
99.3
113.2
101.3
120.1
120.5
101.6
107.6
99.1
114.1
127.6
101.6
111.6
103.9
112.6
127.0
105.3
106.5
105.4
111.8
130.9
101.0
126.6
107.5
120.3
134.3
103.1
142.9
112.7
111.1
135.7
107.6
147.7
-
Broadwoven fabric mills, cotton................................
Broadwoven fabric mills, manmade........................
Narrow fabric mills.....................................................
Knitting mills...............................................................
Textile finishing, except wool....................................
221
222
224
225
226
99.6
99.2
108.4
96.3
90.3
99.8
106.3
92.7
108.0
88.7
103.1
111.3
96.5
107.5
83.4
111.2
116.2
99.6
114.1
79.9
110.3
126.2
112.9
119.5
78.6
117.8
131.7
111.4
128.1
79.3
122.1
142.5
120.1
134.3
81.2
134.0
145.2
118.9
138.6
78.5
137.8
151.1
127.5
150.8
79.8
Carpets and rugs........................................................
Yarn and thread mills.................................................
Miscellaneous textile goods.....................................
Men's and boys' suits and coats...............................
Men's and boys’ furnishings.....................................
227
228
229
231
232
98.6
102.1
101.6
105.1
100.1
97.8
104.2
109.1
97.7
100.1
93.2
110.2
109.2
93.9
102.1
89.2
111.4
104.6
90.2
108.4
96.1
119.6
106.5
89.0
109.1
97.1
126.6
110.4
97.4
108.4
93.3
130.7
118.5
97.7
111.7
95.8
137.4
123.7
92.5
123.4
101.2
146.6
125.4
96.5
134.0
-
Women's and misses' outerwear..............................
Women's and children's undergarments.................
101.4
105.4
99.0
101.3
96.6
96.8
94.6
96.4
88.4
95.7
104.1
102.1
89.2
90.6
99.9
104.3
113.6
91.1
91.8
100.7
109.4
117.4
93.6
91.3
107.5
121.8
124.5
87.2
94.0
108.5
127.4
138.0
77.7
105.5
107.8
135.5
161.3
84.3
116.8
109.2
144.2
171.6
80.9
121.3
106.3
-
Miscellaneous apparel and accessories.................
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products...............
233
234
235
238
239
93.7
100.7
98.9
103.1
97.8
89.4
99.6
97.1
108.8
98.8
86.3
99.8
98.0
111.2
103.1
86.0
102.6
98.0
113.1
103.0
96.2
108.1
99.9
109.4
103.1
88.6
101.9
97.0
100.1
103.8
87.8
103.3
94.5
100.9
98.3
86.0
110.2
92.7
106.1
97.0
86.0
114.9
92.2
106.5
97.0
_
Sawmills and planing mills........................................
Millwork, plywood, and structural members............
Wood containers........................................................
Wood buildings and mobile homes..........................
241
242
243
244
245
249
251
252
253
254
95.9
99.4
94.3
109.6
95.7
102.4
102.0
97.5
113.7
92.4
107.7
104.5
95.0
119.8
95.6
110.5
107.1
94.1
120.2
93.0
114.2
110.5
102.5
140.6
102.7
115.3
110.6
103.2
161.0
107.4
111.8
112.5
100.5
157.4
98.9
115.4
116.9
101.1
173.3
101.2
114.2
122.2
106.8
179.9
97.3
—
259
261
262
263
265
103.6
99.6
103.9
105.5
99.7
101.9
107.4
103.6
101.9
101.5
103.5
116.7
102.3
100.6
101.3
102.1
128.3
99.2
101.4
103.4
99.5
137.3
103.3
104.4
105.2
103.6
122.5
102.4
108.4
107.9
104.7
128.9
110.2
114.9
108.4
110.0
131.9
119.0
119.5
105.1
113.6
132.7
111.9
118.7
106.5
-
267
271
272
273
274
101.1
96.9
97.9
99.1
96.7
101.6
95.2
98.3
94.1
89.0
101.4
90.6
93.9
96.6
92.2
105.4
85.8
89.5
100.8
95.9
105.5
81.5
92.9
97.7
105.8
108.0
79.4
89.6
103.5
104.5
110.8
79.9
82.4
103.0
97.5
113.4
79.0
88.5
101.5
94.8
114.6
77.1
90.9
100.5
93.4
-
275
276
277
278
279
100.0
98.7
100.1
95.6
99.9
101.1
89.7
109.1
94.2
94.3
102.5
93.0
100.6
99.4
99.3
102.0
89.1
92.7
96.1
100.6
108.0
94.5
96.7
103.6
112.0
106.9
91.1
91.4
98.7
115.3
106.5
82.0
89.0
105.4
111.0
107.2
76.9
92.5
108.7
116.7
108.7
74.5
91.8
115.0
126.7
281
282
283
284
285
105.7
98.8
101.1
102.0
101.4
104.2
99.7
102.9
100.7
103.3
106.7
100.9
103.9
103.8
106.3
109.6
100.0
104.7
105.3
104.3
109.6
107.5
99.6
104.4
102.9
105.4
111.9
100.0
108.7
108.8
102.0
125.0
105.5
111.2
116.7
109.2
128.7
108.9
118.6
118.0
110.4
125.1
112.9
121.4
124.2
286
287
289
291
295
299
109.8
103.8
95.4
105.3
98.3
98.4
110.3
104.5
95.2
109.6
95.3
101.9
101.4
105.0
97.3
109.2
98.0
94.8
95.8
99.9
96.1
106.6
94.1
90.6
94.5
99.9
101.8
111.3
100.4
101.5
92.2
104.3
107.1
120.1
108.0
104.2
100.0
105.7
105.7
123.8
104.9
96.3
98.8
109.0
107.8
132.3
111.2
87.4
98.4
111.4
110.2
142.0
114.4
86.4
Copper ores................................................................
Gold and silver ores...................................................
Bituminous coal and lignite mining...........................
Crude petroleum and natural gas.............................
Crushed and broken stone........................................
M anufacturing
Miscellaneous wood products..................................
Household furniture....................................................
Public building and related furniture.........................
Partitions and fixtures................................................
Miscellaneous furniture and fixtures.......................
Paperboard mills........................................................
Paperboard containers and boxes...........................
Miscellaneous converted paper products...............
Periodicals..................................................................
Books..........................................................................
Miscellaneous publishing.........................................
Drugs...........................................................................
Industrial organic chemicals....................................
Agricultural chemicals..............................................
Miscellaneous chemical products...........................
Miscellaneous petroleum and coal products..........
See footnotes at end of table.
112 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
_
-
_
_
-
42. Continued—Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit sic industries
[1987 = 100]
102.9
103.7
104.3
100.5
101.3
103.8
96.3
105.5
101.7
101.1
103.0
96.1
109.2
105.6
101.1
102.4
92.4
110.1
108.1
94.4
107.8
97.8
115.3
114.1
104.2
116.5
99.7
123.2
116.4
105.2
124.1
102.7
119.2
120.4
113.0
131.1
104.6
121.6
120.7
117.1
138.8
107.2
120.3
124.9
125.8
316
317
321
322
323
93.7
98.5
91.9
100.6
95.9
104.8
93.1
90.7
100.2
90.1
106.2
96.5
84.5
104.8
92.6
100.3
98.7
83.6
102.3
97.7
90.7
111.2
92.7
108.9
101.5
89.5
97.8
97.7
108.7
106.2
92.3
86.8
97.6
112.9
105.9
90.5
81.8
99.6
115.7
106.1
108.5
83.9
104.2
121.9
124.5
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products................
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral products..........
324
325
326
327
329
103.2
98.8
99.6
100.8
103.0
110.2
103.1
97.1
102.4
95.5
112.4
109.6
98.6
102.3
95.4
108.3
109.8
95.8
101.2
94.0
115.1
111.5
99.5
102.5
104.3
119.9
105.8
100.3
104.6
104.5
125.6
113.0
108.4
101.5
106.3
124.3
111.6
109.3
104.5
107.8
127.9
119.5
119.4
107.5
111.3
Iron and steel foundries............................................
