Full text of Monthly Labor Review : October 1980, Volume 103, Number 10

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

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

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Ray Marshall, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner

The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, D.C. 20212.
Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year—
$18 domestic; $22.50 foreign.
Single copy $2.50.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-0818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402
Make checks payable to
Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Use of funds for printing
this periodical has been approved by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget
through October 31, 1982. Second-class
postage paid at Riverdale, MD.,
and at additional mailing offices.
Library of Congress Catalog
Card Number 15-26485

Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I — Boston: W endell D. M acdonald
1603 JFK Federal Building, Government Center,
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II — New York: Sam uel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region III — Philadelphia: A lvin I. M argulls
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101
Phone: (215) 596 -11 54
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region I V — Atlanta: D onaldM . Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 30309
Phone: (404) 8 8 1 -44 18
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V — Chicago: W illiam E. Rice
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street,
Chicago, III. 60604
Phone: (312) 3 5 3 -18 80
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI — Dallas: Bryan Richey
Second Floor, 555 Griffin Square Building, Dallas, Tex. 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII — Kansas City: E llio tt A. B row ar
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, Mo. 64106
Phone: (816) 374-2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming

October cover:

Fragment panel from the mural “ Immigration” (1937)
painted by Edward Laning.
Formerly located on Ellis Island, an abandoned site
for screening immigrants to the United States, the
mural was retrieved and restored by
the General Services Administration.
Cover design by Kris Jorgenson,
Audio-Visual Communication Services,
U.S. Department of Labor.


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

Regions IX and X — San Francisco: D. Bruce H anchett
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017,
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556 -46 78
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
OCTOBER 1980
VOLUME 103, NUMBER 10

Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor

IMMIGRATION AND THE LABOR FORCE
Philip L. Martin, Alan Richards

4

International migration of labor: boon or bane?
According to trade theory, free labor flows across national borders should benefit
workers, employers, and societies; but recent evidence raises doubts about the results

Ayse Kudat, Mine Sabuncuoglu

10

The changing composition of Europe’s guestworker population
Although the flow of guestworkers diminished during the 1970’s, wives joined those
who remained; the proportion of women migrants rose and now exceeds 40 percent

Ellen Sehgal, Joyce Vialet

18

Documenting the undocumented: data, like aliens, are elusive
Millions of illegal immigrants currently live and work in the United States, but efforts to
estimate their economic and societal impact are hampered by lack of valid information

Barry R. Chiswick

22

Immigrant earnings patterns by sex, race, and ethnic groupings
Based on 1970 census data, most immigrant men reach earnings equality with natives
in 11 to 15 years; for women, earnings vary more by racial and ethnic characteristics

David S. North

26

Nonimmigrant workers: visiting labor force participants
These aliens include students, laborers, and professionals; most require sponsors and
to obtain temporary workers employers must show that U.S. workers are unavailable

Robert L. Bach, Jennifer B. Bach

31

Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees
Based on the limited data available, most earlier Indochinese refugees found work,
but recent arrivals speak less English and are confronted with a weaker job market

Robert L. Bach

39

The new Cuban immigrants: their background and prospects
Most early arrivals were young working-age men, with education and skill levels
above average for Cuba; ex-offenders include many jailed for political reasons

David S. North, Philip L. Martin


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

47

Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination
Immigrants may constitute up to 45 percent of future U.S. labor force growth;
efforts are needed to ensure that immigration, employment goals are complementary

DEPARTMENTS
2
51
52
56
65

Labor month in review
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics

Labor M onth
In Review
IMPROVING JOBLESS PAY. The Na­
tional Commission on Unemployment
Compensation, a 13-member panel
representing employers, employees, and
the public, completed a 4-year study
with more than 30 recommendations to
improve or preserve the unemployment
compensation system. Highlights:
Broader coverage. The commission calls
for a major expansion of coverage.
Several proposals would be especially
beneficial to women: the panel asks that
“ sexual harassment” and “ compelling
family circumstances” be considered
legitimate reasons for leaving a job and
that persons who seek only part-time
work be eligible for compensation. In
addition, displaced homemakers who
registered for work would qualify for
benefits through unemployment in­
surance credits or equivalent work or on
the basis of credits earned by their
spouses. Other groups included in the
broadened coverage are all agricultural
workers (presently only those on farms
with 10 or more employees or a $20,000
payroll are insured) and household
workers who are paid at least $50 a
quarter (presently only those receiving
$1,000 or more are covered).
Tax-exempt payments. The panel
recommends that unemployment in­
surance payments be exempted from
Federal income tax, calling the practice
discriminatory (because some other in­
comes are not taxed) and citing the dif­
ficulties of the Internal Revenue Service
in enforcing this provision. It recom­
mends that basic benefits be increased,
in steps, to a maximum in 1986 of twothirds of a State’s average weekly wage
for covered workers.

2 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The Commission wants greater pro­
tection provided during periods of heavy
unemployment and recommends a
“ State extended benefit” (SEB) program
that would provide, depending on a
State’s insured unemployment rate, up
to an additional 26 weeks of unemploy­
ment benefits. This means that some
workers could receive 65 weeks of aid;
the present maximum benefit period is
39 weeks. For the longer-term
unemployed, the Commission proposes
increasing Comprehensive Employment
and Training Administration (CETA) job
slots and recommends establishing some
type of income-tested program, separate
from the unemployment compensation
program, for all unemployed persons,
including those who have exhausted
their benefits under the present pro­
gram.
Finances and administration. The Com­
mission, concerned about recent in­
creases of unemployment which have
threatened the integrity of the system,
makes several recommendations for put­
ting unemployment compensation pro­
grams on sound financial footing. It
proposes gradually increasing the tax­
able wage base from 50 percent of the
average earnings of covered employees
in 1983 to 65 percent in 1989 and also
favors reducing employer payroll taxes
for past debts. To encourage prudent
financial policies, the Commission sug­
gests allowing only financially solvent
States to borrow from Federal funds.
The panel also wants to establish a
Board of Trustees to monitor unem­
ployment insurance trust funds. Several
of the board’s major responsibilities
would be to set investment policies and
inform the Congress on amounts needed

to finance a State’s compensation
fund.
The panel suggests the system would
be more efficient if the U.S. Treasury
Department would let the States collect
unemployment payroll taxes. It also
wants more Federal funds allocated for
detecting fraud, errors, and tax delin­
quencies and believes that the U.S.
Employment Service should be expand­
ed, from its present ceiling of 30,000
employees to 50,000 by 1985.
First major review. The Federal-State
unemployment system was established in
1935. Although many changes have been
made at both the Federal and State
levels, this study marks the first time a
comprehensive review of the system has
been made. Congress established the Na­
tional Commission on Unemployment
Compensation in 1976 to examine the
unemployment programs of States and
make recommendations for improve­
m ent. The Commission expired
September 30, but it asks the Congress
to appoint a similar National Commis­
sion every 10 years, beginning in 1988.
Wilbur J. Cohen, head of the panel,
estimated that adoption of all the recom­
mendations would increase the cost of
the unemployment compensation pro­
gram by $10 billion, to $35 billion. But,
he warned that “ uncom pensated
unemployment can cost society much
more than the cost of a reasonably im­
proved unemployment compensation
system.”
The preliminary report, Unemploy­
ment Compensation Policy Decisions, is
available from the National Commission
on Unemployment Compensation, 1815
Lynn Street, Arlington, Va. 22209. Q

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

Immigration and
the labor force
Although the United States has been, from its
beginning, a nation of immigrants—more are ad­
mitted each year than to any other nation in the
world—U.S. immigration policy has wavered between
welcoming immigrants and excluding them. When
workers and their skills were needed, immigrants
usually have been welcomed, even actively sought.
Dyring hard times, when job competition was keenest,
efforts at exclusion have been frequent.
Recent discussion of immigration to the United
States has focused on illegal immigrants, their impact
on the U.S. economy, and on refugees from Southeast
Asia and Cuba. This special issue of the Monthly
Labor Review reports on these groups, but also
examines broader immigration questions.
In the opening articles, Philip L. Martin and Alan
Richards help us view U.S. immigration in the context
of international migration, while Ayse Kudat and
Mine Sabuncuoglu examine Europe’s guestworker
experience. The problems of counting and evaluating
the impact of Mexican and other illegal aliens are
explored by Ellen Sehgal and Joyce Vialet. Barry R.
Chiswick analyzes the earnings patterns of immi­
grants, while David S. North examines the special
problems of aliens who are temporary workers. The
employment patterns and prospects of recent immi­
grants from Southeast Asia and Cuba are the subjects
of articles by Robert L. and Jennifer B. Bach. In the
final article, David S. North and Philip L. Martin
examine differences between immigration and em­
ployment policies and point to the need for more
coordination.
Although the articles deal with many facets of
immigration and represent differing approaches, not
all aspects or views of immigration are covered.
Readers who wish to comment on the articles or
present additional information are invited to do so.
The editors thank the authors who contributed to
this special issue of the Review and express particular
appreciation to Ellen Sehgal, who served as overall
consultant for the issue, and to Gregory J. Mounts
and Mary K. Rieg, who provided special editorial
assistance.

International migration
of labor: boon or bane?
According to trade theory,
free labor flows across national borders
should benefit workers, employers, and societies;
but recent evidence indicates that such migrations
may not provide these desired benefits
P h i l i p L. M a r t i n

and

A

lan

R ic h a r d s

An estimated 20 million persons currently live and
work in countries where they are neither citizens nor in­
tend to be permanent immigrants. One-half of these are
legally admitted “guestworkers”; the rest are illegal
aliens or “undocumented workers.’’1This article surveys
contemporary labor migrations, assesses their impacts
on the areas which send and receive them, and explores
future trends in international labor flows.2
Historically, migration brought permanent settlers
from the cosmopolitan East to the frontier West. Be­
tween 1800 and 1930, for example, 60 to 70 million for­
eigners arrived in the Americas, including indentured
servants and slaves. Some eventually returned to their
countries of origin,3 but most brought with them their
mobile assets, intending a permanent break with their
homelands.
Contemporary migration, on the other hand, is large­
ly a flow of workers, rather than of permanent settlers.
Most of today’s migrants move from less to more devel­
oped nations. They tend to be drawn from the middle
economic ranks of the societies which send them; the
very poor are generally unable to finance the trip or ob­
tain a work permit.4
Much migration is temporary today because few
areas remain open for permanent immigrants. Better
communication, lower real transport costs, and the crePhilip L. Martin is an associate professor of agricultural economics at
the University of California at Davis. Alan Richards is an assistant
professor of economics at the University of California at Santa Cruz.

Digitized for4 FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ation of new borders should promote more international
resettlement. Instead, most estimates put the number of
legally admitted immigrants (excluding refugees) to all
countries at no more than 1 million annually, of which
the United States receives 40 to 50 percent. While the
impulse to migrate may be as strong as ever, aspiring
permanent settlers find few opportunities to do so.5
Migrant labor benefits a variety of people in sending
and receiving areas. Labor migration provides income
for individual aliens and remittances, .through workers’
dependents, to sending nations. Employers hiring aliens
benefit, as do domestic consumers, when lower labor
costs translate into lower prices for goods and services.
Some native workers may also gain if the presence of
foreign labor preserves or creates skilled or supervisory
jobs for them. Finally, governments in labor-importing
countries may enjoy increased net income if more is col­
lected from legal aliens in taxes than it costs to provide
them public services.
The original premise motivating labor transfers held
that such migration was a positive-sum exchange: ex­
cept for a few natives who might have to compete for
jobs with the aliens, everyone gained. It is true that
benefits do flow from the use of foreign labor— benefits
sufficient to make halting labor migration very difficult.
But labor transfer often leads to undesired results,
mainly unemployment and low wages for some host-na­
tion residents and employer addiction to low-cost labor.
Much of the following discussion focuses on what goes
wrong in labor migrations, but it is important to note

that economic advantages also accrue from the use of
alien labor.

Contemporary labor flows
The magnitude and diversity of present day labor
flows is unprecedented. They may reflect traditional
movements to and from new nation states, illegal mi­
gration on a new scale, or publicly and privately orga­
nized labor transfers. Among the most controversial of
these flows are those of illegal aliens to the United
States, “guestworkers” to Western Europe, large foreign
workforces to the Middle East, and black labor to
South Africa.
Guestworkers. Legal “guestworkers” are foreign nation­
als admitted to a country for a fixed period to work for
a particular employer.6 Thus, they are “guests” in the
economic system, rather than aspiring permanent resi­
dents. Most official guestworker programs are jointly
directed by labor ministries and immigration authorities
so that immigration can be regulated in accordance
with current labor market needs.
Because guestworkers are admitted for predetermined
periods of employment, they leave families and assets
behind. After achieving a savings target or fulfilling a 1or 2-year contract, they are expected to return home
and perhaps be replaced by other workers eager for a
chance to earn “high wages.” Thus, implementation of
a guestworker program reflects the belief by the host
nation that a particular domestic labor shortage is only
temporary. As we will see, such beliefs are often unreal­
istic.
The most noteworthy guestworker programs were ini­
tiated by Western European nations between 1960 and
1973.7 France and Germany absorbed more than twothirds of Europe’s migrant workers, although alien la­
bor dependency reached its zenith during the late 1960’s
in Switzerland, where 1 in 3 workers was foreign. In
most instances, international agreements regulated the
recruitment and transportation of guestworkers, while
both domestic and bilateral considerations governed mi­
grant rights in receiving societies and the ultimate fate
of migrant populations. During the 6 years following
the European “recruitment stop,” nations which former­
ly imported labor have been plagued by unanticipated
results of their guestworker programs. These problems
include foreign resident populations swelled by family
unification; persistent labor shortages in the “second­
ary” (low-wage, low-skill) job markets in which alien
labor is concentrated; and the treatment of migrant
children, who are expected to leave, but are likely to be­
come permanent residents.
Migrants in the United States. The U.S. labor system
most closely resembling a legal guestworker program is

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

that which supplies farmworkers for temporary harvest
employment. This reliance on imported farmworkers is
anachronistic; most industrialized nations do not struc­
ture agriculture in a way which requires migrant labor.
And, whether inherently flawed or only badly adminis­
tered to date, temporary farmworker programs are gen­
erally regarded as one of the sorriest chapters in
American labor history.
The United States is also the world’s largest de facto
employer of foreign labor. A variety of past and current
factors, including the Bracero program (1942-1964),
lax enforcement of U.S. borders and immigration laws,
and Third World perceptions of U.S. economic oppor­
tunities, have produced an illegal labor force 4 to 6 mil­
lion strong. Apprehensions of such workers by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service have been
mounting steadily for over a decade, and now exceed 1
million persons annually. Many observers believe that
current resident aliens must eventually be granted am­
nesty permitting them to stay in the United States. Oth­
er possible solutions to the problem of illegal immi­
gration are currently under study by a Congressional
Select Commission.
Finally, the United States admits more of the world’s
stock of 14 million refugees than any other nation. The
1952 immigration law expedited the entry of aliens
fleeing Communist and Middle Eastern lands but dis­
couraged granting asylum to those from other countries.
Since 1975, the United States has admitted more than
750,000 refugees. The economic and social pressure of
these numbers led to passage of the Refugee Act of
1980,8 which sought to streamline admission procedures
by adopting the United Nations’ definition of “refugee”9
and setting an annual limit of 50,000 refugees for the
United States. The challenge now facing this nation and
other industrial societies is how to distinguish between
economic and political refugees, particularly when some
authoritarian governments blur such distinctions.
Other labor flows. Oil-rich Middle Eastern countries are
the temporary homes of 2 to 3 million workers. Aliens
often constitute well over half of a Middle Eastern la­
bor importer’s workforce. Labor flows in this region are
characterized by a relatively high proportion of manage­
rial or highly skilled persons from more industrialized
nations. Even so, most of the Middle East’s alien work­
ers, like guestworkers everywhere, are unskilled or semi­
skilled.
Private contractors in the Middle East are expected
to supply and control their own workforces. Some
guestworkers are also hired directly by governmental
agencies, but the absence of general labor laws and for­
mal labor transfer agreements produces employment
conditions which vary widely within and between
countries.10
5

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • International Migration o f Labor
The other major labor flows are still more varied.
Several million agricultural guestworkers move between
African nations each year. In South America, the eco­
nomic attractions of Venezuela and Argentina make
them the primary destinations, although South Ameri­
ca’s migrations often include political refugees as well
as persons seeking employment. And, East Germany is
a temporary home to an estimated 100,000 workers
from other Eastern Bloc nations. A variety of less visi­
ble illegal flows, and legal but only seasonal labor
transfers complete this sketch of current international
labor migration.11
During the 1970’s, many countries attempted to re­
duce their legal alien workforces by encouraging work­
ers to return to their homes, or by permitting them to
become permanent immigrants. However, indications
are that over the same period, the number of illegal mi­
grants has increased dramatically.

Theory and reality
According to international trade theory, two nations
with unequal resource endowments or productivities can
enjoy a bilateral increase in economic well-being by
freely exchanging capital, goods, and labor. Economic
benefits arise from the fact that one nation can use the
other’s capital or labor more productively, or that one
nation has a comparative advantage over its trading
partner in the production of certain goods. Permitting
trade and migration thus increases the output available
to both nations. Conversely, restricting exchange forces
each nation to produce and consume at less than full
capacity.
Trade theory also assumes that the welfare of all indi­
viduals is equally important, but in reality most nations
are more concerned with citizen welfare than with the
well-being of foreign nationals. Labor importation bene­
fits aliens and their employers, but may force natives to
compete with migrants for jobs, housing, and scarce
public goods. Thus, even if total output in both nations
increases, migration is “mutually beneficial” only if its
effects on each country’s income distribution are offset­
ting or relatively minor.
Another problem is that labor markets in sending
countries are highly imperfect. Often, there is limited
substitutability among workers of different skill levels.
Such labor-market segmentation can make it difficult to
fill specific vacancies caused by emigration, despite
widespread unemployment, thus retarding economic de­
velopment.
Finally, free migration is different from free trade in a
fundamental way. A trade transaction is a mere com­
modity exchange. Labor flows consist of people, whose
services are only rented, and whose desires can change
in unpredictable ways. International trade theory fails
6


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

to account for the willingness and capacity of migrants
to adapt to life abroad.

Labor market impacts
The availability of migrant workers makes labor mar­
kets more competitive in the short run. Many migrants
will work at or below prevailing wages, because they
are accustomed to lower standards of living. Their belief
that working in a wealthy society is a privilege usually
retards unionization and limits complaints about work­
ing conditions, especially among migrants of doubtful
legal status.12 As a result some (usually the lowerskilled) sectors of the labor market experience slower
growth in real wages.
If migrants and most domestic workers do not com­
pete in the same labor markets, migration can promote
dualism or labor-market segmentation, with each seg­
ment responding to separate economic and social forces.
The availability of migrant labor preserves traditional
labor-intensive agricultural, manufacturing, and service
jobs. Employers in these sectors must choose between
labor-intensive production based at least partially on
low-wage foreign workers, or capital-intensive produc­
tion using a smaller but more highly paid domestic
work force. In general, it is the smallest operations
which rely on alien labor to maintain production, be­
cause they lack capital or the skills to manage largescale automated firms. Thus, migrant labor may help to
preserve inefficient establishments which might other­
wise fail in the face of foreign or domestic competition.
Illegal alien workers are more likely to be found in
small firms for another reason. Small employers often
know workers personally, maintain their own records,
and sometimes operate on a “cash” basis. The employer
who knowingly hires illegal workers can avoid paying
his or her share of taxes for social security, unemploy­
ment insurance, and workers’ compensation. And, be­
cause aliens generally do not understand the handling
of payroll taxes, the employer may pocket the employ­
ee’s share of these taxes as well. If uniform deductions
are made from the wages of legal and illegal workers
alike, take-home pay will be the same for both.
Payroll taxes on employer and employee, combined,
range from 25 to 35 percent of a U.S. employer’s total
wage bill and up to 50 percent in Europe. They are
forwarded by the employer to the appropriate revenue
office, and are only verified when an employee files a
claim for benefits. If the employer can assume that ille­
gal workers will not attempt to obtain benefits for fear
of apprehension, the tax savings from employing alien
labor may contribute substantially to profits.13 The ex­
tent to which tax evasion opportunities cause employers
to hire aliens is not known, but the practice is common
enough to be of concern in both the United States and
Western Europe.