Primary nonferrous metals........................................
Nonferrous rolling and drawing................................
Nonferrous foundries (castings)...............................
331
332
333
335
336
112.6
104.0
107.8
95.5
102.6
108.0
105.4
106.1
93.6
105.1
109.6
106.1
102.3
92.7
104.0
107.8
104.5
110.9
90.9
103.6
117.1
107.2
102.0
95.8
103.6
133.5
112.1
108.0
98.2
108.5
142.4
113.0
105.4
101.1
112.1
142.7
112.7
111.1
99.1
117.8
153.6
115.7
111.0
103.9
122.6
Miscellaneous primary metal products....................
Metal cans and shipping containers........................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardware............................
Plumbing and heating, except electric.....................
Fabricated structural metal products.......................
339
341
342
343
344
106.6
106.5
97.8
103.7
100.4
105.0
108.5
101.7
101.5
96.9
113.7
117.6
97.3
102.6
98.8
109.1
122.9
96.8
102.0
100.0
114.5
127.8
100.1
98.4
103.9
111.3
132.3
104.0
102.0
104.8
134.5
140.9
109.2
109.1
107.7
152.2
144.2
111.3
109.2
105.8
149.6
155.2
117.9
118.6
106.7
345
346
347
348
349
98.5
101.5
108.3
97.7
101.4
96.1
99.8
102.4
89.8
95.9
96.1
95.6
104.7
82.1
97.5
97.9
92.9
99.4
81.5
97.3
102.3
103.7
111.6
88.6
100.9
104.4
108.7
120.6
84.6
101.8
107.2
108.5
123.0
83.6
103.0
109.7
109.3
127.7
87.6
106.4
110.4
113.7
127.5
87.4
108.6
-
Metal forgings and stampings...................................
Metal services, n.e.c..................................................
Ordnance and accessories, n.e.c.............................
Engines and turbines.................................................
Farm and garden machinery....................................
Construction and related machinery.......................
Metalworking machinery............................................
Special industry machinery.......................................
351
352
353
354
355
106.8
106.3
106.5
101.0
104.6
110.7
110.7
108.3
103.5
108.3
106.5
116.5
107.0
101.1
107.5
105.8
112.9
99.1
96.4
108.3
103.3
113.9
102.0
104.3
106.0
109.2
118.6
108.2
107.4
113.6
122.3
125.0
117.7
109.9
121.2
122.7
134.7
122.1
114.8
132.3
136.9
136.6
123.8
114.7
134.7
-
General industrial machinery....................................
Refrigeration and service machinery.......................
Industrial machinery, n.e.c........................................
Electric distribution equipment.................................
Electrical industrial apparatus...................................
356
358
359
361
362
106.0
102.1
106.5
105.4
104.5
101.6
106.0
107.1
105.0
107.3
101.5
103.6
107.3
106.3
107.5
101.6
100.7
109.0
106.5
106.8
101.6
104.9
116.9
119.6
116.8
104.8
108.6
118.4
122.2
132.5
106.7
110.7
127.3
131.8
134.5
109.0
112.7
138.8
143.0
150.4
110.0
114.4
142.1
145.1
154.1
Household appliances..............................................
363
364
366
369
371
103.0
101.9
110.4
102.8
103.2
104.7
100.2
107.0
99.6
103.3
105.8
99.9
120.9
90.6
102.4
106.5
97.5
123.8
98.6
96.6
115.0
105.7
145.4
101.3
104.2
123.4
107.8
149.0
108.2
105.3
131.4
113.4
164.8
110.5
107.1
127.3
113.7
169.6
114.1
104.1
126.7
117.4
189.6
123.0
104.1
Guided missiles, space vehicles, parts...................
372
373
374
375
376
100.5
99.4
113.5
92.6
104.8
98.2
97.6
135.3
94.6
110.5
98.8
103.7
141.1
93.8
115.7
108.1
96.3
146.9
99.8
109.8
112.2
102.7
147.9
108.4
109.3
115.1
106.2
151.0
130.9
120.9
109.5
103.8
152.5
125.1
117.5
107.8
97.9
150.0
120.3
118.7
112.6
100.5
146.3
123.3
127.3
Medical Instruments and supplies............................
Ophthalmic goods......................................................
Photographic equipment & supplies........................
381
382
384
385
386
104.8
103.1
104.4
112.6
105.6
105.8
101.3
107.2
123.3
113.0
112.7
106.1
116.3
121.2
107.8
118.9
112.9
118.4
125.1
110.2
122.1
119.9
123.3
144.5
116.4
129.1
124.0
126.9
157.8
126.9
132.1
133.8
126.1
160.6
132.7
149.5
146.4
130.9
167.2
129.5
141.8
150.4
140.4
188.9
129.0
391
393
394
395
396
399
100.1
101.8
104.8
108.6
102.0
104.5
102.9
96.1
106.0
113.3
93.8
102.8
99.3
97.1
108.1
118.7
105.3
107.9
95.8
96.9
109.7
117.3
106.7
109.9
96.7
96.0
104.9
111.7
110.8
109.6
96.7
95.6
114.2
112.0
115.8
107.8
99.5
88.7
109.7
130.2
129.0
106.2
100.2
86.9
113.6
135.4
143.7
108.2
103.2
78.9
120.0
144.4
142.3
113.5
U.S. postal service'...................................................
431
99.9
99.7
104.0
103.7
104.5
107.1
106.6
106.5
104.7
108.
Air transportation 2.....................................................
4512,13,22 (pts.)
99.5
95.8
92.9
92.5
96.9
100.2
105.7
108.6
111.1
112.
481
483
484
491,3 (pt.)
492,3 (pt.)
106.2
103.1
102.0
104.9
105.5
111.6
106.2
99.7
107.7
103.5
113.3
104.9
92.5
110.1
94.8
119.8
106.1
87.5
113.4
94.0
127.7
108.3
88.3
115.2
95.3
135.5
106.7
85.1
120.6
107.0
142.2
110.1
83.3
126.8
102.2
148.1
109.6
84.3
135.0
107.5
159.4
105.9
81.6
146.5
116.0
160.
101.
84.
150.
119.
Handbags and personal leather goods...................
Flat glass....................................................................
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown.................
Products of purchased glass....................................
Cement, hydraulic......................................................
Structural clay products.............................................
Communications equipment.....................................
Miscellaneous electrical equipment & supplies.......
Motor vehicles and equipment..................................
Aircraft and parts.......................................................
Ship and boat building and repairing.......................
Railroad equipment...................................................
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware......................
Musical instruments..................................................
Toys and sporting goods..........................................
Costume jewelry and notions...................................
Miscellaneous manufactures....................................
1991
1993
1995
1996
1997
301
305
306
308
314
Fabricated rubber products, n.e.c............................
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c....................
1990
1994
SIC
1988
1989
1992
Industry
Tires and inner tubes.................................................
-
“
-
“
-
“
”
”
“
Transportation
Communications and utilities
Radio and television broadcasting...........................
Gas utilities................................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
113
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
42. Continued—Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit sic industries
[1987 = 100]
Industry
SIC
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
Wholesale and retail trade
521
523
525
526
531
101.0
102.8
108.6
106.7
99.2
99 1
101.7
115.2
103.4
97.0
103 6
106.0
110.5
83.9
94.2
101 3
99.4
102.5
88.5
98.2
100.9
101.9
100.8
98 9
99.0
89 8
124.4
109.8
95 4
167.7
136.1
93 3
97.6
83 3
151.2
116.4
94 6
96.8
89 7
154.2
121.8
93 7
Meat and fish (seafood) markets...............................
Retail bakeries.............................................................
533
539
541
542
546
88.4
94 7
New and used car dealers.........................................
Auto and home supply stores....................................
Gasoline service stations............................................
Men's and boys’ wear stores.....................................
Women's clothing stores............................................
551
553
554
561
562
103.4
103.2
103.0
106.0
97.8
102.5
101.6
105.2
109.6
99.5
106.1
102.7
102.6
113.7
101.5
Family clothing stores.................................................
Shoe stores..................................................................
Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores.........
Furniture and homefurnishings stores.....................
Household appliance stores.......................................
565
566
569
571
572
102.0
102.7
96.3
98.6
98.5
104.9
107.2
95.2
100.9
103.5
Radio, television, computer, and music stores.......
Eating and drinking places.........................................
Drug and proprietary stores.......................................
Liquor stores.................................................................
Used merchandise stores...........................................
573
581
591
592
593
118.6
102.8
101.9
98.2
105.3
Miscellaneous shopping goods stores.....................
Nonstore retailers........................................................
Fuel dealers..................................................................
Retail stores, n.e.c.......................................................
594
596
598
599
Commercial banks......................................................
Hotels and motels........................................................
Laundry, cleaning, and garment services................
Photographic studios, portrait....................................
Beauty shops................................................................
Barber shops................................................................
Funeral services and crematories.............................
Automotive repair shops.............................................
Motion picture theaters................................................
Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores............................
Hardware stores..........................................................
Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores....
Department stores.......................................................
Variety stores................................................................
Miscellaneous general merchandise stores............
105 4
110 3
117 9
117 0
106.5
107.2
100.4
112.1
106.5
106.6
126.8
110.7
117.1
108.1
124.6
114.2
116.6
111.2
113.4
185.5
159.7
93 0
191.8
160.9
99 9
95.8
94 0
95.8
Rfi 0
104.1
99.0
104.3
119.2
103.0
106.5
100.0
109.7
118.2
112.2
104.5
106.1
88.6
101.8
102.8
106.4
105.1
78.8
101.5
105.2
114.6
102.2
102.5
101.1
104.9
119.6
104.0
103.6
105.2
100.3
100.7
105.6
95.6
105.9
104.2
110.8
92.0
103.1
602
701
721
722
723
102.8
97.6
97.2
100.1
95.1
724
726
753
783
108.8
102.5
105.7
107.1
132.1
115.2
136.6
121.0
132.3
115.8
119.3
125.7
205.8
164.0
91 9
232.6
165.1
246.1
165.7
95.3
90 1
95.5
91 9
88.8
90.8
107.6
100.9
113.3
115.6
116.8
108.7
107.0
116.5
118.1
115.8
107.1
112.6
120.4
117.9
122.8
108.2
113.9
117.2
126.3
133.6
107.3
109.7
116.5
139.1
134.1
111.7
111.5
89.1
108.4
113.9
114.9
112.4
95.2
108.5
115.0
121.2
124.4
105.4
110.5
116.8
135.2
131.5
131.2
114.7
131.6
140.5
142.6
139.9
122.5
132.0
143.2
143.5
128.0
125.7
149.4
128.3
103.1
104.7
105.9
98.6
137.8
102.5
103.6
108.4
110.4
153.4
101.7
104.8
100.1
110.4
178.8
98.9
104.5
98.1
111.6
200.0
97.6
105.2
102.0
111.6
209.3
95.2
107.5
110.3
121.6
220.4
93.7
113.8
107.8
122.1
104.2
108.8
84.4
113.7
105.0
109.3
85.3
103.2
102.7
122.1
84.4
111.6
106.2
121.8
92.2
115.5
111.5
130.6
99.7
121.3
117.2
125.7
112.3
120.5
119.5
138.3
113.3
130.6
124.5
148.0
106.5
137.8
104.8
95.0
99.7
94.9
99.6
107.7
96.1
101.8
96.6
96.8
110.1
99.1
99.2
92.8
94.8
111.0
107.8
98.3
97.7
99.6
118.9
106.2
98.9
105.9
95.7
122.3
109.6
104.0
117.4
99.8
127.6
110.1
105.5
129.3
103.5
130.9
109.7
108.7
126.4
106.3
134.1
107.9
108.1
135.4
108.9
111.6
97.9
108.1
114.3
100.2
90.9
106.9
115.8
94.1
89.5
98.7
116.0
112.1
103.2
103.3
110.8
120.8
98.2
104.0
109.8
117.7
103.8
112.3
106.5
114.6
99.7
119.5
101.4
127.6
97.1
114.1
100.4
153.4
101.3
115.8
100.8
Finance and services
1 Refers to output per full-time equivalent employee year on fiscal basis.
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified.
2 Refers to output per employee.
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.
43. Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts, in nine countries, quarterly data
seasonally adjusted
Country
Annual average
1997
1998
1997
IV
1998
I
II
1999
III
IV
I
II
III
United States.........................................
4.9
4.5
4.7
4.7
4.4
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.2
Canada...................................................
Australia.................................................
Japan.....................................................
9.2
8.6
3.4
8.3
8.0
4.1
8.9
8.3
3.5
8.6
8.1
3.7
8.4
8.0
4.2
8.3
8.1
4.3
8.0
7.7
4.4
7.8
7.4
4.7
8.0
7.4
4.8
7.6
7.2
4.8
France....................................................
12.4
11.7
12.3
12.0
11.7
11.7
11.5
11.3
11.2
11.1
Germany................................................
9.9
9.4
10.0
9.9
9.5
9.1
9.1
9.0
9.0
9.1
Italy1........................................................
Sweden..................................................
United Kinadom.....................................
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.2
12.3
12.4
12.4
12.3
12.1
10.1
7.0
8.4
6.3
9.1
6.6
8.8
6.4
8.6
6.3
8.5
6.3
7.7
6.3
7.4
6.3
7.0
6.1
1 Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
- Data not available.
data, and
therefore should
be viewed as
_
7.1
5.9
less precise indicators of
unemployment under U.S. concepts than the annual figures. See "Notes
on the data” for information on breaks in series. For further qualifications
NOTE:
Quarterly figures for France, Germany, and the United Kingdom
are calculated by applying annual adjustment factors to current published
114 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
and historical data, see C o m p a ra tiv e C ivilian L a b o r F o rc e S tatistics, T e n
C o u n trie s ,1 9 5 9 - 1 9 9 8
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, Oct. 22, 1999).
44. Annual data: Employment status of the working-age population, approximating U.S. concepts, 10 countries
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status and country
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
123,869
14,151
8,228
61,920
24,170
125,840
14,329
8,444
63,050
24,300
126,346
14,408
8,490
64,280
24,490
128,105
14,482
8,562
65,040
24,550
129,200
14,663
8,619
65,470
24,650
131,056
14,832
8,776
65,780
24,760
132,304
14,928
9,001
65,990
24,820
133,943
15,145
9,127
66,450
25,080
136,297
15,354
9,221
67,200
25,140
137,673
15,632
9,347
67,240
25,390
28,840
22,530
6,430
4,552
28,580
29,410
22,670
6,640
4,597
28,730
39,120
22,940
6,750
4,591
28,610
39,040
22,910
6,950
4,520
28,410
39,130
22,760
7,090
4,443
28,310
39,210
22,640
7,190
4,418
28,280
39,050
22,700
7,270
4,460
28,480
39,180
22,820
7,370
4,459
28,620
39,450
22,850
7,530
4,418
28,760
39,430
23,000
7,720
4,402
28,870
C iv ilia n la b o r fo r c e
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia...............................................................................
Japan...................................................................................
France.................................................................................
Germany*............................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden................................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
P a r tic ip a tio n ra te 3
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia...............................................................................
Japan...................... .............................................................
France.................................................................................
Germany*............................................................................