The rationale for labor importation
Legal guestworkers in industrialized societies are
most often found in larger establishments because their
employment imposes additional hiring and supervision
costs. They must be recruited, screened, and transport­
ed, often housed in company-owned units, and either
taught the host country’s language or supervised by
multilingual personnel. And, to protect the jobs of do­
mestic workers, the recruitment of aliens often entails
the payment of a fee to the labor ministry. Given these
additional employment costs, why might employers hire
guestworkers?
The answer lies in the relatively rigid wage structures
characteristic of large firms in industrialized societies.
Whether by tradition or contractual agreement, such
structures are typically hierarchical, with well-defined
wage differences among groups of workers. For exam­
ple, in a hypothetical auto manufacturing plant
employing 10,000, assembly-line workers earn $10 and
skilled workers receive $15 per hour. A labor shortage
develops on the assembly line which could be filled lo­
cally by raising assembly-line wages from $10 to $13.
However, the additional cost of filling the openings is
not simply $3 per hour times the number of vacant as­
sembly-line jobs; rather, it is $3 per hour times all
10,000 jobs, or $30,000 per hour, in order to maintain
previous wage differentials.14 The profit-maximizing em­
ployer may elect to recruit foreign labor if the extra re­
cruitment, housing, and supervisory expenses do not
exceed the cost of hiring locally.
In other cases, changes in technology, industry struc­
ture, or educational attainment permit more native
workers to obtain white-collar positions. The domestic
supply of persons willing to fill unskilled industrial and
service jobs is thus reduced. Employers, faced with the
costs and uncertainties of restructuring existing wage
levels and job status patterns, may see foreign labor as
a surer and cheaper way to staff undesirable positions.

The migratory chain
Whether imported to fill permanent or temporary la­
bor market gaps, foreign workers who gain a foothold
in a host nation quickly make the immigration process
self-feeding.15The first migrant workers are single males,
but if the demand for labor persists, especially among
service-sector employers, females immigrate. Some of
the temporary workers form families, while others send
for spouses and dependents as soon as they secure
housing and obtain permission, usually after 1 year of
employment if they have legal status, and longer if they
are undocumented. A growing stock of foreign workers
and their families then justifies additional immigration
so that migrants can have access to familiar foods and
services— the third stage in the migration process.

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

The fourth and final step in the migratory chain is de
facto permanence. Individuals may come and go, but a
growing core of foreign nationals acquires financial and
personal equity in the host society. The proximate cause
of this permanence is the persistence of employer
“needs” for low-wage labor, which in turn results from
the original choice to import labor rather than reorder
domestic wage structures.16 Thus, importing foreign
workers does not solve domestic labor-market prob­
lems, but only postpones the need to address them.
In fact, importing workers often causes new prob­
lems. Most migrants initially anticipate a short stay
abroad. However, they become permanent residents as
they adjust to industrial life and its rewards; when they
realize that their accumulated savings will not provide a
better life back home; when they form or unite families
abroad; when economic problems in their homelands
persist or worsen; and when their current employers
continue to offer jobs. They may go home only every
third or fourth year, thus carefully preserving their right
to return to a foreign job. When that right is threat­
ened, many migrants simply refuse to leave. Some re­
ceiving societies have avoided such “backdoor”
immigration by rotating imported workers periodically,
but these policies are unpopular, and must be enforced
through elaborate administrative and policing systems.
Permanent settlement changes the economic impacts
of international labor flows. When settling, migrants de­
mand housing and consumer durables, thereby increas­
ing demand in host nations and creating yet more jobs.
However, the net result of settlement may still be eco­
nomically undesirable because of the concentration of
immigrants by industry, occupation, and residence.
Migrant permanence alters the social impacts of labor
exchanges, as well. Host countries initially benefit from
the fact that imported workers do not require social in­
frastructure;—health care, education, and other services.
But permanent immigrants do require social invest­
ments if they and their children are to be brought up to
host-country norms. Providing that infrastructure often
involves a higher than usual per capita cost, because the
children must be educated to function in both the send­
ing and the receiving countries.
Such social investments might seem profitable if the
children of immigrants were to fill the same labor-mar­
ket roles their parents did. But migrant children adopt
native attitudes quickly, and some reject the jobs so ea­
gerly accepted by their parents.17 Thus, the host nation
finds itself again on a labor importation treadmill. In
turn, each round of immigration results in more perma­
nent residents, but fewer workers willing to fill undesir­
able jobs. And employers, rather than national
policymakers, determine who these new residents will
be, where they will locate, and how they will be inte­
grated into the receiving society.
7

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • International Migration o f Labor

Impacts on sending societies
Demographic issues. Personal characteristics of emi­
grants help to determine the economic results of
exporting labor. Males between the ages of 18 and 45
are generally first to be recruited, but must leave their
dependents behind until they have met host-country ser­
vice requirements for legal family unification (usually 1
year). As a result, the home-country labor force de­
creases, although some women take jobs vacated by the
men; the age structure develops concentrations of young
and old persons, who are often dependent on the 18- to
45-year-olds abroad; and birth rates decline, as some
migrants delay marriage while others adopt the birth
control practices of labor-receiving nations. Recruitment
may be regionally selective as well, taking persons only
from certain cities or areas.
Agricultural decline. The outflow of prime-aged workers
should prompt agricultural land consolidation, a reform
which usually results in increased productivity and out­
put. Dependents remaining in rural villages often rely
on remittances for virtually all of their income, but few
guest worker families are willing to sell or lease their
land, given the uncertainty of the breadwinner’s tenure
abroad. Thus, rather than being consolidated, land is
left idle or farmed less intensively, and the nation may
be required to increase food imports. At the same time,
local rural labor shortages may lead to an irreversible
decline in agricultural capital, as terraces go untended
and irrigation systems collapse.18
Urbanization. Migrant labor is often recruited in “urban
staging areas,” a practice which accelerates growth in
these cities. The trend toward urbanization is intensified
if remittances from breadwinners abroad increase rural
family incomes enough to permit relocation in cities.
Often the result is an urban real estate “boom,” which
is unsupported by any increase in domestic output.
Industrial distortion. Domestic industry takes on an out­
ward resemblance to “modern” industry abroad as a re­
sult of emigration. Because individual employers must
compete with foreign recruiters for labor, emigration
puts upward pressure on wages and increases employer
uncertainty. Returned migrants, now familiar with so­
phisticated production techniques, may not wish to
work in less capital-intensive industries at home. Rath­
er, many returnees enter the domestic service sector, in­
tending to support themselves with a small vehicle or
establishment.
As a result, labor-exporting countries move directly
from an agricultural focus to a service-oriented economy, bypassing the development of industrial capacity.
In an economy fueled by foreign earnings, an insuffi­
8

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

cient industrial base encourages consumption of
imported goods, and increases the nation’s dependence
on industrial societies. Perhaps the chief economic cause
for skepticism about the true amount of “foreign aid”
to be derived from exporting labor is the tendency of
returned migrants to purchase “unproductive” capital
or imported goods with their savings.
Economic development. In the aggregate, emigration is a
source of foreign currency, and should thus be helpful
to domestic development plans. But migrant earnings
are an uncertain source of foreign exchange, because
they fluctuate with short-term foreign labor demands
and the savings and repatriation decisions of individual
workers. Economic development is a long-term process,
and development plans based on such a stream of re­
mittances may be disrupted by recession in a labor-host
nation, usually at a time when the labor-sending coun­
try most critically needs foreign exchange.
Political trends. Because there are far more labor-send­
ing than receiving societies, and because national sover­
eignty implies the right to control immigration, sending
nations have little influence over the immigration poli­
cies of labor-short countries. However, despite their
heretofore limited role in international labor-force deci­
sion-making, these nations appear to have realized that
the blessings of exporting workers are not unmixed.19 In
years preceding the European guestworker programs,
labor-exporting countries usually cooperated with labor
recruiters, helping to locate and screen workers in prep­
aration for the trip abroad. During the early 1970’s,
however, many sending nations began to,view their la­
bor exports as subsidies to industrialized societies. The
result has been ambivalence toward emigration; labor­
exporting countries resent the worker emigration, but
realize that they cannot provide full employment for
their citizens.

The future of international labor migration
The study of past and present labor flows yields an
important lesson for the future: despite the initial re­
cruitment effort required, most temporary worker mi­
grations are easier to start than to stop. The benefits
from labor transfers are clear and immediate; the costs
are distant and ambiguous. Availability of foreign labor
distracts receiving nations from solving the job-market
problems which first made it necessary to import work­
ers. As aliens are assimilated by the receiving society
and climb the economic ladder, new labor shortages de­
velop which are similarly eased with imported labor.
Temporary worker transfers thus become permanent
migration channels. Subsequent attempts to block these
channels are likely to result in illegal immigration.

Even so, pressures to initiate labor transfer programs
will probably increase during the 1980’s. Unequal eco­
nomic, social and political development in coming years
will reinforce wage and unemployment differences
among nations. Most industrialized societies, for exam­
ple, will experience sharp drops in numbers of new la­
bor-force entrants as the effects of declining birth rates
are felt, and female labor-force participation rates stabi­
lize. During the same period, less developed countries
may be experiencing unprecedented levels of unemploy­
ment. Such a combination of domestic and foreign in­
fluences would make it virtually impossible to limit
worker migration. Therefore, a critical réévaluation of
international labor flows by both sending and receiving
countries is imperative.
During the next decade, the United States will be one

ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This research was partially supported by
grants from the German Marshall Fund and the Agricultural Devel­
opment Systems Project. Neither organization bears responsibility for
the views expressed in this article.
' Philip Martin and Marion Houstoun, “The Future of Internation­
al Labor Migration,” J o u r n a l o f I n te r n a tio n a l A ffa irs, Fall-Winter
1979, pp. 311-33.
2 Reprints of this article will be available from the Giannini Foun­
dation, University of California at Berkeley. No. 592.
3Migration of this type was widespread in the late 19th century.
Most of the “second wave” of immigration to the United States con­
sisted of “target earnest,” who hoped to return home with their accu­
mulated savings. Return migration as a percentage of in-migration
from 1908 to 1910 for various ethnic groups was estimated as follows:
Croatian and Slovenian, 57 percent; French, 45 percent; Greek, 25
percent; Northern Italian, 63 percent; Southern Italian, 56 percent;
Magyar, 65 percent; Polish, 31 percent; and Slovak, 59 percent. Rates
for some groups were much lower, such as the 8 percent reported for
Hebrews. The figures above are from the Dillingham Commission on
Immigration, A b s tr a c t o f R e p o r ts o f th e I m m ig r a tio n C o m m issio n , U.S.
Senate, 61st Cong., 3d Sess., S. Doc. 747 (Washington, 1911), Vol. I,
p. 182, table 16.
4 David North, “Worker Migration: A State of the Arts Review.”
Mimeographed, 1979.
5 Roger Bohning notes that migration pressures are escalating just
when most countries are moving to restrict immigration. See “Interna­
tional Migration— Past, Present, and Future.” Mimeographed, 1979.
6 Roger Bohning distinguishes temporary alien workers (expected to
leave and sometimes forced out) from guestworkers (expected to leave
but never forced out). U.S. discussions center on a temporary alien
worker program. See “Guestworker Employment — Lessons for the
U.S.” Mimeographed, 1980.
7See Philip Martin, G u e stw o r k e r P r o g ra m s: L e sso n s f r o m E u r o p e
(U.S. Department of Labor, 1980).
“Public Law 96-212, signed Mar. 17, 1980.
9The United Nations defines a refugee as any person who is outside
his or her country of nationality or habitual residence because of wellfounded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality,
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, who is
unwilling, because of such fear, to avail himself or herself of the pro­
tection of his or her country of origin or to return to the country of
habitual residence. This definition is not restricted to persons fleeing
any specific nation or type of government. (See D e p a r tm e n t o f S ta te
B u lle tin , December 1979, p. 12.)


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

of the first countries to debate the merits of a legal
guestworker program.20 The report of the Congressional
Select Commission, due in March 1981, is not expected
to address the question of guestworkers directly, but at
least five bills now pending propose such programs.
Supporters of these bills argue that the United States
cannot seal its borders, that Mexico and other less de­
veloped nations need a “safety-valve” for their surplus
labor, and that the United States must have alien labor
to do its undesirable work. But opponents say that
guestworkers provide immediate economic benefits to
selected employers and consumers, but most of their
costs to society-at-large are deferred to a later date. If
the United States decides to continue to import labor, it
should admit aliens as permanent immigrants, so that
both benefits and costs are explicit from the outset. □

10See, for example, J. S. Birks and C. A. Sinclair, I n te r n a tio n a l M i­
(Geneva, International
Labor Organization, 1980); Nazli Choukri, “Demographic Changes in
the Middle East: New Factors in Regional Politics,” T h e P o litic a l
E c o n o m y o f th e M id d le E a s t — C h a n g e s S in c e 1 9 7 3 (Washington, Li­
brary of Congress, Congressional Research Service, 1979); and, “The
New Migration in the Middle East: A Problem for Whom?” I n te r n a ­
tio n a l M ig ra tio n R ev ie w , Winter 1977, pp. 421-43.

g ra tio n a n d D e v e lo p m e n t in th e A r a b R eg io n

" See P. Martin and M. Houstoun, “The Future of International
Labor Migration.”
12 See Michael J. Piore, B ir d s o f P a ssa g e: M ig r a n t L a b o r a n d I n d u s ­
(New York, Cambridge University Press, 1979), chs. 3 -

tr ia l S o c ie tie s

4.
13 David North and Marion Houstoun found that most of the 793
apprehended aliens interviewed had worked for employers who knew
they were in the United States illegally. For more detail, see Th e
C h a r a c te r istic s a n d R o le o f I lle g a l A lie n s in th e U .S. L a b o r M a r k e t: A n
E x p lo r a to r y S tu d y (Washington, Linton and Co., 1976).

14 If skilled workers demand the same percentage increase in pay as
the unskilled, the cost would be even higher. There is a large body of
literature on the stability of wage contours. See, for example, John
Dunlop, W a g e D e te r m in a tio n U n d e r T r a d e U n io n s (New York, Kelly,
1950). More recent discussions may be found in Lester C. Thurow,
G e n e ra tin g I n e q u a lity (New York, Basic Books, 1975), ch. 5; and, Mi­
chael J. Piore, B ir d s o f P a ssa g e, ch. 2.
15 For empirical examples, see Roger Bohning, T h e E c o n o m ic E ffe c ts
W o rk e rs (Paris, Organization for Eco­
nomic Cooperation and Development, 1975).
o f th e E m p lo y m e n t o f F o reig n

16 Indeed, this is a “choice” only for society as a whole, not for an
individual employer. See Suzanne Paine, E x p o r tin g W o rk ers: T h e T u r ­
k ish C ase, (New York, The Cambridge University Press, 1974), ch. 1.
17 See Michael J. Piore, B ir d s o f Passage.
18Jon Swanson, E m ig r a tio n a n d E c o n o m ic D e v e lo p m e n t: T h e C a se o f
th e Y e m e n A r a b R e p u b lic (Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, 1979); J. S.
Birks and C. A. Sinclair, “The Sultanate of Oman: Economic Devel­
opment, The Domestic Labor Market and International Migration,”
Working Paper WEP 2-26/W P 28 (Geneva, International Labor Or­
ganization, World Employment Program, June 1978).
19 Roger Bohning, “International Migration in Western Europe: Re­
flections on the Past Five Years,” I n te r n a tio n a l L a b o r R ev ie w , JulyAugust 1979, pp. 401-14.
20 For a survey of the arguments, see Philip Martin, “Guestworkers
and Immigration Policy.” Mimeographed, 1980.

9

The changing composition
of Europe’s guestworker population
Although the flow of guestworkers diminished
during the 1970’s, wives joined men who remained;
as the proportion of women migrants— now more than
40 percent rose, labor market structures changed,
as did socioeconomic implications for host countries
—

A y se K

udat and

M

in e

Sa b u n c u o g l u

The rapid economic recovery of Western Europe after
World War II was accompanied by severe labor short­
ages. Consequently, European industries sought workers
from other countries, and migrant labor flows increased
significantly in the following decades. By the 1960’s, ap­
proximately 800,000 workers were emigrating annually
from the Mediterranean countries alone. When these
flows peaked in the early 1970’s, they were unmatched
in scale by any other documented labor movement in
history.
However, with the successive introduction of restric­
tive immigration measures by the labor-importing
countries after 1970, the movement slowed and came to
a virtual standstill with the onset of the 1973-74 oil
crisis. During 1973-75, flows from the major labor­
exporting countries within the Organization for Eco­
nomic Cooperation and Development declined from
500,000 to 100,000, and approximately 600,000 workers
returned to these sending countries during 1974-75.
The great majority, however, managed to remain in the
host countries during the crisis.1
In 1975, the share of foreign workers within the total
labor force of six labor-importing countries (Austria,
France, West Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland,
and Sweden) was slightly more than 10 percent, with
considerable national differences. The individual shares
Ayse Kudat is coordinator of impact studies for the Rural Access
Roads Program in Kenya, sponsored by the Danish International De­
velopment Agency. Mine Sabuncuoglu is a doctoral candidate in po­
litical science at the University of California at Berkeley.

10

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

ranged from a high of 24 percent in Switzerland to a
low of 4.2 percent in the Netherlands. Those registered
as unemployed among the total number of foreign
workers in these countries averaged 5.7 percent. The
share of foreign workers in the count of total persons
unemployed in each country, however, was as high as
25 percent in Switzerland and as low as 4.5 percent in
Sweden, with an average of nearly 12 percent in the six
countries.2
Several trends have distinguished earlier phases of
European labor migration from more recent ones. First,
the majority of the early migrant workers were un­
skilled laborers. Even as late as the 1970’s, 82 percent
of all Mediterranean labor migrants in the Netherlands,
for example, remained unskilled. By 1976, however, this
figure had fallen to 25 percent as a result of more selec­
tive entry criteria as well as skill improvement among
migrants.3Second, during the initial phases of the move­
ment, migrant workers tended to remain in host
countries for shorter periods. Stays progressively length­
ened, however, as increased numbers of migrants were
reunited with their spouses and children in host
countries. Again, Dutch statistics indicate that in 1965
nearly one-third of foreign work-permit holders re­
turned to their home countries, but that by 1970 this
proportion had dwindled to 15 percent, and by 1973
had reached a low of 4.5 percent.4
Although a new peak in return migration was
attained in the years immediately following the 1973 re­
cession, relatively low levels of new worker inflow and

outflow have prevailed since 1976. Yet the influx of mi­
grant family members, which was especially heavy after
1973, accounted for the fact that little overall change in
the stock of migrants occurred despite a reduction in
the number of those working. This influx resulted in a
significant increase in the proportion of migrant women
who, together with second-generation migrants, filled
available job vacancies, thus mitigating the need for
new labor importation. Indeed, approximately one-quar­
ter of all European work permits issued to foreigners
since 1970 have been for women.5 And today, more
than 40 percent of all migrants and 25 percent of mi­
grant workers in Europe are women.
Some of the consequences of this massive movement
of human resources are becoming increasingly clear now
that new flows have significantly subsided and strategies
for consolidation of existing migrant populations are be­
ing implemented in most European countries. Yet many
new issues relating to the circumstances of the workers
who have remained in host countries have also emerged
as migrant families have reunited, expanded, and their
offspring have matured and sought entry into the labor
markets of host countries. Among these, the roles and
problems of migrant women have been least explored.
In the following sections, data on migrants in Europe
are examined with reference to the changing role of
women. Sex-based differences observed among Yugoslav
and Turkish migrants in West Berlin offer particularly
interesting insights into the new character of Europe’s
guest-worker population.

More women guestworkers
In four major European labor-importing countries
(West Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the Nether­
lands) for which sex-specific information on immigrants
is available, the proportions of women (working either
in or outside the home) have been high throughout the
past decade. In 1978, women constituted an average 37
percent of the largest migrant groups in the four
countries. During 1974-78, the overall ratio of foreign
resident and working women to men in West Germany
and in Austria increased by 14.5 percent and 17.9 per­
cent, respectively. In West Germany, increases in the fe­
male ratios among seven of the eight major foreign
resident groups accounted for nearly 11 percent of this
change, with Moroccans and Tunisians exhibiting the
highest rates of increase. The data for each major group
in West Germany, collectively representing 73.7 percent
of all foreigners, are presented in table 1.
In Austria, where available statistics relate exclusively
to new work-permit holders, growth in the proportions
of female workers among major groups (representing
90.3 percent of the total foreign labor force) ranged
from a high of 21.8 percent for Yugoslavs to a low of
3.2 percent for Italians. These data are presented in

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

Table 1. Foreign resident population in West Germany by
nationality and sex,' 1974 and 1978

Total

Percent
female

Percent
change in
female ratio
1974-1978

35.2

3,027,951

40.3

14.5

35.5
45.7
31.8
82
37.0
37.0
13.8
39.6
35.9

2,195,023
223,005
439,343
22,970
81,599
145,448
15,481
774,278
492,899

39.3
46.2
339
17.7
44.2
40.3
25.9
39.4
41.3

10.7
1.1
6.1
115.9
19.5
8.9
87.7
-.5
15.0

September 1978

September 1974
Nationality
Total

Percent
female

All nationalities . . . .

3,525,220

Nationalities listed
below ...............
Greek ...........
Italian.............
Moroccan . . . .
Portugese . . . .
Spanish .........
Tunisian.........
Turkish...........
Yugoslav . . . .

2,597,383
314,560
495,160
21,928
101,683
221,031
16,085
873,882
626,794

1Excluding children under 16 years of age.
S ource :

Adapted from OECD continuous reporting system on migration (SOPEMI),

1979, p. 22.

table 2.
Interestingly, the ratio of working German women in
Austria decreased during 1974-78, and that of Italian
women increased only marginally in comparison to the
same ratios for Turkish and Yugoslav women. Female
migration trends to the Netherlands have followed simi­
lar patterns. During 1976-78, the proportion of all fe­
male foreign residents from principal “recruitment
countries” increased by nearly 10 percent. As shown in
table 3, percent changes in these ratios among individu­
al nationality groups ranged from a high of 34.7 percent
for Moroccans to no change for Greeks. As in Austria
and in West Germany, the rates of increase in the pro­
portion of female migrants to the Netherlands have
been the most pronounced among North African na­
tionalities.
Swiss statistics. Data from Switzerland offer the most
comprehensive and detailed basis for evaluating the ex­
tent and nature of female participation in labor migra­
tion to Europe. But economic structural differences
between Switzerland and West Germany, for example,
prevent generalization of the Swiss case to the overall
European context. As a heavily industrialized country,
Table 2. Initial work permits issued in Austria, by
nationality and sex, 1974 and 1978

Nationality

Percent
change in
female
Percent
ratios 1974 female
1978

1978

1974

Total

Percent
female

Total

All nationalities......................

189,840

31.3

81,120

36.9

17.9

Nationalities listed below . . . .
German ........................
Italian.............................
Turkish..........................
Yugoslav ......................

171,510
4,140
1,060
22,530
143,780

31.3
406
31.1
22.1
32.5

71,420
3,160
780
12,450
55,030

37.0
38.9
32.1
25.5
39.6

18.2
-4.2
3.2
15.4
21.8

S ource :

Adapted from OECD continuous reporting system on migration (SOPEMI),

1979, p. 8

11

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Europe's Guestworker Population
West Germany has traditionally attracted larger pro­
portions of male migrant workers. In contrast, the pre­
dominantly service-oriented Swiss economy has offered
less physically demanding work opportunities, attract­
ing women as well as men from a wide range of devel­
oped and developing countries. According to recent Or­
ganization for Economic Cooperation and Development
sources, 45.9 percent of all foreign residents in Switzer­
land (including annual work-permit holders) were wom­
en in 1978— the highest such percentage among the
European countries examined here. Further, the female
ratios among all major foreign groups were consistently
high, ranging from 43.9 to 49.6 percent. A comparison
of the data in tables 1 and 3 reveals that, in fact, the
greatest variation in the sex-composition of different for­
eign groups was in West Germany.
An examination of sex-specific employment figures
for five of the largest “permanent” immigrant groups in
Switzerland in 1978 (presented in table 4) shows that
female worker ratios in Switzerland paralleled the rates
existing in Austria and in the Netherlands. However,
during 1974-78, the overall female worker ratios in
Switzerland only exhibited a 3.3-percent positive change
as compared with 18.2 percent in Austria and 9.8 per­
cent in the Netherlands. Percentage changes in the ratio
of women among individual nationalities in the three
countries were quite different. Whereas female worker
ratios increased in almost all cases in Austria and in the
Netherlands, these ratios declined in Switzerland among
German, French, and Austrian workers; only Spanish
and Italian women exhibited relative employment gains.
Swiss data for 1955-78 reveal even more distinct
trends. Overall, the percentage change in the proportion
of women among the groups represented was signifi­
cantly negative during 1955-65, less so during 1965-74
and slightly positive during 1974-78. Among individual
groups, the total number of German and Italian work­
ers decreased by one-half over this entire period. Also,
by 1978, the total number of Austrian workers fell to a
quarter of the 1955 level. But, in contrast to the decline
in the female proportion of German and Austrian work­
ers during the 23-year period, the ratio of women

Table 4.

Table 3. Foreign population in the Netherlands, by
nationality and sex, 1976 and 1978

Total

Percent
female

Percent
change in
female ratio
1976-1978

225,800
4,200
20,700
13,600
55,400
9,400
25,800
1,700
95,000

37.0
38.1
34.8
46.3
29.1
45.7
39.5
23.5
39.6

9.8
.0
.9
3.1
34.7
3.2
4.5
17.5
12.2

1976
Nationality

T o ta l......................
Greek ...........
Italian.............
Yugoslav . . . .
Moroccan . . . .
Portugese . . . .
Spanish .........
Tunisian.........
Turkish...........

19781

Total

Percent
female

196,100
4,200
20,000
13,800
42,200
8,800
29,100
1,500
76,500

33.7
38.1
34.5
44.9
21.6
44.3
37.8
20.0
35.3

1Provisional figures.
Adapted from “ Fact Sheet on the Netherlands,” Ministry of Cultural Affairs,
Recreation and Social Welfare, the Netherlands, 1979, p. 1.
S ource :

among Italians increased during 1965-74, and again
during 1974-78. The number of French and Spanish
workers in Switzerland during 1955-78 increased by a
factor of 5 and 6, respectively. The proportions of Span­
ish women increased by 18.7 percent during 1974-78,
offsetting a decline of similar magnitude during 196574.
Switzerland is one of the rare cases in which sex-spe­
cific statistics on migrant populations have been system­
atically compiled according to types of migration.
Tables 5 through 7 present such figures for annual, sea­
sonal, and frontier workers. Table 5 indicates that the
peak in the overall level of migration occurred in the
mid-to-late 1960’s. By 1978, migrant worker flows had
decreased by over 50 percent; however, steady but
slight growth occurred in the proportion of women. The
female ratio among annual work-permit holders showed
minor decreases while the proportion of women season­
al workers significantly increased. The volume of fron­
tier workers doubled during this period, also with slight
growth in female ratios.
Table 6 provides a breakdown of migrants by nation­
ality and type of migration in 1978. Italians have pre­
dominated in permanent and seasonal migration to
Switzerland, and approximated the French numbers in
frontier migration. Following the Italians, Spaniards
and Yugoslavs have assumed the bulk of seasonal and

Foreign workers in Switzerland, by nationality and sex, selected years 1955 to 1978'
1955

1960

1965

1970

1974

Percent change in
female ratio

1978

Nationality

T o ta l........................
G erm an...........
French .............
Italian .............
Austrian...........
Spanish...........
O ther...............

Total

Percent
female

271,149
59,208
8,140
162,343
35,441
6,017

46.4
49.6
43.1
32.5
63.8
43.2

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

1955-65

1965 - 74

1974-78

435,476
72,365
11,932
303,090
31,604
6,408
10,077

42.3
458
42.6
27.8
56.5
39.5
41.3

676,328
67,668
23,775
448,547
24,184
79,419
32,735

35.8
39.9
37.8
26.8
41.0
35.5
33.8

659,485
52,975
41,486
371,814
19,920
112,636
60,654

35.9
36.5
40.9
29.3
36.9
32.7
39.0

551,346
40,573
58,368
227,895
15,121
112,703
96,686

33.2
34.0
40.8
27.2
33.1
28.9
35.0

285,889
27,377
41,961
98,302
8,921
42,052
67,276

34.3
32.7
40.6
30.3
32.6
34.3
35.5

-22.8
-19.6
-12.3
-17.5
-35.7
N/A
N/A

-7.3
-14.8
7.9
1.5
-19.3
-18.6
3.6

-3.3
-3.8
-.5
11.3
-1 .5
18.7
1.4

1Not Including annual, seasonal or frontier workers.

12

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

S ource :

A nnuaire S tatistique de ia Suisse, 1978.

annual work. This table also shows that female rates of
participation in annual migration to Switzerland have
been consistently high. Yet significant sex-discrepancies
are evident among national groups in seasonal migra­
tion. Although the Italians, for example, have dominat­
ed the short-term labor market in Switzerland, Italian
women represented a mere 6.4 percent in seasonal
flows, the lowest rate among all the groups. A similar
pattern was evident among Yugoslavs and Spaniards
who, together with the Italians, constituted 60 percent
of the short-term labor force.
Overall, approximately one-third of all these migrants
in 1978 were women. The proportion of women among
all annuals and frontier workers was about 38 percent,
while their ratio among seasonal workers was only 13.2
percent. A look at the sectoral distribution of the three
types of migrants presented in table 7 provides some
possible explanations. Among annual workers, men as­
sumed most of the jobs provided by the two largest em­
ployers of migrants— the metal and construction
industries, whereas women predominated in textile
clothing, health, and tourism (hotels and restaurants)
occupations. A similar pattern occurred among border
workers, except that more of these women were
employed in commerce.
The majority of Switzerland’s migrant seasonal work­
ers were employed in the construction, tourism, and ag­
ricultural sectors. Only in tourism, the second largest
employer of seasonal workers, did the proportion of
women exceed 10 percent. Because women are generally
considered unsuitable for industrial work, and particu­
larly construction, their greatest concentration (80.8
percent of the seasonal female work force) was found in
the tourism sector. Consequently, women number oneseventh of all men in the seasonal work force, as op­
posed to one-third for the short-term economy as a
whole. Aside from the sectoral demand for such work,
the ability of women to respond to seasonal work op­
portunities is typically limited by age and social circum­
stances. Married women with or without children
generally will not leave home on a seasonal basis unless
their family is destitute, or the male head of the house­
hold cannot find work. Possible exceptions to this are

Table 5. Foreign workers in Switzerland, by mode of
migration and sex, selected years 1960 to 1978
Annual
Year

1960
1965
1970
1974
1978

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

S o urce :

Total

Percent
female

256,519
446,493
429,956
296,176
157,581

46.4
38.9
40.0
39.3
37.0

Seasonal
Total

Percent
female

139,538
184,235
154,732
121,226
40,621

9.8
9.6
9.4
9.6
13.2

Frontier
Total

Total

Percent
female

39,419
45,600
74,797
107,902
87,687

36.6
31.5
35.2
36.3
37.9

435,476
676,328
659,485
525,304
285,889

33.8
30.4
32.3
31.8
33.9

A nnuaire S tatistique de ta Suisse, 1977 and 1978.


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

All groups

Percent
female

Table 6. Foreign workers in Switzerland, by mode of
migration and nationality, 1978
Annual
Nationality

German...........
French ...........
Italian .............
Austrian...........
Spanish...........
Yugoslav.........
Other countries
S ource :

Seasonal

Frontier

All groups

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

11,435
4,352
53,144
4,090
31,976
19,286
33,298

37.9
36.2
30.9
37.3
40.5
46.7
37.6

391
750
14,776
305
10,008
10,088
4,303

42.2
49.5
6.4
46.2
14.7
12.5
4.0

15,551
36,859
30,382
4,526
68
47
254

26.8
41.0
40.7
27.4
22.1
44.7
32.7

27,377
41,961
98,302
8,921
42,052
29,421
37,855

32.7
40.6
30.3
32.6
34.3
35.0
35.9

A nnuaire S tatistique de la Suisse, 1978.

those cases in which the seasonal migration of entire
families can be arranged.
Import o f data on women. The preceding data shed
some light on the role women play within differing mi­
gration patterns. But because of the paucity of compa­
rable data in other contexts, as well as more detailed
sex-specific data in general, important aspects of women’s
participation in labor migration remain unexplored.
This is regrettable as sex-differences in modes of migra­
tion and sectoral distributions seem related to the status
and welfare of foreign workers in host societies. The cir­
cumstances and roles of women who have migrated as
dependents of their husbands, for example, presumably
have a bearing on the size and nature of the illegal for­
eign female work force. In March 1980, illegal workers
employed by the clothing industry in France organized
a hunger strike which was supported by radical domes­
tic political parties and trade unions. An estimated
25,000 persons, thought to be predominantly Turkish in
origin, participated in the strike. Although no sex-spe­
cific estimates were released, the traditional preponder­
ance of women in this industry (corroborated by the
Swiss statistics) suggests that a significant proportion of
the strikers were women. It would thus appear that in
France, at least, migrants who experience great frustra­
tion and poor working conditions include those in in­
dustries with high proportions of women.
It is also common knowledge that the spouses and
daughters of large numbers of migrants in France, Ger­
many, and other European countries are increasingly
employed “illegally” as domestic help. Even some legal
women workers, and particularly those already em­
ployed in the domestic sector, take such unrecorded
jobs to supplement their incomes. There has been no
official acknowledgment of this fact, and little is known
about the volume of such activities and the working
conditions of the women involved.
The problem of migrants working illegally in Western
Europe is somewhat different from the issue of illegal
aliens working in the United States.6 In Europe, the ille­
gal workers are primarily women. Over the years, large
13

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Europe's Guestworker Population
numbers of women have migrated to Europe in a de­
pendent status. With a spouse in Europe, the acquisi­
tion of entry permits for women has been generally
easier than obtaining work permits.7 Following their ar­
rival, wives of migrants often seek to supplement rela­
tively low family income in the host country. Thus,
many probably work illegally, but their dependent sta­
tus makes documentation of illegal work very difficult.
These issues suggest the need for more sex-specific
data in migration research. Until now, analyses of labor
migration have mostly concerned problems of overall
national economic and social accommodation. Rarely
have questions been asked about the differences in male
and female migrant behavior and circumstances— for
example, employment security, retirement rights, politi­
cal organization, and union involvement. In general, it
has been assumed that the needs of migrant women are
taken care of by husbands, other male family members,
or income from some form of legal employment. This
conception clearly fails to address more subtle existing
and potential trends that may threaten the economic,
social, and political fabric of host systems.

Turks and Yugoslavs in West Berlin
In 1974, one of the authors and her colleagues sur­
veyed 1,500 Turkish and 700 Yugoslav workers in West
Berlin.8 The data revealed interesting differences in eco­
nomic and social status between working men and
women of these two nationalities'.
Prior to the survey, in June 1973, women constituted
30 percent of the total foreign labor force in all of West
Germany as well as in West Berlin. Both in 1972 and

Table 7.

in 1973 (the year of the official ban on new worker
entries), the number of foreign women who obtained en­
try permits increased. Greeks, Yugoslavs, and Turks to­
gether accounted for 84 percent of all new immigrants
during this period. Twenty-two percent of these were
women. Of these women, nearly one-half were Turkish,
and one-third were of Yugoslav origin. Further, the
Berlin Statistical Yearbook reported that, in 1973, 40
percent of the Turks and 48 percent of the Yugoslavs
employed in the city were women,9 the largest such per­
centages for these two nationalities at any time in Eu­
rope.
Explanations for such high proportions of women
include the fact that West Germany has served as a tra­
ditional destination for large numbers of Turkish and
Yugoslav migrant workers. And in the early 1970’s, mi­
grants’ wives were far more likely to accompany or join
their spouses than in earlier years. In general, worker
recruitment patterns in the 1970’s contributed to a
higher proportion of women among migrants. In West
Germany, migrant women were accorded employment
priority in the first half of the decade to fill vacancies in
the electronics industry, largely concentrated in West
Berlin. Large numbers of foreign women also indepen­
dently took advantage of this opportunity, and joined
their husbands in Germany. In the late 1970’s, worker
recruitment was severely curtailed, and entry permits re­
stricted primarily to the immediate relatives and depen­
dents of resident workers.
The priority given female immigrants stemmed
largely from the advantages employers perceived in
maintaining large female work forces. Employers

Foreign workers in Switzerland, by mode of migration, sex, and employment sector, 1978
Annual
Employment sector

Total ..............................................
Agriculture ........................................
Forestry-fishing ...........................
Mining........................................
Food-tobacco ......................................
Textile industry ..........................
Clothing industry ...............................
Wood-cork .....................................
Paper ........................................
Graphic arts .....................................
Leather crafts .....................................
Rubber-plastic...................................
Chemical industry ...................................
Stonework ...................................
Metalwork-machines ....................
Watchmaking ...................................
Other industries........................................
Construction-civil engineering .........
Commerce-banking ..................
Transportation-communications.................
Flotels-restaurants.............................
Health services ..........................
Teaching-science..........................................
Flousework .................................
Other .................................................
S ource :

Annuaire S tatistique de ia Suisse, 1978.