Italy......................................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden................................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
66.5
67.5
64.0
62.2
56.1
66.5
67.3
64.6
62.6
56.0
66.2
66.7
64.1
63.2
56.0
66.4
65.9
63.9
63.4
55.8
66.3
65.5
63.6
63.3
55.6
66.6
65.3
63.9
63.1
55.5
66.6
64.8
64.6
62.9
55.2
66.8
64.9
64.6
63.0
55.4
67.1
64.8
64.3
63.2
55.2
67.1
65.1
64.4
62.8
55.6
55.2
47.3
54.7
67.3
64.0
55.3
47.2
56.1
67.4
64.1
58.9
47.7
56.5
67.0
63.7
58.3
47.5
57.8
65.7
63.1
58.0
48.1
58.5
64.5
62.8
57.6
47.5
59.0
63.7
62.5
57.2
47.5
59.3
64.1
62.7
57.4
47.7
59.8
64.0
62.7
57.6
47.7
60.7
63.4
62.8
57.6
47.8
62.0
63.1
62.7
E m p lo y e d
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia..............................................................................
Japan...................................................................................
France.................................................................................
Germany*............................................................................
Italy.......................................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden................................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
117,342
13,086
7,720
60,500
21,850
118,793
13,165
7,859
61,710
22,100
117,718
12,916
7,676
62,920
22,140
118,492
12,842
7,637
63,620
21,990
120,259
13,015
7,680
63,810
21,740
123,060
13,292
7,921
63,860
21,710
124,900
13,506
8,235
63,890
21,890
126,708
13,676
8,344
64,200
21,950
129,558
13,941
8,429
64,900
22,010
131,463
14,326
8,597
64,450
22,410
27,200
20,770
5,980
4,480
26,510
27,950
21,080
6,230
4,513
26,740
36,910
21,360
6,350
4,447
26,090
36,420
21,230
6,560
4,265
25,530
36,020
20,430
6,620
4,028
25,340
35,900
20,080
6,670
3,992
25,550
35,850
19,980
6,760
4,056
26,000
35,680
20,060
6,900
4,019
26,280
35,540
20,050
7,130
3,973
26,740
35,720
20,170
7,410
4,034
27,050
E m p lo y m e n t - p o p u la t io n r a tio 4
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia..............................................................................
Japan...................................................................................
Germany*............................................................................
Italy.......................................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden................................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
63.0
62.4
60.1
60.8
50.7
62.8
61.9
60.1
61.3
50.9
61.7
59.8
57.9
61.8
50.6
61.5
58.4
57.0
62.0
49.9
61.7
58.2
56.6
61.7
49.0
62.5
58.5
57.7
61.3
48.7
62.9
58.6
59.1
60.9
48.7
63.2
58.6
59.1
60.9
48.5
63.8
58.9
58.8
61.0
48.3
64.1
59.7
59.2
60.2
49.1
52.0
43.6
50.9
66.2
59.3
52.6
43.9
52.6
66.1
59.6
55.5
44.5
53.2
64.9
58.0
54.4
44.0
54.5
62.0
56.7
53.4
43.1
54.7
58.5
56.2
52.8
42.1
54.7
57.6
56.5
52.5
41.8
55.1
58.3
57.2
52.2
41.9
55.9
57.6
57.6
51.9
41.8
57.5
57.0
58.3
52.2
41.9
59.5
57.8
58.8
U n e m p lo y e d
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia..............................................................................
Japan...................................................................................
6,528
1,065
508
1,420
2,320
7,047
1,164
585
1,340
2,210
8,628
1,492
814
1,360
2,350
9,613
1,640
925
1,420
2,560
8,940
1,649
939
1,660
2,910
7,996
1,541
856
1,920
3,050
7,404
1,422
766
2,100
2,920
7,236
1,469
783
2,250
3,130
6,739
1,414
791
2,300
3,120
6,210
1,305
750
2,790
2,980
Germany*............................................................................
1,640
1,760
450
72
2,070
1,460
1,590
410
84
1,990
2,210
1,580
400
144
2,520
2,620
1,680
390
255
2,880
3,110
2,330
470
415
2,970
3,320
2,560
520
426
2,730
3,200
2,720
510
404
2,480
3,500
2,760
470
440
2,340
3,910
2,800
400
445
2,020
3,710
2,840
310
368
1,820
Italy.......................................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden...............................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
U n e m p lo y m e n t ra te
United States'....................................................................
Canada................................................................................
Australia..............................................................................
Japan...................................................................................
France.................................................................................
Germany*............................................................................
Italy.......................................................................................
Netherlands........................................................................
Sweden...............................................................................
United Kingdom..................................................................
5.3
7.5
6.2
2.3
9.6
5.6
8.1
6.9
2.1
9.1
6.8
10.4
9.6
2.1
9.6
7.5
11.3
10.8
2.2
10.4
6.9
11.2
10.9
2.5
11.8
6.1
10.4
9.7
2.9
12.3
5.6
9.5
8.5
3.2
11.8
5.4
9.7
8.6
3.4
12.5
4.9
9.2
8.6
3.4
12.4
4.5
8.3
8.0
4.1
11.7
5.7
7.8
7.0
1.6
7.2
5.0
7.0
6.2
1.8
6.9
5.6
6.9
5.9
3.1
8.8
6.7
7.3
5.6
5.6
10.1
7.9
10.2
6.6
9.3
10.5
8.5
11.3
7.2
9.6
9.7
8.2
12.0
7.0
9.1
8.7
8.9
12.1
6.4
9.9
8.2
9.9
12.3
5.3
10.1
7.0
9.4
12.3
4.0
8.4
6.3
1 Data for 1994 are not directly comparable with data for 1993 and earlier years. For
Labor force as a percent of the working-age population.
additional information, see the box note under "Employment and Unemployment Data"
4 Employment as a percent of the working-age population.
in the notes to this section.
2 Data from 1991 onward refer to unified Germany. See C o m p a ra tiv e Civilian L a b o r
F o rc e S tatistics, T e n C ou n trie s ,
1 9 5 9 -1 9 9 8 ,
October 22, 1999, on the Internet at
No te :
See "Notes on the data" for information on breaks In series for the United
States, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden
h t t p : / /s ta ts .b ls .g o v /fls d a ta .h tm .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
115
Current Labor Statistics:
International Comparisons Data
45. Annual indexes of m anufacturing productivity and related measures, 12 countries
[1992 = 100]
Ite m
a n d c o u n try
1960
1970
1980
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Output per hour
United States........................................................
Canada................................................................
Japan...................................................................
Belgium................................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy.......................................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden................................................................
United Kingdom...................................................