14


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

Seasonal

Total

Percent
female

157,581
2,077
124
266
5,643
8,317
6,731
2,399
1,533
1,774
325
1,590
2,690
2,276
28,431
2,284
1,153
20,640
14,638
3,220
16,762
19,377
4,674
2,102
8,555

37.0
15.9
1.6
1.5
42.1
53.4
73.9
10.8
36.8
32.3
57.8
32.2
25.2
7.9
20.0
56.0
39.6
1.3
30.6
13.5
46.4
72.6
45.5
91.8
55.4

Frontier

Total

Percent
female

40,621
3,706
169
308
633
11
7
239
0
4
0
2
8
446
288
1
15
23,833
418
148
10,025
80
18
48
214

13.2
7.5
2.4
0
61.1
18.2
28.6
5.4
.0
75.0
.0
50.0
.0
.2
.7
.0
.0
.3
19.6
17.6
43.1
76.3
667
66.7
24.8

All groups

Total

Percent
female

Total

Percent
female

87,687
450
34
135
3,474
2,109
7,693
2,010
595
1,156
159
683
7,398
948
19,783
3,587
1,235
10,275
13,033
3,672
2,794
2,041
713
1,096
2,614

37.9
15.3
2.9
3.7
40.8
48.6
88.3
7.7
40.8
25.6
59.7
30.9
36.6
10.2
16.5
57.5
33.4
2.1
52 4
28.5
49.1
77.1
59.7
98.1
71.2

285,889
6 233
327
709
9,750
10,437
14,431
4,648
2,128
2,934
484
2,275
10,096
3 670
48,502
5,872
2,403
54 748
28 089
7^040
29,581
21,498
5,405
3,246
11,383

33.9
109
21
13
42 9
52 4
81 5
9.2
37 9
29 7
58 5
31 8
33 6
76
18 5
56 9
36 2
10
40 5
21 4
45.5
73.0
47 5
93.6
58.4

Table 8.

Married Turkish and Yugoslav workers in West Berlin, by circumstances of migration, 1974
Yugoslavs

Turks
Men

Circumstances of migration
Number

Together .......................................................................................

45

Alone, spouse came later ............................................................

501

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

24

Percent

Number

9.3

9

Percent

8.0

31

7.0

58.7

172

39.1

87

33.7

20

17.7

13.9
9.8

77
59

29.8
22.9

40
23

35.4
20.4

30.2

10

3.9

20

17.7

53

Alone, spouse still in home country ............................................
Alone, married here .....................................................................

132
48

15.5
5.6

61
43

Alone, spouse was already In Germany ......................................

127

14.9

133

S ource :

Women

Men

Women

Ayse Kudat, “ International Labor Migration: A Description of the Preliminary

paratlve Social Studies, Preprint No. P/74-1 b, October 1974.

Findings of the West Berlin Migrant Worker Survey,” International Institute for Com-

expected that women, particularly single ones, could be
easily housed in dormitory-style living quarters, and
they would pose fewer potential problems in terms of
personnel management. They would be more pliable to
authoritarian demands, and had shown little tendencies
in the past to participate in organized labor movements
in host countries. Employers thus viewed migrant wom­
en workers as a reliable source of cheap labor.
The results of the 1974 survey of Yugoslav and Turk­
ish workers in West Berlin, in part, bear out some of
these expectations. Among both groups, a significantly
lower percentage of women were married than men.
Among Yugoslavs, 42 percent of the women and 59
percent of the men were married; Turkish marriage
rates were 72 percent for women and 89 percent for
men. Only a small proportion of the married women in
both cases had migrated with their spouses. As shown
in table 8, 69.3 percent of the Turkish women had mi­
grated either to join a spouse already in West Berlin, or
to arrange a reunion there with him at a later date. In
contrast, only 34.4 percent of the Yugoslav women mi­
grated with such expectations. Over one-half of the Yu­
goslav women, and nearly a quarter of the Turkish
women who claimed to be married came without their
spouses, or were married in the host country. The aver­
age age of the men surveyed was 31 for Yugoslavs and
33 for Turks. The corresponding average ages among
women were 29 and 30.
The majority of women workers were recruited
through official immigration channels (71 percent of the
Turks and 86 percent of the Yugoslavs). Both women
and men who claimed to have been “tourists” or “visi­
tors” upon arrival were a small minority among the
workers in both national groups. Sex differences thus
appear to have played a negligible role in the mode of
migration. This runs counter to the popular view that
women play a predominantly dependent role in migra­
tion, at least in West Berlin. However, sex differences
appear to have assumed greater importance once the
migrants entered the host system. For example, both
Yugoslav and Turkish women exhibited low mobility—

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

both geographically and in job status— relative to men.
Eighty percent of the Turkish women, but only 58 per­
cent of the Turkish men, claimed West Berlin as their
first port of entry. These ratios were 93 percent and 85
percent for Yugoslav women and men, respectively.
The lower geographic mobility rates for Yugoslavs in
general are explained in part by their shorter experience
in international worker migration relative to Turks. The
very low mobility rates for women of both nationalities
may be explained both by the nature of their original
placement in the job market and by their relative inex­
perience in labor force participation. Further, the geo­
graphic isolation of West Berlin from the rest of West
Germany is a considerable obstacle to the mobility of
new or inexperienced migrants. In this sense, the setting
works in favor of employers who can expect less worker
turnover and, hence, lower costs for on-the-job training.
On average, women changed jobs fewer times than
men during their stay abroad. For example, in 1974,
Turkish men changed their jobs an average of 2.2 times,
whereas the figure for women was 1.6. Further, the av­
erage number of job changes among all Turks was
greater than that among all Yugoslavs. Prior to arrival,
less than half as many women as men among both na­
tionalities had been employed in their home countries.
More than two-thirds of the women in both groups be­
came employed for the first time after migration. Wom­
en claiming previous employment in their home
countries had been primarily unskilled workers. Among
the few that reported prior skilled employment, there
was a higher percentage of Turkish than Yugoslav
women.
Upon arrival, the majority among both sexes of the
two nationalities were employed in an unskilled capaci­
ty within the industrial sector. However, a dramatic
skill improvement was observed among men in compar­
ison with women. For instance, more than a third of
the Yugoslav men who were unskilled workers at the
time of arrival bettered their job status in a m atter of a
few years. In 1974, only 29 percent of Yugoslav men
were employed as unskilled workers; 59 percent had be15

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Europe’s Guestworker Population

Table 9. Sectoral distribution of Turkish and Yugoslav
workers in West Berlin, 1974
Turks
Sector of
employment

Men

Yugoslavs
Women

Men

Women

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Agriculture . . . .
Industry...........
Service ...........
Commerce . . . .
Construction .. .
Other .............
No answer . . . .

185
139
138
124
91
179
104

19.3
14.5
14.4
12.9
9.5
18.6
10.8

12
60
78
18

2.0
10.0
13.0
3.0

12
412

2.0
70.0

31
217
11
12
35
2
137

7.0
48.8
2.5
2.7
7.9
.4
30.9

18
36
11
11
2
2
186

6.8
13.5
4.1
4.1
.8
.8
70.0

S o urce : Ayse Kudat, "International Labor Migration: A Description of the Preliminary
Findings of the West Berlin Migrant Worker Survey," International Institute for Comparative
Social Studies, Preprint No. P/74-1 b, October 1974.

come skilled laborers, and another 12 percent, foremen.
However, 94 percent of Yugoslav women remained in
unskilled positions in 1974. Sex differences among the
Turks were also significant, although not to the same
extent. Seventy-two percent of the men as opposed to
95 percent of the women remained unskilled. The
sectoral spread o f men of both nationalities was also"
greater than that of women; although, over the years,
the workers of both sexes shifted gradually from the in­
dustrial to the service and commercial sectors, parallel
to the changes in the sectoral distribution of the indige­
nous labor force. D ata for these distributions in 1974
are presented in table 9.
Most of the workers surveyed from both nationalities
had limited residence and work permits, with an aver­
age 1-year duration. The average length of women’s
permits was somewhat shorter than men’s. This pattern
was more consistent among Yugoslav than Turkish
women. Significantly, very few among all the workers in
both groups had acquired unlimited residence permits;10
again, the ratio of women with flexible permits was low­
er in general than that of men. Almost 90 percent of the
Turks claimed to have no knowledge of long-term per­
mits, thus contributing to the low ratio for Turkish
women. Yet less than 30 percent of the Yugoslavs re­
sponded negatively, with evident sex differences. The
best explanation may be that the shorter national experi­
ence of Yugoslavs in international labor migration may
have precluded the qualification of many of these work­
ers for such permits at the time of the survey, because
application for longer term permits is possible only after
5 years continuous residence in West Germany.
These patterns also are supported by the findings that
a far lower percentage of Turks than Yugoslavs had
been educated beyond the primary level or exhibited
competance in German (with negligible sex differences).
Surprisingly, however, a far greater percentage of Turks
than Yugoslavs had acquired union membership in
West Germany. This ratio for Turkish men was nearly
double the Yogoslav ratio, and the ratio for Turkish
16


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

women was nearly triple that of Yugoslavs. There is an
open question as to why proportionately more Turkish
women joined unions than their Yugoslav counterparts.
One obvious reason is that many Turkish women joined
unions because their compatriots were members.

What next?
The increased presence of women in European and
international labor migration needs further attention.
The evidence presented here suggests that sex differ­
ences in labor migration have im portant social and eco­
nomic implications for the migrant population as well
as for the host country.
Increasing numbers of women migrants redefine the
needs of the foreign population and thereby change the
infrastructural costs for the host countries. The influx of
women migrants has further amplified the already ap­
parent duality in the European labor market. With mi­
grant women replacing native women as well as migrant
men in the worst paid sectors, the latter groups may
shift to jobs with higher pay and greater social benefits.
The economic and social implications of female immi­
grant workers are clearly different from those associated
with male migrants— if only because of the added po­
tential for future generations of an immigrant popula­
tion. Many of the resulting socioeconomic problems
could be dealt with more effectively by anticipating
trends. For example, migrant sex ratios examined on a
longitudinal basis would identify patterns which signal
the nature and potential volume of future demands for
employment, education, health and child care, housing,
and other social services that might be made on public
resources. High fertility rates among migrant women,
such as those in Europe, amplify the magnitude of these
potential demands, especially in host countries with low
population growth.11
Past research has shown that the migration of men
and women is primarily motivated by economic factors.
But the specific nature of the “push” and “pull” factors
affecting women migrants awaits greater clarification.
The significant nationality discrepancies found to exist
among migrant women in Europe suggest that motiva­
tional factors vary among groups. Thus, a thorough in­
vestigation of migrant women’s economic and social
circumstances, as well as policies governing their migra­
tion in host and home countries should be undertaken.
In particular, the circumstances surrounding return mi­
gration of migrant women also requires more focused
attention. A second survey of 2,519 Turkish migrants
returning home from West Berlin between January 1975
and June 1976 has revealed, for example, that not all
workers were leaving because of unemployment.12 Fewer
male and female returning migrants were unemployed
than had voluntarily quit their jobs before departure.
This was especially the case among women. Further-

more, family responsibility accounted for 80 to 90 per­
cent of the reasons given for departure among women.
This constrasts sharply with the responses in 1974 indi­
cating that a high percentage of women were recruited
to West Berlin for employment purposes.
Although a full description of this second survey and
its results cannot be presented here, the findings alluded
to above suffice to illustrate the need for more detailed
information on the female component of international
labor migration. For example, how do the characteris­
tics of female migrants returning home differ from those
remaining in host countries? what personal effects does
migratory movement have on women and their families?

and what are the prospects for integration and reinte­
gration of migrant women into host and home societies?
Migrant populations are an increasingly important
and dynamic factor of economic and social importance
in a world more closely linked by improved transporta­
tion and communication. Thus, the role of migrant
women is of special salience. However, this role cannot
be properly assessed on the basis of national aggregate
statistics alone. Only a combination of macro and mi­
cro-level information, disaggregated according to sex,
will provide a suitable foundation for a realistic under­
standing of the problems and prospects of migrant
workers throughout the world.
□

FOOTNOTES

1Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,
SOPEMI (Continuous Reporting System on Migration), 1976-79.
2Ib id .
3 “Fact Sheet on the Netherlands,” Ministry of Cultural Affairs,
Recreation and Social Welfare, the Netherlands, 1979.
4 Ib id .
5SOPEMI, op. cit., 1976-79.
6 For a fuller treatment of issues of illegal migration in Europe and
in the United States, See Jonathan Power, “The Great Debate on Ille­
gal Immigration— Europe and the USA compared,” J o u r n a l o f I n te r ­
n a tio n a l A ffa irs, Fall/Winter 1979.
7For example, in West Germany, spouses and unmarried children
are allowed to join a foreign worker after the latter has completed a
1-year residence in the host country. Until April 1979, a workers fam­
ily members were allowed access to the labor market providing they
had entered West Germany before certain “key dates”; however, the
new regulation requires a waiting period. Children of workers who are
of legal employment age can now acquire a “general work permit” af­
ter a 2-year residence (those having completed 6 months of vocational
training are granted immediate access). Spouses are now granted spe­
cial permits for work in sectors where there are labor shortages, and
this only after a 3 or 4-year residence. Further, these provisions are
completely at the discretion of the Labor Institute and apply to jobs
for which German nationals have not been granted precedence. See


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

SOPEMI, 1979, p. 41.
8
Ayse Kudat, “International Labor Migration: A Description of the
Preliminary Findings of the West Berlin Migrant Worker Survey,” In­
ternational Institute for Comparative Social Studies, Berlin, Preprint
No. P /74-lb, October 1974.
"The B er lin S ta tis tic a l Y e a r b o o k 1973 (W. Berlin, Office of the May­
or).
'“Until Oct. 1, 1978, unlimited work permits were available to all
foreigners with 10 years residence in West Germany, who could dem­
onstrate some proficiency in German and establish a legal claim for
residence. This waiting period has now been reduced to 8 years. How­
ever, such a permit will now be issued after 5 years provided the ap­
plicant has reasonable housing, simple oral proficiency in German,
and children who have been properly enrolled in school. See
SOPEMI, 1979, p. 42.
" In 1965, for example, foreigners and migrant workers constituted
.6 percent and 1.4 percent of the overall population and labor force in
West Berlin, respectively. The corresponding ratios in 1974 were 4.3
percent and 12 percent. During the second half of the 1970’s, each of
these ratios approximated 10 percent, with nearly half of all births in
the city being accounted for by migrant populations.
12This survey was sponsored by the Berlin Science Center and
implemented in cooperation with the Turkish Consulate in West Ber­
lin. Its results have not yet been published.

17

Documenting the undocumented:
data, like aliens, are elusive
Millions of illegal immigrants currently live
and work in the United States, but efforts to
estimate their economic and societal impact are
hampered by a lack of valid information
E llen Se h g a l

and

Jo y c e V ia l e t

Most undocumented, or illegal, aliens enter the country
unlawfully, bypassing inspection and other procedures
required by the Immigration and Nationality Act. A
smaller number enter legally and subsequently violate
the terms of their admission, generally by overstaying
their temporary visas and accepting unauthorized em­
ployment. Increasingly large numbers of illegal immi­
grants have been apprehended by the Immigration and
Naturalization Service over the past decade. In 1977
alone, the agency apprehended 1,042,215 deportable
aliens, more than double the 462,315 immigrants legally
admitted that year.
It is generally believed that more illegal aliens escape
detection than are apprehended and that they may con­
tribute to a number of social and economic problems,
including unemployment. At issue, then, is how best to
reduce the number and presumably adverse impact of
undocumented aliens in the United States. The problem
is especially difficult because there are no exact facts
and figures concerning illegal immigrants, their num­
bers, or their effective role in the U.S. labor market.

Research— limitations and accomplishments
Data problems. Research in this area has been severely
hampered by the difficulty in collecting valid data; one
cannot know the “universe” of illegal immigrants, or
Ellen Sehgal is an analyst with the Office of Research and Develop­
ment, Employment and Training Administration, Department of La­
bor. Joyce Vialet is an analyst with the Education and Public Welfare
Division, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress. The
views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent those of ei­
ther the Department of Labor or the Congressional Research Service.

18

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

obtain a representative sample. One would assume that
the aliens and their employers would be reluctant to re­
spond to official interviews. And research findings based
on interviews with apprehended aliens or with migrants
who have returned to their homes may not necessarily
apply to those who have remained in this country
undetected.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service ( i n s )
collects data on arrests for law enforcement purposes,
but the resulting information is of limited value in re­
search. INS apprehension statistics record occurrences,
not persons, and thus are subject to considerable
overcounting. And Mexicans are far more likely to be
located than other foreign nationals, because the efforts
of the INS are concentrated along the U.S.-Mexican bor­
der. In fiscal 1977 for example, 92 percent (954,778) of
the deportable aliens found by the agency were Mexican
citizens.
Recent research efforts. A number of research efforts
have attempted to estimate the numbers of undoc­
umented aliens in the United States. The results of six
of these are summarized in exhibit 1. As indicated
previously, Mexican nationals account for an over­
whelming majority of INS apprehensions, and are the fo­
cus of the greater part of research on illegal immigrants
to this country.
Of particular interest is the study conducted by
Clarise Lancaster and Frederick Scheuren of the Social
Security Administration. The authors used two esti­
mates of the U.S. population, one which included illegal
immigrants, and the other excluding them. The latter, a

population estimate of the Census Bureau updating a
corrected 1970 census count, was subtracted from the
estimate which included undocumented aliens. That es­
timate, in turn, was based on the March 1973 Current
Population Survey sample, which had been matched
with individual Federal income tax and social security
records.

Exhibit 1.

Lancaster and Scheuren estimated that there were
about 3.9 million 18- to 44-year-old illegal immigrants
in the United States in April 1973, but noted that the
actual figure could be anywhere between 2.9 and 5.7
million. They also cautioned that their work should be
considered exploratory, citing a number of limitations
in both the data and the assumptions underlying the

Recent estimates of the undocumented alien population in the United States
Study

Scope and period of measurements

Estimate

Lancaster, Clarise and Frederick Scheuren,
“Counting the uncountable illegals: some initial
statistical speculations— employing capturerecapture techniques,” 1977 Proceedings of the
Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical
Association, (Washington, American Statistical
Association, 1978), pp. 68-75.

United States as a whole, each
sex, age 18-44, white and
nonwhite races, April 1973.

2.9-5.7 million in stock, 18-44
years old; 2.0-3.7 million whites
in stock, same age group.

Robinson, J. Gregory, “Estimating the
approximate size of the illegal alien population in
the United States by the comparative trend
analysis of age-specific death rates,” paper
presented at the annual meeting of the
Population Association of America (Philadelphia,
April 1979).

Five States in Northeast, five in
Southwest, white males, age 2 0 44, 1960-1975.

.6-4.7 million net flow, white
males, 20-44 in 1960-1975 in 10
States.

Goldberg, Howard, “Estimates of emigration
from Mexico and illegal entry into the United
States, 1960-1970 by the residual method,”
unpublished seminar paper (Washington,
Georgetown University, Center for Population
Research, 1974), p. 19.

Mexico as a whole, each sex, all
age groups, 1960-1970.

1.6 million, net flow, Mexicans in
all of the United States.

Heer, David, “What is the net flow of
undocumented Mexican immigrants to the
United States?” paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Population Association of
America (Atlanta, 1978). An abbreviated version
of the same paper appears in Demography,
August 1979, pp. 417-23.

United States as a whole, both
sexes, all age groups, Mexicans,
1970-1975.

80,000-242,000 annual net flow,
Mexicans, 1970-1975.