40.7
14.0
18.0
29 9
21.8
29.2
19.6
19.3
36.7
27.6
31.2
59.2
38.0
32.9
52 7
43.1
52.0
36.8
38.1
57 8
52.8
44.7
71.9
75.3
63.9
65.4
90 3
66.7
77.2
64.1
69.2
76 7
74.0
56.2
94.4
91.3
81.2
88.9
98.0
91.1
84.8
92.0
97.1
92.4
89.5
96.9
97.8
95.3
95.4
96.8
98.3
95.1
99.4
99.1
102.1
102.5
100.5
102.5
108.3
106.2
101.8
108.4
114.9
108.9
109.3
113.2
117.3
107.3
115.8
114.7
122.1
110.0
120.2
121.7
127.0
111.7
120.5
122.4
81.8
88.1
85.1
91.7
93 3
90.1
79.5
87.4
91.5
86.7
93.8
91.9
94.6
89.4
97.1
93.5
99.0
92.5
98.6
96.9
101.9
95.2
99.6
100.6
100.6
102.9
101.9
108.5
107.9
105.6
114.2
114.5
111.2
109.3
119.9
115.0
115.1
110.3
124.4
123.3
121.8
113.4
130.7
127.5
127.1
113.6
132.8
90.8
82.4
93.8
86.2
95.0
88.4
95.0
92.2
106.7
104.1
116.1
106.8
122.4
104.7
125.4
103.3
133.6
103.8
136.5
104.8
34.2
10.7
30.7
40.8
31.0
41.5
21.4
31.7
56.5
46.5
67.8
60 5
38.8
57.6
68.0
64.1
70.9
44.7
59.5
89.1
81.7
90.4
77.3
97.9
104.5
104.0
102.5
98.7
103.5
112.2
119.6
121.6
128.8
134.2
59.9
78.2
91.3
88.7
85.3
78.4
77.4
103.6
91.8
87.2
78.4
88.8
99.3
87.2
88.0
88.2
89.5
110.7
107.7
94.5
84.6
93.3
100.8
92.2
90.9
94.5
92.8
105.3
110.2
101.5
90.2
99.1
104.3
97.2
94.0
98.1
96.9
101.3
111.6
105.5
96.3
101.0
102.7
99.1
99.1
99.6
100.1
100.2
110.6
105.4
101.4
100.7
101.7
99.8
102.8
99.2
100.6
98.3
103.6
100.1
96.0
97.0
99.0
95.7
91.8
96.4
98.2
102.7
101.3
101.5
95.4
101.4
109.3
100.3
93.5
102.2
104.2
106.7
115.7
106.2
100.6
104.2
115.1
104.9
93.7
107.2
107.8
109.0
130.1
107.8
106.7
104.2
119.0
104.6
92.5
106.7
110.6
110.1
132.9
108.3
110.0
109.0
121.7
110.3
95.8
110.4
116.1
113.3
140.3
109.3
103.9
111.8
127.3
114.6
100.7
112.5
118.8
116.4
146.4
109.7
92.1
84.1
76.3
170.7
136.5
142.1
142.3
109.0
164.7
154.0
168.3
217.4
104.4
102.1
102.3
174.7
129.0
148.7
136.3
121.2
156.4
154.3
154.7
202.1
107.5
113.5
93.8
119.7
101.1
133.1
110.5
122.4
111.9
135.0
124.0
155.3
103.8
113.0
96.6
100.0
109.6
106.6
99.9
103.6
97.6
118.6
119.5
118.9
106.6
120.0
99.8
101.5
107.2
105.5
99.3
108.9
98.9
114.3
121.4
123.2
107.1
119.9
100.8
102.3
104.7
105.8
99.3
109.7
99.7
107.1
119.0
122.3
104.8
111.9
100.9
104.3
103.7
105.9
100.1
107.7
101.6
103.7
116.4
119.2
100.4
103.8
102.0
101.5
102.1
103.0
100.9
104.2
101.0
100.8
109.0
108.5
101.4
102.6
95.6
94.7
94.8
95.1
91.3
93.6
96.4
102.1
94.9
97.5
103.6
106.6
93.7
93.6
104.0
109.1
92.0
92.0
103.7
112.0
92.2
90.8
105.5
115.4
91.5
89.5
105.6
119.0
86.2
91.3
14.9
10.4
4.3
5.4
4.6
4.3
8.1
1.6
6.4
4.7
4.1
3.1
23.8
17.8
16.5
13.7
13.3
10.3
20.7
4.7
20.2
11.8
10.8
6.3
55.8
47.7
58.6
52.5
49.6
40.8
53.6
28.2
64.4
39.0
37.4
33.2
80.9
75.3
77.9
79.7
80.1
78.6
76.0
66.7
87.8
78.5
67.3
64.8
84.2
77.8
79.2
81.1
82.9
81.6
79.1
69.3
87.7
83.3
71.7
67.7
86.9
82.5
84.2
85.9
87.7
86.0
83.2
75.9
88.5
87.2
79.4
72.9
91.0
89.5
90.7
90.1
92.7
90.6
89.4
84.4
90.8
92.3
87.6
80.9
95.8
94.7
95.9
97.3
95.9
96.2
95.1
96.3
95.2
97.5
95.4
90.5
102.9
99.6
104.6
104.8
104.6
102.8
105.9
107.5
103.7
101.5
98.0
104.3
-
-
_
105.0
111.7
107.8
108.2
104.4
101.1
106.5
107.7
117.7
112.8
110.6
109.2
106.2
107.4
109.4
123.7
120.9
113.9
113.6
113.4
108.2
112.4
126.6
125.9
117.5
119.1
118.3
112.8
114.0
127.6
124.8
117.8
126.4
121.5
119.2
25.5
30.9
30.1
15.4
19.5
27.8
8.0
33.2
12.9
14.9
10.5
30.0
43.3
41.7
25.2
24.0
39.8
12.7
53.0
20.4
20.5
14.1
77.6
63.3
91.7
80.3
55.0
61.2
69.4
44.0
93.1
50.8
50.6
59.1
85.7
82.5
96.0
89.7
88.4
96.2
86.3
78.3
95.8
84.1
74.7
81.5
85.9
85.5
93.4
88.1
88.2
93.4
86.5
79.9
93.5
90.4
79.0
82.2
89.5
89.2
94.0
88.7
88.1
93.6
87.9
84.9
91.1
92.2
84.7
84.6
93.1
93.9
95.0
93.0
93.6
96.8
90.3
91.3
92.1
95.6
92.3
91.6
97.5
99.6
96.5
98.1
96.3
99.3
93.3
98.4
95.6
100.0
100.4
98.1
100.8
97.2
104.1
102.3
100.1
102.2
105.3
104.4
101.8
100.9
91.8
100.2
97.7
94.5
104.9
97.9
93.0
96.8
103.6
102.1
94.8
102.9
87.0
99.7
94.3
95.2
100.1
96.4
93.4
94.0
105.9
103.2
92.3
107.1
86.8
102.5
94.3
95.8
95.8
97.6
92.3
95.1
107.5
109.6
91.5
111.4
90.4
104.7
94.3
96.2
95.0
94.6
95.3
91.1
103.9
111.1
89.9
116.9
88.5
108.7
94.5
99.2
95.4
94.7
94.9
89.4
100.4
109.8
88.7
121.4
89.0
113.8
31.9
10.9
19.4
13.5
21.1
10.4
16.0
15.5
11.3
16.8
15.6
34.7
15.3
27.0
20.3
23.0
17.1
24.9
25.8
17.8
23.0
19.2
77.6
65.4
51.3
88.3
58.9
76.7
59.6
63.3
82.4
63.9
69.6
77.8
85.7
75.2
84.2
77.2
77.9
84.7
74.9
74.4
83.1
77.5
68.5
75.7
85.9
83.9
92.4
77.0
79.0
82.9
76.9
75.6
83.1
86.1
75.0
82.9
89.5
91.0
86.3
72.3
72.6
77.7
73.0
76.2
75.5
82.9
76.4
78.5
93.1
97.2
83.1
89.5
91.3
94.1
87.3
93.8
88.9
95.0
90.8
92.5
97.5
105.0
90.9
92.3
90.8
93.1
87.8
97.6
89.8
95.7
96.6
98.2
100.8
91.1
118.8
95.1
93.2
95.5
99.4
81.8
96.3
88.3
68.6
85.2
97.7
83.6
130.1
94.2
88.3
92.4
99.8
78.1
91.6
90.7
65.7
86.4
94.3
83.8
135.1
105.2
100.7
99.8
115.5
78.0
101.2
105.0
70.8
91.6
94.3
84.9
111.7
101.4
96.1
98.4
111.6
87.5
95.4
107.1
78.5
92.5
94.3
83.9
99.5
84.9
87.0
82.6
93.5
80.3
81.0
102.5
67.5
100.8
94.5
80.8
92.3
83.8
85.5
80.2
89.1
77.9
78.6
99.9
65.2
106.8
Output
United States........................................................
Japan....................................................................
Belgium.................................................................
Denmark..............................................................
France...................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy.......................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Norway..................................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
Total hours
United States........................................................
Canada................................................................
Japan....................................................................
Belgium.................................................................
Denmark...............................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Nonway.................................................................
Sweden................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
-
-
92.4
86.7
96.7
91.3
105.2
99.6
99.4
91.6
84.3
98.0
90.0
106.9
106.3
103.0
91.0
80.4
96.7
88.9
107.9
106.0
104.8
_
89.5
78.6
97.4
88.8
111.1
105.0
105.4
_
89.9
79.3
99.0
89.5
111.9
107.3
104.7
_
105.8
100.4
106.7
106.1
108.3
103.6
109.5
109.2
110.7
102.8
110.9
112.0
115.1
106.7
114.1
115.1
120.0
110.8
115.0
115.9
Compensation per hour
United States........................................................