Garcia y Griego, Manuel, El volumen de la
migración de mexicanos no documentados a los
Estados Unidos (Nuevas hipótesis) (Mexico,
Centro Nacional de Información y Estadísticas
del Trabajo, in press, 1980).

United States as a whole, both
sexes, all age groups, Mexicans,
1972-1977.

.5 million to 1.2 million Mexicans
in stock, January 1977, 50,000158,000 annual net flow, 1972—
1977.

.4-2.5 million net flow, in 5
southwestern States.

629,000-2,043,000 annual gross
flow (entries) in same period.
Zazueta Carlos H, “Mexican workers in the
United States: Some initial results and
methodological consideration of the National
Household Survey on Migration ( en efneu ),”
paper prepared for the Working Group on
Mexican Migrants and U.S. Responsibility,
(College Park, University of Maryland, Center
for Philosphy and Public Policy, January 1980).
SOURCE:

Mexico as a whole and the
United States as a whole, regions
of destination in United States,
persons looking for work, age 15
and over, December-January
1978-1979.

.4 million Mexican workers age
15 and over in the United States,
January 1979.

Manuel Garcia y Griego, presentation before the Washington Statistical Society, Mar. 20, 1980.


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

19

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Documenting the Undocumented
analysis. For example, the data used were subject to
matching and survey coverage errors; and, the nature of
the methodology was such that the illegal population
estimates were retained as a residual and thus may be
of questionable accuracy.1
More information is available on the characteristics
of undocumented aliens than on their numbers. Studies
of persons apprehended consistently show that workers
from Mexico are predominantly young men, who are
poorly educated, and have a limited command of Eng­
lish. They come to the United States to find work, and
send a large part of their earnings back to their families.
There is less information on illegal migrants from
other parts of the world, although it is thought that
they are generally better educated and better off fi­
nancially than those from Mexico. Many enter this
country legally on temporary tourist visas, but overstay
their visas and find jobs. The results of a major study
also indicate that they tend to be somewhat older than
Mexican entrants; more are married with family mem­
bers present; they are more likely to speak English; and
they report higher earnings.2

Economic effects o f illegal migration. Studies have con­
sistently found that the principal impact of illegal mi­
gration is on the labor market. Because of the economic
imbalance between the United States and less developed
nations, citizens of the Third World may perceive illegal
immigration as their only means of escape from poverty.
Available information indicates that many U.S. em­
ployers are willing to hire undocumented workers in
spite of, and sometimes because of, their illegal status.
Such workers, accustomed to the lower standards of liv­
ing of their home economies, will frequently work for
lower wages than U.S. natives. They are also susceptible
to exploitation in the form of substandard working con­
ditions and minimal fringe benefits because they fear be­
ing reported to the Immigration and Naturalization
Service.
Therefore, many observers believe that this source of
cheap labor, if available on a fairly constant basis, has
an adverse effect on U.S. wage standards and working
conditions. Illegal aliens may also displace native work­
ers, adding to the country’s already serious regional and
national unemployment problems. Concern over this is­
sue, formerly focused primarily on the Southwest bor­
der and on agriculture, has now extended to other
regions and ctors of the economy.
However, some analysts contend that most un­
documented aliens take jobs which native workers will
not accept at existing wage levels. They argue further
that, without migrant labor, many low-wage industries
would be forced to shut down or move abroad, thereby
costing U.S. workers jobs.
20


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

Legislation and other Federal response
Administration initiatives. On January 6, 1975, President
Ford established a Cabinet-level Domestic Council
Committee on Illegal Aliens. The preliminary report of
this committee was released in January 1977. While it
contained no numerical estimates, the report stated that
illegal immigration was a significant and growing prob­
lem, and recommended legislation establishing penalties
for the knowing employment of undocumented workers.
The issue continued to receive extensive study by the
Carter Administration. On August 4, 1977, President
Carter submitted a message to the 95th Congress,
outlining a “set of actions to help markedly reduce the
increasing flow of undocumented aliens in this country
and to regulate the presence of the millions of un­
documented aliens already here.” Included in the pro­
posal were: civil penalties for the employment of illegal
aliens; increased Southwest border enforcement; more
vigorous administration of labor standards legislation;
continued cooperation with major migrant-source
countries in order to improve their economies; perma­
nent resident status for eligible aliens who had been in
the United States continuously prior to January 1, 1970;
and 5-year temporary resident status for aliens who had
been here continuously as of January 1, 1977. At the
same time, the President indicated support of pending
legislation to increase the annual limitation on Mexican
and Canadian immigration from 20,000 each to a com­
bined total of 50,000.
This Administration initiative represented an attempt
to balance the various conflicting interests involved in
the complex and controversial illegal alien issue. For­
eign policy considerations, such as the predictable ad­
verse reaction of the Mexican government to any drastic
change in the status quo, had to be weighed against do­
mestic factors, including the impact of foreign workers
on the U.S. labor market. It was in the latter area that
the research on undocumented aliens was most relevant.
For example, the decision to request increased enforce­
ment of minimum wage and other labor standards legis­
lation was in keeping with findings of labor-market
exploitation of undocumented workers. By minimizing
the economic incentive to hire aliens, their employment
would presumably be reduced.
In connection with the employer sanctions proposal,
however, the President also had to consider the interests
of U.S. employers, who stressed enforcement difficulties;
of Hispanic groups and the U.S. Catholic Conference,
which were concerned that legal residents (particularly
Hispanics) would encounter hiring discrimination be­
cause employers would not want to risk violating the
law; and of civil libertarians, who feared that the plan
would require each citizen to carry an identity card, a
practice viewed as an invasion of privacy. The Adminis-

tration bill, entitled the “Alien Adjustment and Em­
ployment Act,” did not receive action beyond a Senate
Judiciary Committee hearing in May 1978.
Congressional action. Legislative solutions to the prob­
lem of mass illegal entry have been under congressional
study since the early 1970’s. In 1974, the 93rd Congress
amended the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act
of 1963 to strengthen administrative, civil, and criminal
penalties for farm labor contractors who knowingly en­
gage the services of illegal aliens. During the same Con­
gress, a bill (H.R. 982) proposing a graduated series of
civil and criminal penalties of increasing severity for
other employers of undocumented workers passed the
House but was not acted on by the Senate Judiciary
Committee.
During the 94th Congress, consideration was given to
another bill (H.R. 8713), which would have made it un­
lawful to knowingly employ illegal aliens, and would
have provided injunctive remedies as well as civil and
criminal penalties for violation. Unlike previous bills, it
also authorized the Attorney General to take civil ac­
tion against employers who discriminated against U.S.
citizens on the grounds of national origin, and provided
an amnesty for certain undocumented workers who had
entered the country prior to June 30, 1968. This bill
was favorably reported by the full Judiciary Committee,
but was not brought before the House for a vote.
On the Senate side during the 94th Congress, omni­
bus legislation (S. 3074) was introduced which included
graduated civil penalties for the knowing employment
of illegal aliens, an injunctive remedy, and a provision
allowing certain aliens who entered the country illegally
prior to July 1, 1968, to establish a record of lawful ad­
mission. This bill was not reported to the full Judiciary

Committee.
Legislation which was enacted by the 94th Congress,
the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of
1976,3 included a provision prohibiting aliens who have
entered the country legally as nonimmigrants, and who
have subsequently violated the terms of their admission
by accepting unauthorized employment, from adjusting
their status to that of permanent resident alien while in
the United States. The provision was intended to deter
tourists, foreign students, and other nonimmigrants
from working illegally. The 1976 Amendments also ex­
tended to the Western Hemisphere an immigration pref­
erence system and a 20,000-person annual limit for each
country, provisions previously in effect only for Eastern
Hemisphere countries.
The 95th Congress amended the Immigration and
Nationality Act to provide for the seizure and forfeiture
of vehicles used to illegally transport aliens into the
United States.4 In another relevant enactment, the same
Congress combined the Eastern and Western Hemi­
sphere ceilings on immigration into a worldwide ceiling
of 290,000.5 Additionally, it created a 16-member Select
Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy, com­
posed of four members each from the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees, four Cabinet members, and four
members appointed by the President.
The Commission is to report to the President and the
Congress by March 1, 1981, on its administrative and
legislative recommendations relating to the admission of
immigrants and refugees. Without question, the issue of
undocumented aliens will be of major concern to its
members. Both the Administration and the Legislature
appear to be awaiting Commission findings before act­
ing in an area where political controversy is severely
compounded by lack of reliable data.
□

FOOTNOTES

' For an independent review of the Lancaster-Scheuren work, see
Jacob S. Siegel, Jeffrey S. Passel, and J. Gregory Robinson, “Prelimi­
nary Review of Existing Studies of a Number of Illegal Residents in
the United States,” W o rk in g D o c u m e n t (Washington, U.S. Bureau of
Census, January 1980).
2 David S. North and Marion Houstoun,


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

T h e C h a r a cte r istics a n d

R o le o f I lle g a l A lie n s in th e U.S. L a b o r M a r k e t: A n E x p lo r a to r y S tu d y

(Washington, Linton and Company, Inc., March 1976).
’ Public Law 94-571.
4 Public Law 95-582.
5Public Law 95-412.

21

Immigrant earnings patterns
by sex, race, and ethnic groupings
Based on 1970 census data, most immigrant men
reach earnings equality with the native born
in 11 to 15 years; for women, earnings following
arrival vary more by racial and ethnic group;
skills and motive for moving affect performance
B a r r y R. C h isw ick

How well and how quickly immigrants adapt to a new
life in the United States concerns policymakers as well
as the public. Responses to the recent arrival of Cuban
and Indochinese immigrants discussed elsewhere in this
issue reflect the concern over the ability of these groups
to assimilate into U.S. society. On an economic basis,
the success of immigrants in the United States can be
measured by their level of earnings following arrival.
Some immigrant groups tend to reach earnings equality
with the native population more quickly than others.
An examination of these patterns could provide clues
about the future earnings performance of those newly
arrived.
This article summarizes the findings on the earnings
and occupational mobility of immigrants from a large
ongoing analysis of the economic adjustment of immi­
grants and how they compare with the native popula­
tion.1 Presented here, with the use of economic theory
and statistical analysis, is an assessment of immigrants’
economic progress relative to that of their native-born
racial and ethnic counterparts. The purpose of the en­
tire project is to add to the currently insufficient re­
search base regarding immigrants.

Immigrant earnings theory
A theoretical analysis of the earnings of immigrants
may be based on two concepts — the international
Barry R. Chiswick is Research Professor, Department of Economics
and Survey Research Laboratory, University of Illinois at Chicago
Circle.

22

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

transferability of the skills acquired in the country of
origin and the “self-selection” of immigrants. The
weaker the transferability of schooling and on-the-job
training, the smaller the effect of these skills on future
earnings and the lower they will be just after immigra­
tion. With the passage of time, however, the relative
earnings of immigrants would rise as they acquire infor­
mation, credentials, and marketable skills.
Persons who become international migrants tend to
be different from those who remain. Migrants typically
have greater innate ability, greater motivation for per­
sonal economic advancement, and are more willing to
sacrifice current consumption to make investments that
may increase future consumption. Such self-selected im­
migrants would tend to have higher earnings than the
native born in the destination, if it were not for the dis­
advantages of being foreign born. Combining the effects
of skill transferability and favorable self-selection sug­
gests that the earnings of the foreign born may eventu­
ally equal and then surpass those of the native born.
The year at which this earnings cross-over occurs can
be estimated.
Data on various measures of “achievement” suggest
that it may be transmitted from one generation to the
next, but with a “regression to the mean.” That is, the
children of high achievers tend to have higher-than-average achievement which is nonetheless lower than that
of their parents.2(The reverse is true for offspring of low
achievers.) This suggests that the children of immi­
grants would tend to have an earnings advantage over
other children if it were not for the disadvantages of be-

ing raised in a household that is less familiar with the
language and customs of the country. It also implies
that this advantage would disappear asymptotically
with successive generations.
Analytically, it is useful to consider three groups:
“economic migrants,” those who move primarily for
their own economic betterment; “refugees,” those who
move primarily out of concern for their personal safety
or for political or ideological reasons; and “tied mov­
ers,” those who move primarily to join or accompany a
family member. Although refugees sometimes have a
higher level of schooling than economic migrants, their
skills are often less readily transferable internationally.
For example, lawyers and judges, who have countryspecific skills, appear in refugee populations but are sel­
dom economic migrants. In addition, although refugees
may, arguably, have more innate ability and work moti­
vation than the population which remains at home, the
difference is likely to be smaller for refugees than for
economic migrants. As would be expected, tied movers
generally have skills that are less readily transferable
than those of economic migrants.
It is not easy to identify the primary motive for mi­
gration. The immigration category under which a per­
son enters a country (family reunification, scarce skills,
refugee, and so on) is often unrelated to motive. How­
ever, immigrant groups from some countries at certain
periods are likely to include a larger proportion of refu­
gees. Examples of this are the Chinese beginning in
1949, the Cubans beginning in 1959, and the Southeast
Asians beginning in 1975. Wives, especially those of
Americans, are more likely to be tied movers than are
other immigrant women with the same demographic
characteristics.

Earnings of men
The most recent analyses of earnings for foreign-born
and foreign-parentage men in the United States use data
from the 1970 Census of Population (Public Use Sam­
ple, State files, one-in-a-hundred samples from the
5-percent and 15-percent questionnaires). In spite of the
substantial differences among the various racial and eth­
nic groups studied, quite stable patterns emerge when
the immigrant generations are compared within racial
and ethnic groups (table 1).
Other things the same, schooling and preimmigration
labor-market experience of the foreign born have a
smaller effect on U.S. earnings than skills acquired by
the native born (table 2). For example, among white
men, an extra year of schooling raises earnings by 7.2
percent for the native born and 5.7 percent for the for­
eign born. The effect of schooling and preimmigration
experience is particularly small for refugee groups; an
extra year of schooling raises earnings by only 3.1 per­
cent for Cuban immigrants and 4.8 percent for Chinese

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

Table 1. Comparison of earnings and earnings related
characteristics for native-born and foreign-born adult men
in the United States, by racial and ethnic group, 1970'
Years

Means
Racial and ethnic group
and nativity2

White:
Native ......................
Foreign ....................
Cuban:
N ative...............
Foreign.............
Mexican:
Native...............
Foreign.............
Black:
Native ......................
Foreign ....................
Asian:
Japanese:
Native...............
Foreign.............
Chinese:
Native...............
Foreign.............
Filipino:
Native...............
Foreign.............

Average
earnings

Average
schooling
(years)

Average
age

9,738
9,662

11.9
10.8

42.8
45.6

21.7

13

10,341
6,857

12.3
10.8

43.6
42.2

7.2

18

6,523
5,474

8.9
6.1

39.6
41.9

18.0

15

6,138
6,585

9.9
11.0

41.8
40.4

11.3

11

10,389
9,191

12.6
14.3

43.6
38.4

10.9

18

10,745
8,019

12.7
11.9

41.8
42.8

16.8

n

7,010
7,086

11.1
11.0

36.8
44.6

18.9

13

Years
tion at earn­
since
ings cross­
migration
over3

' Men aged 25 to 64 in 1970 who worked and had earnings in 1969 and, for the analyses
for black and Asian immigrants, were not enrolled in school in 1970.
2 Race/ethnic identity is defined by the race and Spanish origin variables. White men are
used as the native-born comparison group in the Cuban analysis. The Mexican analysis is for
Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. The Cuban and black analyses are
for urban areas.
3The number of years in the United States at which the earnings of the foreign born equal
the earnings of the native born, when other variables are held constant.
“ The earnings of Chinese immigrants approach but do not equal the earnings of nativeborn Chinese-Americans, even after 3 decades in the United States.
S ource :
1970 Census o f Population, Public Use Sample, 5-percent questionnaire, 1/100
sample, except for a 1/1,000 sample for the white analysis.

immigrants, the two groups with the largest proportion
of refugees. In addition, there is a larger partial effect
on earnings of schooling and labor-market experience
for white and black immigrants from English-language
countries than for those from other countries, reflecting
the greater transferability of the skills acquired in the
country of origin.
The effect of time in the United States on earnings,
controlling for schooling and total labor market experi­
ence, is quite large (table 2). The differential effect of
U.S. labor market experience compared with that
abroad is greatest for immigrants with the weakest
transferability of skills— refugees from other than En­
glish-language countries, Cubans and Chinese. It is
smallest for those with highly transferable skills— eco­
nomic migrants from English-language countries.
What is the progress of male immigrants relative to
native-born men? Other things equal, the earnings of
economic migrants equal those of the native born (or
those with native-born parents) of the same racial and
ethnic group after 11 to 15 years in the United States;
beyond this point, immigrants have higher earnings (ta­
ble 1). For example, among whites the earnings of for­
eigners are 10 percent lower than those of natives after
5 years of residence, 3 percent lower after 10 years,
23

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Immigrant Earnings Patterns
equal to the natives after 13 years, and 6 percent higher
after 20 years. Among Mexican-Americans, the earnings
cross-over occurs at about 15 years; among Filipinos, at
about 13 years; and among blacks, it occurs at 11 years
for the country as a whole and 13 years if the data are
limited to urban New York State, the home of twothirds of foreign-born blacks. Among the Japanese, the
earnings cross-over is also in the 11 to 15-year interval
if the comparison is with third-generation Americans.
The earnings cross-over occurs later, or does not occur
at all, for refugees; that is, for the Cuban and Chinese
immigrants under study.3
The rise in the relative economic position of immi­
grants based on their duration of residence is found in
longitudinal data on earnings and occupational status.
In the National Longitudinal Survey file for older men,
earnings increased more rapidly from 1965 to 1973 for
the foreign born than for the native born, other things
the same. Evidence of this relationship also appears in
the longitudinal analysis of the occupational mobility
(1965 to 1970) of white male immigrants using 1970
census data. The occupational mobility of male immi­
grants exhibits a U -shaped pattern; that is, occupation­
al status declines when the “last” occupation in the
country of origin is compared with the “early” U.S. oc­
cupation, after which upward occupational mobility is
greater for the foreign born than for the native born.
This U -shaped pattern is most intense for those whose
skills are the least transferable (Cuban refugees) and
least intense for those with highly transferable skills
Table 2. Partial effects on earnings of schooling and
labor market experience for adult men in the United
States, 1970'
Average percent change in earnings for an additional year —
of foreign
of U.S. labor
of U.S. labor
labor market
market
market ex­
experience
experience
perience for
for immi­
for natives
immigrants3
grants 2

Racial and
ethnic group

of
school­
ing for
natives

of
schooling
for immi­
grants

W hite:......................
Cuban (urban) .
Mexican (Southw e s t) ...........
Black (urban) .........
Asian:
Japanese .........
Chinese...........
Filipino.............

7.2
7.3

5.7
3.1

2.13
2.22

1.41
0.33

1.12
2.37

5.2
4.6

3.9
3.3

1.80
78

1.67
1.18

1.34
1.60

6.3
6.7
5.8

5.9
4.8
6.4

1.73
273
1.30

1.52
4 0.60
1.46

2.38
2.70
1.94

Unless indicated otherwise, the explanatory variables are statistically significant.
'The foreign born are compared with native-born men of the same racial and ethnic
group, except for the Cubans where the comparison is with native-born urban white men.
Unless noted otherwise, the data are for men age 25 to 64 in 1970, who worked at least 1
week and had earnings (wage, salary, and self-employment income) in 1969. The analyses
for black and for Asian men exclude persons enrolled in school in 1970. The parameters are
estimated from a linear regression of the natural logarithm of earnings on schooling, labor
market experience and its square, the logarithm of weeks worked, marital status, and geo­
graphic area and, for the foreign born, years since migration and its square.
2The quadratic experience variables (T, T2) were evaluated at T =10.
3The quadratic years since migration variables (YSM, YSM2) were evaluated at YSM =
10. The value measures the differential effect of an extra year of labor market experience in
the United States rather than in the country of origin.
4Set of country-of-origin experience variables (T, T2) has no significant effect on earnings.
N ote :

S ource :
1970 Census o f Population, Public Use Sample, 5-percent questionnaire, 1/100
sample, except for a 1/1,000 sample for the white analysis.

24


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

Table 3. Relative earnings advantage of native-born U.S.
men with foreign-born parents over native-born men with
native-born parents, by racial and ethnic group, 19701
Racial and ethnic group
W hite:.......................................................
Mexican3 ..........................................
Black:
All States (urban) .............................
New York State (SMSA) ..................
Asian:
Japanese ..........................................
Chinese ............................................
Filipino..............................................

Earnings advantage2 (in percent)
4.9
5.1

(4 8.6)

48.4
410.7
4 5.2
44.3
4 9.0

N ote : All coefficients are statistically significant, except for the Japanese, Chinese, and
Filipino groups. The sample size for each Asian group was very small for native-born men
with both parents native born.
1Earnings in 1969 for native-born men, age 25 to 64 in 1970, who worked and had earn­
ings in 1969. There were too few native-born men with Cuban-born parents for an analysis
of this group.
2The parameter is 100 times the coefficient of a foreign parentage dichotomous variable
when the natural logarithm of earnings is regressed on schooling, experience, marital status,
the log of weeks worked, geographic area, nativity of parents, and, in some equations, moth­
er tongue. For small values, the parameter is the percent difference in earnings. A positive
value indicates higher earnings for those with foreign-born parents (one or both).
3 Men with Spanish surnames living in Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and
Texas.
4 Mother tongue is held constant. Evaluated for a Spanish mother tongue in the Mexican
analysis and an English mother tongue in the black analysis.
S ource :
1970 Census o f Population, Public Use Sample, 15-percent questionnaire,
1/1,000 sample for the white men, and 1/100 sample for other groups.

(English-speaking economic migrants).
Second-generation American men are about the same
age and have the same schooling as those with both par­
ents born in the United States, but other things being
equal they had a 5 to 10-percent earnings advantage in
the 1970 census data (table 3). In the National Longitu­
dinal Survey ( n l s ), but not in the census, third-genera­
tion Americans can be compared with fourth and later
generations. Analyses using the NLS file for older white
men suggest that the earnings advantage of the foreignorigin population is smaller and may disappear by the
third generation. Although the second generation has a
significant 6-percent earnings advantage over the third
generation, the latter has either no earnings advantage
or only a small positive advantage (1.0 to 4.0 percent,
not statistically significant) over later-generation Ameri­
cans. This represents a “regression to the mean” in the
earnings performance of the foreign-origin population
with successive generations born in the United States.

Faster equality for most immigrant women
An analysis of the earnings of immigrant women for
the same seven groups, using the same data from the
1970 census, shows patterns similar to the men but with
greater variability by race and ethnic origin. Among
women who worked, schooling and preimmigration la­
bor market experience of the foreign born have a
smaller effect on U.S. hourly earnings than the skills of
the native born. The relative difference in the effect of
schooling is greatest for the immigrant groups that in­
clude the largest proportion of refugees and tied movers.
When there is an earnings cross-over for women, it

occurs sooner than for men. On average, just after they
arrive, white women have higher hourly earnings than
natives, and the gap widens over time. For most groups
of nonwhite immigrants, hourly earnings equal those of
natives of the same racial and ethnic group within
about 5 years. However, among Mexican and Filipino
immigrants, time in the United States appears to have
no differential effect on earnings (controlling for total
potential experience), and their earnings never equal
those of women born here of similar descent.
Persons who migrate primarily because of their
spouse’s job opportunities tend to have less readily
transferable skills and are obviously not necessarily eco­
nomic migrants. Women who married prior to immigra­
tion and whose migration decisions therefore may have
been influenced in large part by their husband’s are
found to have lower earnings. For example, among
white women, those who married prior to immigration
have earnings that are lower by 3 percent, a significant
difference. The earnings disadvantage is particularly
great for Asian women who married U.S. servicemen.
Women of the second generation earn more than
women with native-born parents, other things being
equal. The estimated earnings advantage of the former
in each of the groups studied is consistent with the 5 to
10-percent earnings advantage found among men of the
second generation.

Economic implications
There are clear patterns of racial and ethnic differ­
ences in the economic success of immigrants in the
United States, even though there is substantial variation
in the earnings of individuals within each group.

Among the groups studied by immigrant generation,
Mexicans and Filipinos tend to have low earnings com­
pared with whites, both overall and when other vari­
ables are the same; whereas this is not the situation for
those of Japanese and Chinese descent. These findings
challenge conventional notions about the impact of dis­
crimination on the schooling and earnings of racial and
ethnic minorities.
The impact of immigrants on the native population
changes with their length of residence, as they acquire
new skills. The longer immigrants reside in the United
States and the more their skills generate an economic
return comparable to that of the native population, the
smaller their adverse effect or the larger their favorable
effect on the wages of low-skilled native workers, the
smaller their use of income transfers for the poor, and
the more favorable is their effect on the aggregate in­
come of the native population.
Economic migrants are likely to have a more favor­
able impact than refugees or tied movers of the same
demographic characteristics and level of schooling, be­
cause the former tend to have relatively higher earnings.
Among potential economic migrants, those selected by
U.S. immigration policy on the basis of their likely pro­
ductivity in this country will tend to have a more favor­
able impact than immigrants selected under alternative
rationing mechanisms, such as kinship or a first-come,
first-served system. The immigration policies of the
United States and many other countries, however, in­
clude special preferences for refugees and the relatives
of citizens and resident aliens because of humanitarian
and foreign policy objectives, as well as for domestic so­
cial and political considerations. These other objectives,
however, have economic costs.
□

FOOTNOTES
' For a more detailed analysis of immigrant earnings and occupa­
tional mobility, see Barry R. Chiswick, “An Analysis of the Econom­
ic Progress and Impact of Immigrants,” Part II, final report
submitted to the Employment and Training Administration, U.S. De­
partment of Labor, June 1980.

2See Lloyd G. Humphrey, “To Understand Regression from Parent


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

to Offspring, Think Statistically,”
pp. 1,317-22.

P s y c h o lo g ic a l B u lle tin ,

85 (1978),

3Patterns similar to those for the contemporary United States
emerge in data for contemporary Britain, Canada, and Israel and for
the United States at the turn of the century. See Chiswick, “An Anal­
ysis . . . ,” Ch. 12.

25

Nonimmigrant workers:
visiting labor force participants
Working visitors include students, laborers,
and professionals; most require sponsors, and
those in health fields must now pass tough entry tests;
to obtain controversial temporary alien labor,
employers must show that U.S. workers are unavailable
D a v id S. N o r th

The term “nonimmigrant” is an awkward one, typical
of the often negative lexicon within the immigration
field. Traditionally, all aliens seeking admission to the
United States have been viewed as intending immi­
grants, until proven otherwise. Those who show that
they do not intend to stay here for the rest of their lives
are thus viewed as nonimmigrants.
Millions of nonimmigrants are admitted to the Unit­
ed States each year (more than 8.2 million in fiscal year
1978). Fully 80 percent of them are simply tourists,1
and the balance come to pursue other activities, includ­
ing work. Of those who come to work, many are not
actually employed in the U.S. labor market. There are,
for example, diplomats representing their nations in
Washington, international civil servants working for the
United Nations in New York, and representatives of
foreign business concerns seeking markets, raw materi­
als, or technology. None of these temporary entrants
performs work normally assigned to U.S. residents.
There are, however, five classes of nonimmigrants
who can and do work in the U.S. labor market: stu­
dents, temporary workers of distinguished merit and
ability, other temporary workers, exchange visitors, and
intracompany transferees (employees of multinational
corporations). Although their numbers are not large,
compared to total nonimmigrant admissions, they play
interesting— and sometimes controversial — roles in our
David S. North is director of the Center for Labor and Migration
Studies of the New TransCentury Foundation, Washington, D.C.

26 FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

society. They are, in a sense, the American equivalent of
Europe’s guestworkers; many of them (those working in
agriculture) are modern braceros, the term for Mexican
nationals who worked for low wages in U.S. agriculture
during 1942-64 in the largest nonimmigrant worker
program in our history.
In a recent study, the interaction of the five classes
with the U.S. labor market was examined.2 A thumbnail
sketch of each category appears in exhibit 1.
A majority of the members of most of the classes are
“bonded” to their employers. Bonded workers’ right of
residence in the United States is tied to their pre­
arranged employment. They do not have legal access to
other jobs in the United States, and if they cease work­
ing for the employer that brought them into the coun­
try they are no longer legally entitled to remain and are
subject to deportation. The bonding concept is not an
inevitable characteristic of alien worker programs; legal
immigrants in the United States and many guestworkers
in Europe are not bonded to their employers.

Program summaries
Each of the five programs of interest was created for
a specific purpose, and has its own interaction with the
U.S. labor market. Following is a summary of each of
the programs in alphabetical order as they are listed in
the immigration law.3
Students. Those with F - 1 visas are admitted to pursue
their education; that many of them wind up working in

Exhibit 1. Labor market characteristics, fiscal 1978
admissions, and admission trends of selected
classes of nonimmigrants
Class and visa
symbol
Students ( F - l)

Fiscal 1978
admissions

Characteristics

187,030

Only a minority
work (at least legal­
ly); none are bonded
to their employers;
admissions of this
group have increased
in the 1970’s.

Temporary
workers of
distinguished
merit and ability
( H - l)

16,838

All are workers,
mostly in the profes­
sions; all are bonded
to their employers;
admissions have de­
clined in the 1970’s.

Other temporary
workers (H -2 )

22,832

All are workers,
mostly in blue-collar
occupations (includ­
ing farmwork); all
are bonded to their
employers; admis­
sions have declined
in the 1970’s.

Exchange visitors
( J - l)

53,319

Most are workers,
some are not; most
are in the profes­
sions; some of the
workers are bonded
to their employers;
admissions have been
steady in the 1970’s.

Intracompany
transferees
( L - l)

21,495

All are workers,
mostly well-paid pro­
fessionals and man­
agers; all are bonded
to their employers;
admissions increased
rapidly in the 1970’s.

So urce : Admissions data from fiscal 1978 Annual Re­
port, Immigration and Naturalization Service (forthcom­
ing); characteristics from David S. North, Nonimmigrant
Workers in the U.S.: Current Trends and Future Implica­
tions (Washington, New TransCentury Foundation, 1980).

the United States is an unintentional, but predictable,
byproduct of their presence here. Although most F - l ’s
attend 4-year colleges or graduate schools, many are ad­
mitted to attend grammar schools, high schools, and in­
stitutions where they are taught English and vocational
subjects.
Students wishing to come to the United States must
first find and be accepted by an educational institution
authorized to admit foreign students by the Immigra­

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

tion and Naturalization Service. The school then issues
a document (form 1-20) to the student, which he or she
then takes to a U.S. Consulate to apply for a visa. Dur­
ing the visa application process, the alien must satisfy
the consular officer that he or she has enough money to
get to and from the United States, to pay for the
planned educational program, and to cover living ex­
penses without working. Unless this assurance can be
made, no visa is granted.
Should the student subsequently find that he or she
needs additional funds and cannot secure those funds
by working on campus (permission for which can be
obtained from the college foreign student adviser), the
student is required to seek a work permit from the Im­
migration Service. In fiscal 1979, for example, when
nearly 190,000 F - l students were admitted, 33,285
were granted permission to work and 5,364 were denied
such permission. These data suggest either that most
F - l students do not need to work or that many work
without permission.
F - l students who work, either legally or illegally, are
not bonded to their employers, as are most other
nonimmigrant workers. They are free to move around
the U.S. labor market, making their own arrangements
and changing jobs as they choose. The nature of their
work and the pay they receive is roughly comparable to
that of U.S. students in the same situation, although
their limited knowledge of English and of U.S. society
is a handicap to some, and others presumably experi­
ence anti-alien discrimination.
Temporary workers o f distinguished merit and ability.
Those with H - l visas are admitted because a U.S. em­
ployer filed a formal petition for their presence, the Im­
migration Service approved the petition (as it does in
approximately 95 percent of the cases), and a consular
official issued a visa to the nonimmigrant. These tempo­
rary workers are bonded to their employers, and in­
clude persons with extraordinary talents (leading opera
singers, actors, and musicians) or exotic skills (jai alai
players, French chefs). Sometimes entire companies (ice
shows, symphony orchestras) arrive on a single H - l
petition, bringing their blue-collar support staff with
them.4
A third subclass among the H - l ’s are members of
the professions, admitted individually, but sometimes
(as in the case of registered nurses) recruited in substan­
tial numbers.
Other temporary workers. Those in the H -2 classifica­
tion fill jobs for which the U.S. Department of Labor
has certified that U.S. workers are not available. Most
of them are assigned to less attractive jobs on the geo­
graphical fringes of the United States: dominating the
construction industry in Guam, performing much of the
27

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Nonimmigrant Workers
blue-collar and service work in the Virgin Islands, cut­
ting trees in western Maine and sugar cane in southern
Florida, and herding sheep in remote pastures in the
Mountain States.
The screening process for H -2 workers is more com­
plex than that for any other group of nonimmigrant
workers. First, the employer must satisfy the Labor De­
partment that he has genuinely tried to secure resident
workers (by offering them appropriate wages and work­
ing conditions), has failed in his recruiting efforts, and
is thus qualified to hire alien workers (of his own choos­
ing). Employers seeking to import H -2 workers are re­
quired to pay a special hourly wage, the adverse effect
wage rate, to both their foreign and domestic workers.
The 1980 special wage rates for the States using H -2
workers appear in table 1.
Applications for certification are often controversial
— as they have been in the East Coast apple harvest,
where congressional pressure exists to grant the certifi­
cations. (See table 2 for State-by-State certification of
H - 2 ’s in the apple harvest.) In recent years, the courts
have also intervened — generally requiring the certifica­
tion of the nonimmigrant workers.
The potential H -2 employer, with a labor certifica­
tion in hand, seeks approval of a petition from the Im­
migration Service and then secures either visas or visaequivalents for the workers. He may hire any alien in
the world he likes once he has the labor certification.
Exchange visitors. These nonimmigrants secure their J - l
visas in much the same way as students secure F - l
visas. The alien finds an exchange program sponsor ap­
proved by the International Communications Agency
(an independent Federal agency), and then is admitted
into that program by the sponsor, who issues an admis­
sions certificate (like the foreign student’s 1-20 form).
Having obtained a certificate, the exchange visitor may
then seek a visa from a consular official.
Table 1.
1980

Minimum wage rates for H -2 workers, by State,
States

Arizona ................................................................................
Colorado .............................................................................
Connecticut .........................................................................
Florida (sugar cane only) ...................................................
Maine ..................................................................................
M aryland.............................................................................
Massachusetts....................................................................
New Hampshire ..................................................................
New York ...........................................................................
Rhooe Island .......................................................................
Texas ..................................................................................
Vermont .............................................................................
Virginia ................................................................................
West Virginia .......................................................................

1980 rates'
$3.73
3.79
3.32
4.09
3.43
3.23
3.30
3.58
3.18
3.30
3.54
3.53
3.51
3.28

1Rates are based upon 1978-79 United States Department of Agriculture wage data and
the formula published at 20 CFR §653.207(b) (1). Pursuant to 20 CFR §655.207(e), the em­
ployer must pay at least $3.35 per hour in calendar 1981. See 29 U.S.C. 206(a) (1).
S o urce : Fed era l Register, Vol. 45, No. 92, May 9,1980, pp. 30733-30734.

28FRASER
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Table 2. Labor certification granted for temporary
foreign workers (H -2 ’s) in the apple harvests, 1975-791
1979

1975

1976

19772

19783

T o ta l..........................

4,742

3,432

4,835

4,931

6,686

Colorado ...............................
Connecticut ..........................
Maine......................................
Maryland ...............................
Massachusetts ......................
New Hampshire ....................
New Y o rk ...............................
Rhode Island ........................
Verm ont.................................
Virginia...................................
West Virginia ........................

0
96
358
178
404
245
1,587
19
353
978
524

0
75
299
0
360
284
1,151
13
252
621
377

0
102
389
30
417
354
1,703
12
305
922
601

0
121
436
0
387
331
1,716
17
315
1,036
572

134
135
432
384
447
349
2,571
18
331
1,141
744

State

1The number of jobs certified does not indicate the actual number of foreign workers ad­
mitted for such employment. An employer may choose not to use any or all of the certifica­
tions granted, and some foreign workers may work in two or more certified jobs.
2 All certifications in 1977 were made pursuant to order from U.S. District Court at
Roanoke, Virginia.
3 In compliance with the order of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond,
Virginia, the Immigration Service admitted 414 more apple pickers than were certified in
1978. These are not included in the 1978 column.
S ource : Administrative reports of the Employment and Training Administration, U.S. De­
partment of Labor.

Exchange visitors are an interesting, mixed lot. They
include high school students living with American fami­
lies, college and graduate school students, visiting pro­
fessors, post-doctoral scholars, and foreign medical
graduates performing their internships and residencies
in U.S. hospitals.
Some of the J - l ’s study full time, others work. Some
of those who work are bonded employees brought to
the United States by a sponsor-employer.
Intracompany transferees. Those with L - l visas are pro­
fessionals and managers employed by multinational cor­
porations, who have worked for their companies for at
least 1 year and who have been screened through the
same process as the H - l visa holders.