Canada.................................................................
Japan....................................................................
Belgium.................................................................
Denmark...............................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Norway.....................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
_
_
Unit labor costs: National currency basis
United States........................................................
Canada.................................................................
Japan..................................................................
Belgium.................................................................
Denmark...............................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Norway..................................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
Unit labor costs: U.S. dollar basis
United States........................................................
Canada..................................................................
Japan.....................................................................
Belgium.................................................................
Denmark...............................................................
France..................................................................
Germany...............................................................
Italy........................................................................
Netherlands..........................................................
Nonway..................................................................
Sweden.................................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
- Data not available.
116 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
46.
Occupational injury and illness rates by industry,1 United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers3
Industry and type of case
1987
1988
1989 1
1990
1992
1991
1993 4 1994 4 1995 4 1996 4 1997 4 1998 4
P R IV A T E S E C T O R 5
8.3
3.8
69.9
8.6
4.0
76.1
8.6
4.0
78.7
8.8
4.1
84.0
8.4
3.9
86.5
8.9
3.9
93.8
8.5
3.8
8.4
3.8
8.1
3.6
7.4
3.4
7.1
3.3
6.7
3.1
11.2
5.7
94.1
10.9
5.6
101.8
10.9
5.7
100.9
11.6
5.9
112.2
10.8
5.4
108.3
11.6
5.4
126.9
11.2
5.0
10.0
4.7
9.7
4.3
8.7
3.9
8.4
4.1
7.9
3.9
8.5
4.9
144.0
8.8
5.1
152.1
8.5
4.8
137.2
8.3
5.0
119.5
7.4
4.5
129.6
7.3
4.1
204.7
6.8
3.9
6.3
3.9
6.2
3.9
5.4
3.2
5.9
3.7
4.9
2.9
14.7
6.8
135.8
14.6
6.8
142.2
14.3
6.8
143.3
14.2
6.7
147.9
13.0
6.1
148.1
13.1
5.8
161.9
12.2
5.5
11.8
5.5
10.6
4.9
9.9
4.5
9.5
4.4
8.8
4.0
14.2
6.5
134.0
14.0
6.4
132.2
13.9
6.5
137.3
13.4
6.4
137.6
12.0
5.5
132.0
12.2
5.4
142.7
11.5
5.1
10.9
5.1
9.8
4.4
9.0
4.0
8.5
3.7
8.4
3.9
14.5
6.4
139.1
15.1
7.0
162.3
13.8
6.5
147.1
13.8
6.3
144.6
12.8
6.0
160.1
12.1
5.4
165.8
11.1
5.1
10.2
5.0
9.9
4.8
9.0
4.3
8.7
4.3
8.2
4.1
15.0
7.1
135.7
14.7
7.0
141.1
14.6
6.9
144.9
14.7
6.9
153.1
13.5
6.3
151.3
13.8
6.1
168.3
12.8
5.8
12.5
5.8
11.1
5.0
10.4
4.8
10.0
4.7
9.1
4.1
11.9
5.3
95.5
13.1
5.7
107.4
13.1
5.8
113.0
13.2
5.8
120.7
12.7
5.6
121.5
12.5
5.4
124.6
12.1
5.3
12.2
5.5
11.6
5.3
10.6
4.9
10.3
4.8
9.7
4.7
12.5
5.4
96.8
14.2
5.9
111.1
14.1
6.0
116.5
14.2
6.0
123.3
13.6
5.7
122.9
13.4
5.5
126.7
13.1
5.4
13.5
5.7
12.8
5.6
11.6
5.1
11.3
5.1
10.7
5.0
18.9
9.6
176.5
19.5
10.0
189.1
18.4
9.4
177.5
18.1
8.8
172.5
16.8
8.3
172.0
16.3
7.6
165.8
15.9
7.6
15.7
7.7
14.9
7.0
14.2
6.8
13.5
6.5
13.2
6.8
15.4
6.7
103.6
16.6
7.3
115.7
16.1
7.2
16.9
7.8
15.9
7.2
14.8
6.6
128.4
14.6
6.5
15.0
7.0
13.9
6.4
12.2
5.4
12.0
5.8
11.4
5.7
14.9
7.1
135.8
16.0
7.5
141.0
15.5
7.4
149.8
15.4
7.3
160.5
14.8
6.8
156.0
13.6
6.1
152.2
13.8
6.3
13.2
6.5
12.3
5.7
12.4
6.0
11.8
5.7
11.8
6.0
17.0
7.4
145.8
19.4
8.2
161.3
18.7
8.1
168.3
19.0
8.1
180.2
17.7
7.4
169.1
17.5
7.1
175.5
17.0
7.3
16.8
7.2
16.5
7.2
15.0
6.8
15.0
7.2
14.0
7.0
17.0
7.2
121.9
18.8
8.0
138.8
18.5
7.9
147.6
18.7
7.9
155.7
17.4
7.1
146.6
16.8
6.6
144.0
16.2
6.7
16.4
6.7
15.8
6.9
14.4
6.2
14.2
6.4
13.9
6.5
11.3
4.4
72.7
12.1
4.7
82.8
12.1
4.8
86.8
12.0
4.7
88.9
11.2
4.4
86.6
11.1
4.2
87.7
11.1
4.2
11.6
4.4
11.2
4.4
9.9
4.0
10.0
4.1
9.5
4.0
7.2
3.1
55.9
8.0
3.3
64.6
9.1
3.9
77.5
9.1
3.8
79.4
8.6
3.7
83.0
8.4
3.6
81.2
8.3
3.5
8.3
3.6
7.6
3.3
6.8
3.1
6.6
3.1
5.9
2.8
13.5
5.7
105.7
17.7
6.6
134.2
17.7
6.8
138.6
17.8
6.9
153.7
18.3
7.0
166.1
18.7
7.1
186.6
18.5
7.1
19.6
7.8
18.6
7.9
16.3
7.0
15.4
6.6
14.6
6.6
5.8
2.4
43.9
6.1
2.6
51.5
5.6
2.5
55.4
5.9
2.7
57.8
6.0
2.7
64.4
5.9
2.7
65.3
5.6
2.5
5.9
2.7
5.3
2.4
5.1
2.3
4.8
2.3
4.0
1.9
10.7
4.6
81.5
11.3
5.1
91.0
11.1
5.1
97.6
11.3
5.1
113.1
11.3
5.1
104.0
10.7
5.0
108.2
10.0
4.6
9.9
4.5
9.1
4.3
9.5
4.4
8.9
4.2
8.1
3.9
March 2000
117
_
A g r ic u ltu r e , fo r e s tr y , a n d f is h in g 5
_
M in in g
_
C o n s tr u c tio n
_
General building contractors:
_
Heavy construction, except building:
Special trades contractors:
_
_
_
_
_
M a n u fa c tu r in g
Durable goods:
Lumber and wood products:
Furniture and fixtures:
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Primary metal industries:
Fabricated metal products:
Industrial machinery and equipment:
Electronic and other electrical equipment:
Transportation equipment:
Instruments and related products:
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
Current Labor Statistics:
Injury and Illness Data
46. Continued-Occupational injury and illness rates by industry,1 United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers3
Industry and type of case2
1987
1988
19891
1990
1991
1992
19934 19944 19954 19964 19974
19984
Nondurable goods:
Total cases......................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................
Lost workdays...................................................