Areas of controversy
Beyond the educational and diplomatic advantages of
many of these programs, there are two major controver­
sies surrounding the impact of nonimmigrant workers
on U.S. labor markets. One concerns foreign-trained
physicians and nurses, and the other involves various
groups of farm laborers brought into the United States
via the H -2 program.
Foreign health professionals. The issues regarding the
foreign medical graduates and the foreign nursing grad­
uates are similar. In both cases, groups representing the
competing U.S. work force (such as the American
Nurses Association and the American Association of
Medical Colleges) contended that it was considerably
easier for a foreign-trained health professional to qualify
for a professional assignment in the United States than

it was for one who is U.S.-trained, because of a less
stringent prearrival competency examination (in the
case of the foreign medical graduates) and a deferred
examination (in the case of foreign nursing graduates).
U.S. physicians and nurses contended that the quality
of care provided by the alien workers was not up to
U.S. standards. Although rarely mentioned in these ar­
guments, rigorous admission standards for such workers
could also tighten the labor market to the benefit of
U.S. workers.
The foreign health care professionals admitted to the
United States were numerous. During 1964-73, there
were more admissions of foreign medical graduates than
there were graduates of U.S. medical schools. The
steady supply of foreign graduates eased the pressure to
expand U.S. medical schools for years, thereby making
it more difficult for U.S. blacks and others to secure
places. One result of this combination of circumstances
(the substantial numbers of foreign medical graduates
and the level of support for U.S. medical schools) was
that there were more Filipino medical graduates in the
United States in 1975 than there were black ones. That
balance has since changed; there are now more black
than Filipino medical graduates.
Foreign nursing graduates were not as large a factor
in the nursing labor force, but approximately one-fifth
of the 432,000 increase in the size of the nursing work
force during 1969-78 resulted from the admission of
foreigners. Most of the foreign nursing graduates had
trouble passing examinations (in English) required by
the States. The nurses who failed the examinations were
then forced to work as nurses aides or licensed practical
nurses— an ironic development for nonimmigrants of
“distinguished merit and ability.”5
Eventually both resident work forces prevailed. Dur­
ing 1976-77, Congress and the Executive created
tougher laws regarding physician admissions6 and creat­
ed a more rigorous competency examination for foreign
medical graduates.7 (Admissions of nonimmigrant medi­
cal graduates dropped sharply as a result, as table 3 in­
dicates.) The reaction to the American nurses was less
immediate: earlier this year, the Immigration Service
Table 3.

promulgated regulations making passage of an examina­
tion in English, equivalent to those of the State boards
of nursing examiners, a prerequisite to securing an H - l
visa as a registered nurse.8
Foreign farmworkers. The recurrent controversy about
the farmworkers among the H - 2 ’s can only be summa­
rized here. Some U.S. growers have maintained that do­
mestic workers are not available at the wages set by the
Department of Labor, and that alien workers are need­
ed to prevent crop losses. Representatives of resident
farm workers (such as the Migrant Legal Action Pro­
gram, Inc.) contend that the growers actively prefer the
hard working, docile Caribbean workers (largely from
Jamaica) and sabotage efforts to recruit U.S. workers.
They also point out that agricultural employers obtain,
in effect, a 9-percent discount for hiring H - 2 ’s because
they are not required to pay social security and unem­
ployment insurance taxes for these workers.
What is rarely discussed is the remarkable power that
employers of nonimmigrants have over their workers,
particularly those in agriculture. H -2 employers have
virtually unlimited power to hire and fire their workers.
These employers can, and do, make the kind of highly
selective hiring decisions that would be illegal outside
the context of the H -2 program. Sugar cane employers
of H - 2 ’s, for example, confine their hiring to Englishspeaking, black men (recruited in Jamaica and, to a
lesser extent, in other former British colonies). They in­
sist on young men (in a narrow age range) without a
police record and in excellent physical condition. Be­
cause there are many more potential cane cutters than
are needed, employers secure a remarkably elite work
force; for the rates paid (around $3 an hour in the 1976—
77 season), employers probably could not recruit such a
work force in the United States. Further, because the
H -2 farmworker is bonded to his employer, firing
means not only that the worker has lost his opportunity
to work at relatively high wages, but it also means his
expulsion from the United States. If a Florida sugar
cane grower is really annoyed with a worker, he may
not only fire him, and expel him from the country, but

Nonimmigrant physicians admitted to the United States, by class of admission, fiscal 1970-78
Nonimmigrant class

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

T o ta l.............................................................................

5,365

5,191

4,283

5,166

5,517

3,466

3,243

2,141

1,169

Temporary workers of distinguished merit and ability (H -1) ..

83

178

231

350

578

426

542

455

180

Other temporary workers (H -2) ............................................

100

47

25

0

0

0

0

0

0

Industrial trainees ( H - 3 ) .........................................................

174

173

82

178

149

143

77

65

20

Exchange visitors (J-1 ) .........................................................

5,008

4,784

3,935

4,613

4,717

2,849

2,562

1,578

951

0

9

10

25

73

48

62

43

18

Intracompany transferees (L -1 )
S ource :

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

IN S A nnual Reports, for the years cited, Table 16B.


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

29

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Nonimmigrant Workers
also blacklist him so that he never can work again as an
H - 2 farmworker.9
As if those powers are not enough to keep the work
force in line, the H -2 employer has had additional
help. In case of a strike, the Government has obligingly
supplied replacements for the striking workers, on the
grounds that the strikers have broken their contracts
with the employers. However, regulations proposed by
the Immigration Service in the spring of 1980, indicate
that this practice may not continue.

Impacts on U.S. labor market
The findings in our study were that the labor-market
role and impact of specific subsets of nonimmigrant
workers vary widely and are strongly influenced by the
conditions under which they entered the country. The
impacts of the nonimmigrants on specific labor markets
fall into three categories:
• The smallest impact is that of the accidental work­
ers (all the F - l ’s and most J - l ’s); they generally
do not cluster, and they come and go in the labor
market with the freedom of immigrant workers;
they are not tied to specific employers. Their im­
pact is about the same as that of the addition of a
similar number of U.S. workers of similar quali­
fications to the same labor market.

1See 1 9 7 8 Y e a rb o o k o f th e I m m ig r a tio n a n d N a tu r a liz a tio n S ervice,
table 16. (To arrive at the total and the percentage used in the text we
excluded more than 1 million returning resident aliens included in
that table.)
2 David S. North, N o n im m ig r a n t W o rk e rs in th e U .S .: C u r re n t
T re n d s a n d F u tu r e I m p lic a tio n s (Washington, New TransCentury
Foundation, 1980). This article is based on that study, which was
supported by the Employment and Training Administration, U.S. De­
partment of Labor.
Immigration and Nationality Act, Section 101 (a) (15) (A)
through (L): S 1101 et. seq.
4 According to the testimony of Barbara Robinson before the Select
Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy in New York on
January 21, 1980, the Vienna State Opera came to Washington, D.C.,
in 1979 with 494 people on one H - l visa. Included in this group
were 43 laborers who replaced the stagehands at the Kennedy Center.
5Adele Herwitz, In v estig a tio n in to th e R e a d in e ss o f G r a d u a te s o f F or­

30


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

• The impact of those admitted individually to work
(nonnurse H - l ’s, L - l ’s, some J - l ’s, and some
nonrural H - 2 ’s) is mixed. In some instances, they
fill genuine vacancies in the workplace, and thereby
help the economy function more smoothly; in some
cases they make the society more cosmopolitan,
bringing to the United States exotic skills. In other
cases, they may be (and here the argument grows
complex and spirited) displacing resident workers
or reducing training opportunities for such workers.
This is particularly likely if there is a clustering of
visiting alien workers.
• The impact of workers admitted in groups or as
part of a mass-hiring operation is clear. (These are
the rural H - 2 ’s, the H - l nurses, and some of the
other H - 2 ’s.) Such workers tend to “freeze” the
micro-labor markets where they cluster: labor in­
tensive work patterns (such as the hand cutting of
sugar cane in Florida) are preserved, and wages do
not rise as they might otherwise.
There will continue to be, and there should be, for
nonlabor-market reasons, a continued flow of immi­
grants and nonimmigrants to the United States; that is
an important part of our heritage. It is another matter,
however, whether part of the nonimmigrant stream
should provide bonded workers as a subsidy to a small
number of U.S. employers.
□

eign N u r sin g S ch o o ls to M e e t L ic e n s u r e R e q u ir e m e n ts in th e U n ite d
S ta tes, C o m p re h e n siv e F in a l R e p o r t (prepared by the Commission on

Graduates of Foreign Nursing Schools, Philadelphia, Pa., under con­
tract with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Bureau
of Health Manpower, Division of Nursing, March 1979).
6 Health Professions Educational Assistance Act of 1976 (P.L. 9 4 484), and the Health Services Extension Act of 1977 (P. L. 95-83).
7The new test is called the Visa Qualifying Examination (VQE) and
was first administered worldwide in 1977.
*See the

F e d e r a l R eg ister,

Apr. 16, 1980.

7For more on how the growers have used their power to repatriate
workers who displease them, see “The Cane Contract: West Indians
in Florida,” in N A C L A : R e p o r t on th e A m e ric a s ; Peter Kramer, Th e
O ff-S h o res: A S tu d y o f F oreign F a rm L a b o r in F lo rid a (St. Petersburg,
Fla., 1966): and Philip Shabecoff, “Florida Cane Cutters: Alien, Poor,
Afraid,” T h e N e w Y ork T im es, Mar. 12, 1973.

Employment patterns
of Southeast Asian refugees
Based on the limited data available,
most earlier Indochinese refugees found jobs,
have had gradual income gains, but work long hours;
recent arrivals speak less English and face more
employment problems because of economic conditions
R o b e r t L. B a c h

and

Je n n if e r B. B a c h

The extraordinary exodus for Vietnam, Laos, and
Kampuchea (Cambodia) has brought more than
360,000 refugee settlers to the United States beginning
in 1975. Recent arrivals have greatly swollen the num­
bers. Based on President Carter’s June 1979 commit­
ment to admit 14,000 a month, 168,000 Southeast
Asian refugees will have entered the United States dur­
ing fiscal year 1980.1
The Refugee Act of 19802 was designed primarily to
meet the needs of those fleeing political and economic
uncertainties as well as military conflicts in Southeast
Asia. The new law concluded a long history to tempo­
rary, ad hoc legislation (see the box, p. 41) by
establishing a permanent and systematic method3for ac­
cepting refugees into the United States and assuring
their effective resettlement. Thus, a major goal of the
act is the swift and complete integration of the
Indochinese refugees into the “mainstream” of Ameri­
can life. Principally, this involves locating and obtaining
adequate employment.
Robert L. Bach is assistant professor of sociology, State University of
New York, Binghamton. Jennifer B. Bach is a private research ana­
lyst.


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

Congress sought to assist the refugees in their em­
ployment search. Under the 1980 law, it required the
Office of Refugee Resettlement to provide resources for
employment and training and job placement.4 Congress
also prbvided monetary assistance for up to 3 years—
expecting all to be working and economically self-suffi­
cient by then.
Some have questioned whether, within 3 years, the
Southeast Asian refugees will gain a level of labor force
participation, employment, and income to warrant the
label “self-sufficient.” However, based on our evaluation
of all available data, there is sufficient cause for opti­
mism. The vast majority of refugees have actively
joined the U.S. labor force and found jobs relatively
quickly. Differences among men and women are sub­
stantial in some areas, but these largely reflect similar
patterns in the U.S. population. Cultural differences
among the three Indochinese nationalities are certainly
distinguishable, yet their employment levels are surpris­
ingly similar. And, by far the most promising indicator,
both labor force participation and employment evident­
ly increase with each year of residence in the United
States.
Still, there are signs that urge caution. Refugees tend
31

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Employment o f Indochinese Refugees
to work longer hours than U.S. workers, while many re­
main dependent on government subsidies. Significant re­
gional disparities also argue against generalized
optimism. Already, for example, an uneven geographical
distribution of refugees within the United States has
generated concern and controversy, not only because it
implies a concentrated and differential impact on local
government resources, but because it affects newer refu­
gees’ employment opportunities. And, a growing con­
cern is apparent over the characteristics of the recent
arrivals and their prospects for employment.

Data on refugees
Our analysis of the employment status of Indochinese
refugees presented in this article is based on the two
major sources of refugee information available: surveys
conducted by Opportunity Systems, Inc., for the De­
partment of Health and Human Services and the annual
Alien Address Registration conducted by the Immigra­
tion and Naturalization Service. Each provides data on
overall employment and demographic differentials, al­
though coverage of the refugee population is quite dif­
ferent, and comparisons are more suggestive than
precise.
Opportunity Systems, Inc., conducts a series of tele­
phone surveys that cover a cross section of all South­
east Asian refugees who arrived through December
1977. The sample selects from the 1975 Evacuee Master
File and from those admitted under the various tempo­
rary programs: the Humanitarian Program (January May, 1976), the Expanded Parole Program (M ay-D e­
cember, 1976), and the 1977 Indochinese Parole Pro­
gram (August-December).
The most recent available survey, taken during A prilJune 1979 by Opportunity Systems, and reported in the
13th Report to Congress,5 included 356 Vietnamese, 175
Cambodian, and 185 Laotian heads of households.
These households contained a total of 3,539 persons, or
an average of 4.94 per household. Response rates ap­
pear to be a recurring problem for the Opportunity Sys­
tems surveys, as one might expect from the general
difficulty with locating and interviewing immigrants af­
ter they enter the United States. For the A pril-June
survey, 716 of an original 1,000 were interviewed suc­
cessfully, yielding a response rate of only 71.6 percent.
Under the Alien Address Registration, aliens are re­
quired by law to register each January with the
Immigration and Naturalization Service. They file a
postcard form that lists name, address, alien identifica­
tion number, date of birth, date of entry, and type of
visa. In addition, they are to report their employment
status and place of employment. Although coverage is
typically a problem, Linda Gordon and Stephen Schroffel6 estimate conservatively that between 85 to 90 per­
cent of the Southeast Asian refugee population regis­
32


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

tered from 1976 to 1979. The 1979 registration included
157,509 persons of Vietnamese, Cambodian, or Laotian
nationality; about 87 percent of all those admitted to
that date.
The Immigration Service data reported here are de­
rived from a 6.8-percent sample, a total of 10,629 per­
sons.7 A 10-percent subsample provides information on
industry and occupation.
Unfortunately, the employment information from
these sources is not directly comparable. Unlike the Op­
portunity Systems surveys, the alien registration data do
not distinguish between those who are out of work but
looking for a job (“in the labor force” but unemployed)
and those out of work and not searching (“out of the
labor force”). Consequently, the Immigration Service
data measure only the proportion of refugees who re­
port holding a job at the time of registration. This pro­
portion of refugees employed can be compared,
however, with the employment population ratio
routinely reported for the U.S. population.8 Moreover, a
profile of the refugee experience can be constructed by
examining several labor market indicators estimated
from each source.
Brief reference will also be made to a study conduct­
ed by the Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Depart­
ment of Health and Human Services.9 The study was
designed to assess the resettlement effort by gathering
qualitative information from open-ended discussions
with 900 people, including 500 refugees and 335 work­
ers from local communities and voluntary agencies. Al­
though not statistically valid samples, the observations
reported will be used here to help fill out an otherwise
skeletal profile of the resettlement experience.10
With the Refugee Act of 1980, Congress anticipated
the need for comprehensive and current statistical infor­
mation to help monitor the resettlement efforts. Thus,
the law requires the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to develop a reporting capability that will pro­
vide Congress an updated profile of the refugees’ em­
ployment and labor force characteristics, a description
of their geographical location, and an account of the
activities and policies of the Office of Refugee
Resettlement, the voluntary agencies, and those groups
and individuals sponsoring refugees. Such a reporting
capability is essential because many of the government’s
existing information systems do not identify refugees as
a separate group for reporting purposes.11

Labor force activity
An employment profile of the Indochinese refugees
can be sketched by reviewing several indicators of labor
market activity.
As shown in the following tabulation, employmentpopulation ratios for the Southeast Asian refugees indi­
cate that approximately 54 percent were employed:

Population
U.S. civilian ................................
Refugee:
Immigration S ervice...........
Opportunity Systems, Inc. .

Employment-population ratio
Total

Men

Women

58.9

72.6

46.6

53.3
54.4

62.6
67.7

42.6
37.7

The independent estimates are remarkably close, consid­
ering the Opportunity Systems survey (A pril-June
1979) includes only the pre-1978 arrivals, while the Im­
migration Service registration (January 1979) includes
those admitted later. The 54 percent employment ratio
for refugees, however, is smaller than the proportion of
the U.S. population employed during January 1979.
It is of some importance that the sex differential is
similar in both the refugee and U.S. populations. Fe­
male employment has been and will likely continue to
be a significant factor in raising household incomes for
refugees and, thus, in contributing to more rapid
resettlement.
These differences in employment ratios are influenced,
of course, by both the rate of labor force participation
and the unemployment rate. As mentioned previously,
the Immigration and Naturalization Service registration
data do not permit this essential refinement. However,
the comparison of the Opportunity Systems data and
U.S. labor force measures helps account for the employ­
ment ratio differential.
Opportunity Systems estimates of refugee labor force
participation and unemployment rates and the compara­
ble U.S. labor force data are shown in the following
tabulation:
Population
Measure

U.S.

Labor force participation rate
Men ...............................................
78.2
Women ..........................................
50.2
Unemployment
Men .....................................................
4.9
Women ................................................
7.0

Refugee
70.3
39.3
3.6
3.5

Clearly, much of the above difference in employment ra­
tios results from the significantly lower rates of labor
force participation among the refugees; the difference is
essentially the same for both sexes. Comparison of un­
employment rates strengthens this conclusion. Once a
refugee has entered the labor force, he or she is more
likely to have found a job than a U.S. worker. In addi­
tion, the importance of female employment among refu­
gees is again highlighted: whereas women in the U.S.
labor force are much more likely than men to be unem­
ployed, female and male refugees share similar low rates
of unemployment.
Consequently, these data suggest that the lower over­
all level of employment in the refugee population results
from a lower rate of labor force participation, rather


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

than a greater inability to find employment once search­
ing has begun. Of course, this merely leaves another
question: why do refugees have lower labor force partic­
ipation rates?
The primary answer seems to be that refugees are
taking advantage of available educational and training
opportunities. Data collected by Opportunity Systems
show that 59.8 percent of those interviewed gave school
attendance as one of the principal reasons for not
searching for a job. Homemaking was mentioned by
26.1 percent; poor English (21.2 percent) and poor
health (17.6 percent) were also listed frequently.
The Government interview d ata12 corroborates that
both training and health affect refugees’ labor market
behavior. The Inspector General reported that 35 per­
cent of those interviewed cited their inadequate knowl­
edge of English as a major reason for not being
employed. Another 19 percent gave health as a contrib­
uting factor. The report also noted that, although 41
percent of those interviewed took jobs immediately
upon arrival, only 9 percent would advise others to do
so. It seems many refugees view training, especially lan­
guage training, as essential to securing better employ­
ment opportunities over the long run.
Such a perspective, if held throughout the refugee
population, could substantially affect participation and
employment rates in the short run because many of the
newer arrivals are sponsored by earlier entries and
would receive their advice. In addition, the presence of
new government programs, resulting from the provi­
sions of the Refugee Act of 1980, could allow more of
the new arrivals to take advantage of training opportu­
nities.
Over the long run, however, the refugees will likely
approach levels of labor force activity comparable to
the U.S. population. Table 1 demonstrates this with
data from both the alien registration and the Opportu­
nity Systems surveys.
The data in columns 1 and 2 of table 1 show that, for
those entering before January 1978, each additional year
of residence increased the likelihood of employment by
an average of about 6 percentage points. The 1975 ar­
rivals are of particular interest because most are eligible
for and will become U.S. citizens in 1980. As of Janu­
ary 1979, after 4 years of residence, both men and
women have reached virtually the same employment ra­
tio as the U.S. population: 70 percent of male refugees
were employed compared to 72.6 percent of U.S. men;
46.1 percent of the female refugees and 46.6 percent of
U.S. women were employed.
The Opportunity Systems estimates of refugee labor
force participation parallel the above employment
counts. Again, each successive year in the United States
shows refugees participating at a higher rate. Neverthe­
less, their participation is still below the overall U.S.
33

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Employment o f Indochinese Refugees
level, with 1975 male refugees about 9 percentage points
below their U.S. counterparts.

More recent arrivals

Monthly income

Arrivals within the year preceding the January 1979
alien registration have a rather low employment ratio.
This could result merely from their new exposure to the
United States. However, such an assumption is un­
warranted. There is general agreement, although little
documentation, that Southeast Asian refugees arriving
before 1978 were positively selected; that is, they had
higher educational and occupational status backgrounds
in Asia and a greater knowledge of English. For exam­
ple, a General Accounting Office review of the reset­
tlement program 13 reported that more recent arrivals are
“poorer, less able to speak English, and less exposed to
urban life than the earlier wave of refugees.”
The National Governor’s Association holds a similar
view, reporting to its members th at14
refugees who arrived after 1978 faced even greater problems
of adjustment and employment. They are comparatively less
educated, and have fewer marketable skills and poor lan­
guage ability. In contrast to the earlier refugees who imme­
diately accepted entry-level employment, this second group
showed an increasing reliance on cash and medical assis­
tance.