11.1
5.1
93.5
11.4
5.4
101.7
5.5
107.8
11.7
5.6
116.9
11.5
5.5
119.7
11.3
5.3
121.8
10.7
5.0
10.5
5.1
Food and kindred products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
17.7
18.5
9.2
169.7
18.5
9.3
174.7
20.0
9.9
202.6
19.5
9.9
207.2
18.8
9.5
211.9
17.6
8.9
17.1
9.2
153.7
8.6
11.6
8.2
4.3
16.3
8.7
15.0
8.0
14.5
8.0
13.6
7.5
Tobacco products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
2.5
46.4
9.3
2.9
53.0
8.7
3.4
64.2
7.7
3.2
62.3
6.4
2.8
52.0
6.0
2.4
42.9
6.4
3.1
Textile mill products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
9.0
3.6
65.9
9.6
4.0
78.8
10.3
4.2
81.4
9.6
4.0
85.1
10.1
4.4
88.3
9.9
4.2
87.1
6.7
3.4
Apparel and other textile products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
7.4
3.1
59.5
8.1
3.5
68.2
8.6
8.8
3.8
80.5
3.9
92.1
9.2
4.2
99.9
9.5
4.0
104.6
6.2
2.6
Paper and allied products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
12.8
5.8
122.3
13.1
5.9
124.3
12.7
5.8
132.9
12.1
5.5
124.8
11.2
5.0
122.7
11.0
5.0
125.9
7.1
3.7
Printing and publishing:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
6.7
3.1
55.1
6.6
3.2
59.8
6.9
3.3
63.8
6.9
3.3
69.8
6.7
3.2
74.5
7.3
3.2
74.8
5.4
2.8
Chemicals and allied products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
7.0
3.1
58.8
7.0
3.3
59.0
7.0
3.2
63.4
6.5
3.1
61.6
6.4
3.1
62.4
6.0
2.8
64.2
4.2
Petroleum and coal products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
7.3
3.1
65.9
7.0
3.2
68.4
6.6
6.6
6.2
5.9
3.9
3.3
68.1
3.1
77.3
2.9
68.2
2.8
1.8
71.2
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
15.9
7.6
130.8
16.3
8.1
142.9
16.2
16.2
7.8
151.3
15.1
7.2
150.9
14.5
6.8
153.3
13.9
6.5
14.0
6.7
12.9
6.5
12.3
6.3
11.9
5.8
11.2
5.8
147.2
Leather and leather products:
Total cases....................................................
Lost workday cases.......................................
Lost workdays................................................
12.4
5.8
114.5
11.4
5.6
128.2
13.6
6.5
130.4
12.1
5.9
152.3
12.5
5.9
140.8
12.1
5.4
128.5
12.1
5.5
12.0
11.4
4.8
10.7
4.5
10.6
9.8
4.5
8.4
4.9
108.1
8.9
5.1
118.6
9.2
5.3
121.5
9.6
5.5
134.1
9.3
5.4
140.0
9.1
5.1
144.0
7.3
4.3
Total cases........................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................
Lost workdays....................................................
7.7
3.4
56.1
7.8
3.5
60.9
8.0
3.6
63.5
7.9
3.5
65.6
7.6
3.4
72.0
8.4
3.5
80.1
6.5
2.8
Wholesale trade:
Total cases........................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................
Lost workdays....................................................
7.4
3.7
64.0
7.6
3.8
69.2
7.7
4.0
71.9
7.4
3.7
71.5
7.2
3.7
79.2
7.6
3.6
82.4
6.5
3.3
Retail trade:
Total cases........................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................
Lost workdays....................................................
7.8
3.3
52.9
7.9
3.4
57.6
8.1
3.4
60.0
8.1
3.4
63.2
7.7
3.3
69.1
8.7
3.4
79.2
6.5
2.7
2.0
2.0
.9
17.2
2.0
.9
17.6
2.4
1.1
27.3
2.4
1.1
24.1
2.9
1.9
0.7
5.4
5.5
2.7
51.2
6.0
6.2
2.8
60.0
8.6
8.0
2.1
5.3
4.3
T r a n s p o r ta tio n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s
Total cases..............................................................
Lost workday cases..................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................
W h o le s a le a n d r e ta il tr a d e
F in a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d re a l e s t a t e
Total cases...............................................................
Lost workday cases...................................................
Lost workdays............................................................
.9
14.3
1.2
32.9
S e r v ic e s
Total cases..............
Lost workday cases..
Lost workdays..........
5.5
2.7
45.8
2.6
47.7
2.8
56.4
7.1
3.0
5.2
2.4
68.6
1 Data for 1989 and subseguent years are based on the S ta n d ard Industrial C lass
ification M a n u a l, 1987 Edition. For this reason, they are not strictly comparable with data
for the years 1985-88, which were based on the S ta n d ard Industrial Classification
M a n u a l, 1972 Edition, 1977 Supplement.
N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays;
EH = total hours worked by all employees during the calendar year; and
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per week, 50
weeks per year).
2 Beginning with the 1992 survey, the annual survey measures only nonfatal injuries and
Illnesses, while past surveys covered both fatal and nonfatal incidents. To better address
fatalities, a basic element of workplace safety, BLS implemented the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries.
4 Beginning with the 1993 survey, lost workday estimates will not be generated. As of
1992, BLS began generating percent distributions and the median number of days away
from work by Industry and for groups of workers sustaining similar work disabilities.
3 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays per
100 full-time workers and were calculated as (N/EH) X 200,000, where:
118 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
March 2000
5 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
- Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
47.
Fatal occupational injuries by event or exposure, 1993-98
Fatalities
Event or exposure1
1993-97
19972
Average
Number
1998
Number
Percent
6,335
6,238
6,026
100
2,611
1,334
652
109
234
132
249
360
267
388
214
315
373
106
83
2,605
1,393
640
103
230
142
282
387
298
377
216
261
367
109
93
2,630
1,431
701
118
271
142
306
373
300
384
216
223
413
112
60
44
24
12
2
4
2
5
6
5
1,241
995
810
75
110
215
1,111
860
708
73
79
216
960
709
569
61
79
223
16
12
9
1
1
4
1,005
573
369
65
290
153
124
1,035
579
384
54
320
189
118
941
517
317
58
266
129
140
16
9
5
1
4
668
591
94
139
83
52
716
653
116
154
87
44
702
623
111
156
97
51
12
10
2
3
2
1
Oxygen deficiency................................................................................
Drowning, submersion.....................................................................
586
320
128
43
120
70
101
80
554
298
138
40
123
59
90
72
572
334
153
46
104
48
87
75
F i r e s a n d e x p l o s i o n s ......................................................................................................
199
196
205
3
O t h e r e v e n t s o r e x p o s u r e s 3........................................................................................
26
21
16
-
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n c i d e n t s ..............................................................................................
Highway incident..................................................................................
Collision between vehicles, mobile equipment............................
Moving in opposite directions, oncoming...................................
Nonhighway (farm, industrial premises) incident............................
Overturned.........................................................................................
Worker struck by a vehicle.................................................................
Water vehicle incident.........................................................................
Railway..................................................................................................
A s s a u l t s a n d v i o l e n t a c t s .............................................................................................
Shooting.............................................................................................
Stabbing.............................................................................................
Other, including bombing................................................................
Self-inflicted injuries..............................................................................
C o n t a c t w i t h o b j e c t s a n d e q u i p m e n t .................................................................
Struck by object....................................................................................
Struck by falling object.....................................................................
Struck by flying object......................................................................
Caught in running equipment or machinery..................................
F a l l s ..................................................................................................................................................
Fall to lower level.................................................................................
Fall from ladder.................................................................................
Fall from roof......................................................................................
Fall from scaffold, staging...............................................................
Fall on same level................................................................................
.....................
Contact with electric current...............................................................
Contact with overhead power lines................................................
Contact with temperature extremes..................................................
Exposure to caustic, noxious, or allergenic substances................
E x p o s u r e t o h a r m fu l s u b s ta n c e s o r e n v ir o n m e n t s
1 Based on the 1992 bls Occupational Injury and Illness
3
6
4
4
7
2
1
2
2
9
6
3
1
2
1
1
1
Includes the category "Bodily reaction and exertion."
Classification Structures.
2
The BLS news release issued August 12, 1998, reported a
NOTE:
Totals
for
major categories
may include sub
total of 6,218 fatal work injuries for calendar year 1997. Since
categories not shown separately. Percentages may not add to
then, an additional 20 job-related fatalities were identified,
totals because of rounding.
percent.
bringing the total job-related fatality count for 1997 to 6,238.
Dash indicates less than 0.5
Monthly Labor Review
March 2000
119
U.S. Government Bookstores
IN» ........r
Seattle /
,N
:ô
/
/ #"■'....... --1
f
/ Portland /
/
/
{
)
'
k
/T - -•—
/
<
r
\ . __•—
J
/
t
''
i
!
fr'p
aukee •?'
_
jM ilw-----v...___ \
^
1
D
V
Boston
l
. r # ; N ew York
Çie v e i3nd \ 'f,
etro
o
/
Goiumbus
Denver •
urei
ashington, DC
« Kansas City
pueblo •
b
f.
Chlcap0 *: P i bu ^ . ^
- i / hHf de,phia
p ,
■ «
San Francise^
Los
y 'T fX .
\i
Ì---- 1
Bjrrnihgharn
*iqham %
• \ • A ,lan ,a
V
\ — .............Jacksonville
„ a Houston •
J /
....\ N
\ \
/
A y
\S
/ y
X V
V
\l
'b 'j
The S uperintendent o f D ocum ents operates 24
U . S . G o v e r n m e n t B o o k s t o r e s w here you can brow se through
shelves o f inform ation p ro d u cts before purchasing. Naturally, the
stores c a n ’t sto c k all 1 0 ,0 0 0 -p lu s titles in our inventory. But they
do carry the titles y o u ’re m ost likely to be looking for.
O ur store personnel will be happy to arrange fo r your purchase
to be sent directly to your hom e or office. All bookstores accept
VISA, MasterCard, Discover/NOVUS, and Superintendent of
Docum ents deposit account orders. For m ore information,
contact the U . S . G o v e r n m e n t B o o k s t o r e nearest to you.
U.S. Government Bookstore
First Union Plaza
999 Peachtree St NE Ste 120
Atlanta, GA 30309-3964
(404) 347-1900
Fax (404) 347-1897
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
1100 Commerce St Rm IC50
Dallas, TX 75242-1027
(214) 767-0076
FAX: (214) 767-3239
U.S. Government Bookstore
O’Neill Building
2021 3rd Ave N
Birmingham, AL 35210-1159
(205)731-1056
Fax (205) 731-3444
U.S. Government Bookstore
1660 Wynkoop Street Ste 130
Denver, CO 80202-1144
(303) 844-3964
Fax (303) 844-4000
U.S. Government Printing Office
Retail Sales Outlet
8660 Cherry Ln
Laurel, MD 20707-4907
(301) 953-7974
(301) 792-0262
Fax (301) 498-8995
U.S. Government Bookstore
Thomas P. O'Neill Building
10 Causeway St Rm 169
Boston, MA 02222-1047
(617)720-4180
Fax (617) 720-5753
U.S. Government Bookstore
One Congress Center
401 South State St Ste 124
Chicago, IL 60605-1225
(312) 353-5133
Fax (312) 353-1590
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
1240 E 9th St Rm 1653
Cleveland, OH 44199-2001
(216) 522-4922
Fax (216) 522-4714
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
200 N High St Rm 207
Columbus, OH 43215-2408
(614) 469-6956
Fax (614) 469-5374
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
477 Michigan Avenue Ste 160
Detroit, M l 48226-2500
(313)226-7816
Fax (313) 226-4698
U.S. Government Bookstore
Texas Crude Building
801 Travis St Ste 120
Houston, TX 77002-5727
(713)228-1187
Fax (713) 228-1186
U.S. Government Bookstore
100 West Bay Street Ste 100
Jacksonville, FL 32202-3811
(904) 353-0569
Fax (904) 353-1280
U.S. Government Bookstore
120 Bannister Mall
5600 E Bannister Rd
Kansas City, MO 64137
(816)765-2256
Fax (816) 767-8233
U.S. Government Bookstore
ARCO Plaza C-Level
505 S Flower St
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2101
(213)239-9844
Fax (213) 239-9848
U.S. Government Bookstore
310 W Wisconsin Ave Ste 150W
M ilwaukee, Wl 53203-2228
(414)297-1304
Fax (414) 297-1300
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
26 Federal Plaza Rm 2-120
New York, NY 10278-0004
(212) 264-3825
Fax (212) 264-9318
U.S. Government Bookstore
Robert Morris Building
100 N 17th St
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2736
(215) 636-1900
Fax (215) 636-1903
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
1000 Liberty Ave Rm118
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4003
(412)395-5021
Fax (412) 395-4547
U.S. Government Bookstore
1305 SW 1st Ave
Portland, OR 97201-5801
(503)221-6217
Fax (503) 225-0563
U.S. Government Bookstore
Norwest Banks Building
201 W 8th St
Pueblo, CO 81003-3038
(719)544-3142
Fax (719)544-6719
U.S. Government Bookstore
Marathon Plaza
303 2nd St Rm 141 -S
San Francisco, CA 94107-1366
(415)512-2770
Fax (415) 512-2276
U.S. Government Bookstore
Federal Building
915 2nd Ave Rm 194
Seattle, WA 98174-1001
(206) 553-4270
Fax (206) 553-6717
U.S. Government Bookstore
U.S. Government Printing Office
71 ON Capitol St NW
Washington, DC 20401
(202) 512-0132
Fax (202) 512-1355
U.S. Government Bookstore
1510 H St NW
Washington, DC 20005-1008
(202) 653-5075
Fax (202) 376-5055
(A s o f J u n e 1 9 9 8 )
A ll stores are open M onday through Friday. Kansas C ity is open 7 days a week.
It helps
to know
the course,
before settin
the strategy
Your job requires that you keep up with
all the numbers. Your company relies on
your analyses of economic conditions.
You need to start with a reliable source:
Monthly Labor Review,
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Subscribe to the publication that offers
facts—not opinions,
analyses—not spin,
research—not advocacy.
United States Government
INFORMATION
Order Processing Code:
] YES
*5551
please send______ subscriptions to:
C redit card orders are welcom e!
Monthly Labor Review (MLR)
Fax yo u r orders (202) 512-2250
at $31 (domestic); $38.75 (foreign) per year.
The total cost of my order is $
Phone yo u r orders (2 0 2 )5 1 2 -1 8 0 0
Price includes regular shipping & handling and is subject to change.
Nam e or title
(Please type or p rint)
Company nam e
Room, floor, suite
Check method of payment:
□
Check payable to:
Superintendent of Documents
□ GPO Deposit Account
Street address
/
City
/
State
Zip code + 4
Daytime phone including area code
Purchase order number (optional)
M ail to:
Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954,
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
Important: Please include this completed order form
with your remittance
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
□ VISA
□ MasterCard
□ Discover
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Postal Square Building, Rm.2850
2 Massachusetts Ave., NE
Washington, DC 20212-0001
Periodicals
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
USPS 987-800
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
Address Service Requested
MLR
FEDER442F ISSDUE004R
1
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF STL0U
CAROL THAXTON LIBRARY UNIT
PO BOX 442
SAINT LOUIS
MO 63 1 6 6
Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series
R e le a se
P e rio d
R e le a se
P e rio d
R e le a se
P e rio d
d ate
c o v e re d
d a te
c o v e red
d ate
c o v e re d
E m p lo y m e n t s itu a tio n
March 3
February
April 7
March
May 5
April
P ro d u c tiv ity a n d co s ts
March 7
4th quarter
May 4
1st quarter
March 15
February
April 12
March
May 11
April
34-38
P ro d u c e r P ric e In d e x e s
March 16
February
April 13
March
May 12
April
2; 31-33
C o n s u m e r P ric e in d e x e s
March 17
February
April 14
March
May 16
April
2; 28-30
R eal e a rn in g s
March 17
February
April 14
March
May 16
April
14, 16
April 27
1st quarter
S e rie s
U .S . Im p o rt a n d E x p o rt
P ric e In d e x e s
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x e s
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M L R ta b le
num ber
1; 4-20
2; 39-42
1-3; 21-24
@FedFRASER