Consequently the lower employment ratios and labor
force participation rates of newer arrivals may be
caused by either differential time in the United States,
lesser background skills, or even divergent opportunities
in areas of resettlement. This question remains largely
unexplored, however, because a proper research design
would require observations of the same individuals over
time; a longitudinal study for which there has been only
limited time and resources.
Still, a few tentative observations are available. Table
2 shows the 1979 income distribution for refugees enter­
ing in 1975, 1976 and 1977. In addition, it includes the
1978 income distribution of the cohort arriving in 1975.
The A pril-June 1979 survey data for the three cohorts
support the claim developed in table 1 that the longer a
refugee resides in the United States, the higher his or
her income. Without additional evidence, this conclu­

Table 1. U.S. labor market activity in 1979 of Southeast
Asian refugees by year of entry and sex, persons age 16
and over
Year of entry

Pre-1975 ......................
1975 .............................
1976 .............................
1977 .............................
1978 .............................
1979 .............................

34


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

Table 2. Monthly income for Southeast Asian refugees,
by year of entry, persons age 16 and over

Employment ratio
(Immigration Service)
Men

Women

74.1
70.0
64.2
58.8
33.5
13.8

54.2
46.1
36.2
41.0
19.0
28.6

Labor force participation
(Opportunity Systems, Inc.)
Men

Women

69.1
65.5
58.4

42.9
34.4
29.6

Less than $200 .............
$200 to 399 ..................
$400 to 599 ..................
$600 to 799 ..................
$800 or m o re ...............
Unknown ......................

1978 distribution1
of refugees who
entered in 1975

2.1
3.1
7.6
14.7
70.0
2.5

1979 distribution2 of
refugees who entered in
1975

1976

1977

2.7
3.6
4.4
11.6
77.6
.0

3.3
4.1
6.2
15.7
70.2
.5

4.6
5.6
15.8
12.4
60.8
.8

1From the November - December 1978 survey.
2 From the April-June 1979 survey.
S ource :

Opportunity Systems, Inc., Seventh Wave R eport: Indochinese R esettlem ent

O perational Feedback, July 10,1979.

sion (as noted) is wrought with inference problems.
However, the November-December 1978 survey data
show that, as the 1975 cohort remained an additional 6
months in the United States, its income distribution
shifted upward. This more accurately shows that length
of U.S. residence facilitates reaching higher employment
and income levels.
Table 2 also reveals that the majority of refugees with
jobs receive $800 or more per month. This is certainly a
promising sign. Nevertheless, it is important to note
that to earn this monthly income, the refugees were
working significantly longer hours than the U.S. labor
force. For instance, the 13th Health, Education and
Welfare, Report to Congress, stated that, compared to
58.7 percent of the U.S. labor force working 40 hours
or more per week, at least 85 percent of the refugees la­
bored this long.
The longer workweek, and indications that about a
third of all the refugees receive cash assistance, suggests
that even the relatively comparable employment levels
may not be enough for the refugees to achieve “self-suf­
ficiency.” Still, there is reason to maintain a guarded
optimism.

Occupational profile
What jobs have Indochinese refugees found? Table 3
presents two independent estimates and compares them
to the U.S. labor force in January 1979. At this writing,
table 3 represents the most recent occupational profile
available for the Southeast Asian refugees. Still, one
must remember that many refugees, suspected of pos­
sessing substantially different occupational traits, have
entered since these data were collected. The current oc­
cupational profile may look very different.
Immigration’s alien registration, covering all those
who entered up to 1979, classifies about one-third of the
refugees as white-collar workers. This is about 20 per­
centage points below the white-collar share of the U.S.
workforce. In addition, the largest white-collar category
of U.S. workers, about a quarter, held clerical and sales
jobs; both Immigration and Opportunity Systems data

report that only 13 percent of the refugees worked at
such jobs. However, 22.1 percent of the refugees report­
ing to Immigration were service workers, which com­
pares to only 13.3 percent of U.S. workers.
Overall, then, the occupational profiles of the two
populations seem reasonably similar. Even the lower
proportion of refugees in white-collar jobs may result
from the inclusion of new arrivals in the Immigration
data. Previous research, for example, has shown that
new arrivals experience a substantial downward mobili­
ty from their occupational status in the country of ori­
gin. It takes a number of years to regain even a share of
that initial decline.15

A diverse population
Nationality may also be another source of variability
in the employment experience of these refugees. The
term “Southeast Asian” obscures many essential differ­
ences among those from Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos:
differences include language, religion, culture, occupa­
tional histories, and family composition. Even within
each nationality, diverse ethnic groups condition the ref­
ugees’ behavior in sharply distinct ways: the Hmong
from Laos and the ethnic Chinese from Vietnam are
just two important examples. Therefore, nationality dif­
ferences among labor market indicators should be con­
sidered mere approximations, preliminary introductions,
to more complex determinants of these refugees’ work
experiences.
Some insight into the diversity of the refugee popula­
tion is gained by contrasting the 1979 employment-pop­
ulation ratio (age 16 and over) for each nationality,16 as
shown in the following tabulation:
Nationality
T o ta l.....................
Vietnamese .....................
Cambodian .....................
L a o tia n .............................

Employment ratio
53.2
54.7
55.7
38.5

Sample size
6,741
5,852
255
634

Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees have very similar
shares of their population employed. The Laotian
group, however, reports a much lower share. Because
the Laotian subgroup is dominated by the Hmong, a
mountain tribal people, this lower employment level
may not be surprising. This difference can be explained
simply by the age, sex, and arrival date of the Laotians.
That is, when one controls statistically for the variation
in employment caused by these demographic factors,
virtually no difference remains in the employment ratios
for these groups.17

Favored destinations
Federal policy toward the distribution of refugees has
aimed at their wide dispersal.18 In spite of this, the refu­
gees continue to concentrate in several States and
counties; either because of the emphasis on family reuni­

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

fication and sponsorship, or because of secondary mi­
gration (after initial resettlement) toward ethnic en­
claves.
Table 4 shows the proportion of refugees in several
States from 1976 to 1979. The clearest and most impor­
tant observation from these data is the increasing con­
centration in both California and Texas. In 1976, both
States shared 30.8 percent of the total refugee popula­
tion; by 1979, they held 43.3 percent. These figures, of
course, precede the increased numbers arriving in 1979.
Yet, State Department information on place of intended
resettlement for those arriving in 1979 indicates that the
impact of these newer arrivals on the two States may be
greater: California is receiving about 4 of every 10 new
arrivals, and Texas about 1 in 10.19
In addition to the disproportionate share of new ar­
rivals, there is general agreement that California and
Texas gain refugees through secondary migration. For
instance, David N orth20 has shown, using data from the
1978 alien registration, that there was a strong net mi­
gration to California, Texas, Louisiana, and Virginia.
The shift was occasioned, of course, by a reduction in
some States: Maine, the Dakotas, and Hawaii. The in­
terstate shift also corresponded with an increased con­
centration in urban areas.
Table 4 also provides an important implication of this
uneven geographical distribution. Matched with the
proportion of the total refugee population in each State
is the corresponding employment ratio for refugees re­
porting in January 1979. The first observation of signifi­
cance is that California, with the largest share of refu­
gees, has the lowest employment ratio among the States
listed. However, Texas, the second most popular State
for these refugees, has the highest ratio. In each case,

Table 3. Occupational distribution for Southeast Asian
refugees and U.S. population, persons age 16 and over
Refugees
Occupation

U.S. workforce,
January 1979

January
19791

April - June
19792

White collar
Total

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

51.2

32.2

51.8

15.8
10.9
24.5

16.1
2.2
13.9

17.7
21.1
13.0

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

48.8

67.8

48.2

Craftworkers .....................................
Operatives and transport workers . .
Farm m anagers.................................
Laborers, farm and nonfarm .............
Serviceworkers .................................

13.2
15.4
1.4
5.5
13.3

12.7
24.3
.0
8.7
22.1

22.5
9.7
.8
9.5
5.7

Professional and technical workers . .
Managers and administrators ...........
Clerical and sales workers ...............
Blue collar
Total

' Immigration and Naturalization Service, Alien Address Registration, January 1979.
2 Opportunity Systems, Inc., Seventh Wave R eport: Indochinese R esettlem ent O perational
Feedback, July 10, 1979.

35

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Employment o f Indochinese Refugees
the refugee employment ratio differs from the U.S.
population by a significant am ount; much lower for
California and higher for Texas. The remaining States,
with the exception of Louisiana, have employment
levels comparable to the total U.S. figure.
The reason for these vast differences between Cali­
fornia and Texas is not clear. However, even when
the demographic composition of the refugees in each
State is accounted for statistically (that is, age, sex, year
of entry, and nationality), the chance of a refugee hav­
ing found work is still significantly greater in Texas
than in California.21
One possible contributing factor is that California
may suffer from a disproportionate influx of secondary
migrants who are not employed. This secondary migra­
tion effect has not been studied extensively outside its
immediate impact on the number of refugees in an area.
Even then, the focus is net migration. Consequently, ta­
ble 5 provides a rare portrait of the demographic char­
acteristics and employment of secondary migrants.

Secondary migration: Los Angeles
The data presented in table 5 derive from the 1978
and 1979 alien registrations and pertain only to Los
Angeles. As such, they do not permit a comparison
with the Texas experience. Nevertheless, they do explore
the assumptions about the difference in a preliminary
fashion. Los Angeles forms an important part of the
southern California region that attracts a substantial
number of secondary migrants. If secondary migrants
have a lower employment level there, it becomes more
likely that the surrounding areas will have had similar
experiences.
The data are part of a 4-percent, systematic random
sample of Southeast Asian refugees registering with the
Immigration Service in January 1979, who reported
their current address as Los Angeles. To determine
their residential status, each respondent was checked for

Table 4. Proportion of all Southeast Asian refugees
residing in selected States, 1976-79, and their 1979
employment-population ratio
[In percent]

State

California.............................
Texas .................................
Pennsylvania ......................
Louisiana.............................
Virginia ...............................
Washington ........................
Illinois .................................

Proportion of all Southeast
Asian refugees

1979 employment
population ratio
(age 16 and over)

1976

1977

1978

1979

Percent

Rank

22.5
8.3
6.0
2.9
4.3
3.8
3.2

24.3
8.5
4.9
4.2
4.3
3.6
2.8

27.8
9.2
4.5
4.5
4.3
3.6
2.8

31.2
10.1
4.2
4.1
3.8
3.6
3.0

46.1
63.5
53.2
62.5
55.9
50.0
54.6

7
1
5
2
3
6
4

S ource : Immigration and Naturalization Service, Alien Address Reports, adapted from
Linda W. Gordon, “ Settlement Patterns of Indochinese Refugees in the United States,” pa­
per presented at the annual meeting of the Southwestern Social Science Association, Hous­
ton, Texas, Apr. 2-5,1980.

36


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

Table 5. The distribution (all ages) and employmentpopulation ratio (ages 16 and over) of Southeast Asian
refugees in Los Angeles, by residential status, 1978-79
Employment-population
ratio

Distribution
Residential status
Percent

Number
measured1

Percent

Number
measured

T o ta l.............................

100.0

183

47.6

124

Stayer ......................................
New entry ...............................
Mover .....................................

50.8
23.0
11.5

93
42
21

55.1
29.2
60.0

69
24
10

Migrant:
Within California...............
Outside California ...........

6.0
8.7

11
16

1Twenty persons were excluded as missing.

his or her address 1 year previously, in January 1978.
Migrants, consequently, are defined as those moving to
Los Angeles during 1978.
The sample shows that 5,902 Southeast Asian refu­
gees lived within the Los Angeles city limits, or about
39.2 percent of the county’s total. Most of the city’s ref­
ugees were Vietnamese and were under age 25. Over
half (59.7 percent) entered the United States in 1975,
with an additional 21.8 percent arriving in 1978.
For the distribution of respondents by residential sta­
tus, “stayers” are those who lived at the same address
in January of both 1978 and 1979; “new entries” regis­
tered in 1979 reported their date of entry as 1978 and
could not be located on the 1978 registration list; and,
“movers” are persons living in Los Angeles for both
registration dates, but reporting different addresses. Mi­
grants moved into Los Angeles during 1978 from either
another city in California or from another State. Ten
percent of the sample registered in 1979 reported their
date of entry as before 1978, but did not file with the
Immigration Service in 1978. These are considered
“missing” and have been excluded from this part of the
analysis.
The data show that Los Angeles gains, at least, an
additional 14.7 percent of its refugee population from
secondary migration. Of course, it also loses some,
which is not indicated here. Only about half of these
migrants, however, originated outside the State.
The proportion of new arrivals in the city is of much
greater significance than secondary migrants. Almost a
quarter of all registered refugees in Los Angeles entered
the United States during 1978, far exceeding the pro­
portion of the national total that arrived in that same
year.
In addition to this numerical impact, new arrivals
also had a significantly lower employment ratio than
any of the other three residential groups. New arrivals
are only half as likely to be employed as those who
have moved within Los Angeles, possibly to find em­
ployment, and are almost 10 percentage points less like-

ly than secondary migrants (table 5).
The data also support, however, the argument that
secondary migrants contribute to lower employment
levels. These migrants are about 30 percent less likely to
be employed than persons remaining residentially stable
in Los Angeles. Still, there is reason to believe that this
negative employment impact may be short-lived. Sec­
ondary migrants, more so than those living in Los
Angeles during the whole year, tend to be men and
have few additional persons listed at their address.22 A
reasonable hypothesis would be that, because these mi­
grants have characteristics normally associated with
higher employment levels, their continued residence in
Los Angeles during the following year would result in
substantial employment gains.

Settling old and new issues
Any evaluation of the employment records of the ref­
ugees must consider a fundamental point: refugees are
not admitted to the United States to perform a special
labor supply function. Their import is intended neither
to fill temporary gaps in particular corners of the labor
market nor to ease a shortage of domestic workers. The
Refugee Act of 1980 refers only to accepting those of
“special humanitarian concern.” As a result, Southeast
Asian refugees do not have any advantage that would
allow them to displace domestic workers. In fact, the
special aid programs made available by the new law are
designed to overcome inherent disadvantages, those
likely to prohibit refugees from entering the labor mar­
ket on any terms. Medical assistance, for example, pro­
vides a necessary remedy to the effects of long periods
in holding camps, to the lingering and devastating con­
sequences of malnutrition, and to the damaging results
of open-seas flights.
It is also worth noting that many of the programs
open to refugees, as well as much of the interest in re­
search on refugees, is necessary to protect them from
unfair labor practices. Inability to speak English, long
work hours, inadequate income, and elementary fears of
not being self-supporting are precisely the conditions
that would permit refugees to be exploited in the labor
m arket— to the detriment of both themselves and U.S.
workers. It is important, therefore, that U.S. trade
unions continue to support the goals of the resettlement
program, and that refugees participate in available
training programs.
Of course, it is also essential to recognize that, unlike
many previous groups, these refugees enter an American
economy strained by double-digit inflation and rising
unemployment. In this context, Federal, State, and local
governments are less able to provide assistance than in
more prosperous times. In their place, the “private sec­
tor,” primarily the voluntary agencies and the refugee
sponsors, has been assigned the major role in the entire

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

process.
Any future attempt to review the employment-related
activities of the resettlement experience, therefore, needs
to take account of the whole range of related activities.
This should involve conducting and reviewing research
in at least three major areas.
First, there is a need to generate data on participa­
tion and employment that represent the entire refugee
population, are more comparable to standard labor sta­
tistics on the U.S. population, and can be made avail­
able more quickly than existing reports. In the tradition
of the present descriptive exercise, this information —
and the analysis it generates— would serve as a national
accounts system, measuring how many and who passed
through specific sectors of the American economy. It is
this type of information Congress seeks through the
Refugee Act to gauge how smoothly resettlement
progresses.
Although essential for labor market analysis, such in­
quiries stop short of precisely those questions of partic­
ular importance to the refugee program. For example,
how and to what extent do the following influence the
participation of refugees in the labor market: voluntary
agencies, ethnic enclaves, government programs, and
community reception.
These issues require a series of more detailed studies
which would be conducted at the local level and pro­
duce new data. Perhaps the key issue for these studies is
the role of ethnic communities in conditioning the par­
ticipation of refugees in particular sectors of the labor
market and in specific training programs. Included
within this area of investigation are questions such as:
how important will refugee owned, operated, and staff­
ed small businesses become as a means of generating
employment for successive waves of arrivals? Is poor
English as important to labor force participation where
a receptive ethnic enclave can employ the newcomer?
And, will the presence of these communities counterbal­
ance the presumed negative effect of the lower status
backgrounds of the latest arrivals?
The third area of research focuses specifically on the
various programs and services available, and unavail­
able, to refugees. The key emphasis here should be on
the varying philosophies and services of the private vol­
untary agencies. Indeed, so much of the responsibility
for resettlement has been given to this sector, that one
would anticipate an outpouring of comparative research
projects. Yet, as of this writing, no such studies are un­
derway.23
Government programs will be studied more com­
pletely as part of the normal evaluation process. Such
studies usually examine the internal structure of existing
or alternative services and their differential outcomes,
hopefully including labor market outcomes after several
years. Efforts to make these studies more comparative
37

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Employment o f Indochinese Refugees
(that is, contrasting them to programs in various areas
of the country), would be a useful step. Integrating
these studies with the research on the role of the volun­
tary agency and ethnic community should also be en­
couraged.
Finally, there is a serious lack of understanding of

how the refugees view themselves in the resettlement
process. Throughout the United States, new communi­
ties are emerging, undoubtedly with their own unique
perspective on their experiences and future opportuni­
ties. These perceptions need to be uncovered, studied,
and their messages understood.
□

FOOTNOTES

1Southeast Asians represent 72 percent of the 230,700 refugees and
asylum cases sought by the Administration in fiscal year 1980. Over­
all, the Administration planned to accept 169,200 from Asia, 33,000
from the Soviet Union, 17,000 from Latin America, 5,000 from East­
ern Europe, 2,500 from the Middle East, 1,500 from Africa, and
2,500 asylum cases.
2Public law 96-212, signed into law Mar. 17, 1980.
’ The refugee act requires the President to request the number of
refugees over 50,000 to be admitted each fiscal year before that year
begins and after consultation with Congress. Because the act passed
in the middle of fiscal year 1980, the Administration requested and
received an extension of the present rate of admission for Indochinese
refugees (14,000 monthly).
"The Refugee Act of 1980, Section 442 (A).
I n d o c h in e s e R e fu g e e A ss is ta n c e P ro g ra m , U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Office of Refugee Affairs, Dec. 31, 1979.
6 Linda W. Gordon and Stephen A. Schroffel, “The Indochinese
Refugees in America: New Ethnic Groups,” presented at the annual
meetings of the American Statistical Association, Houston, Tex., Aug.
11-14, 1980.
7The total sample size differs slightly from that reported by Gor­
don and Schroffel, op. cit., because of the method used to identify
Southeast Asian refugees.
8The comparison assumes that few refugees have been insti­
tutionalized since arrival.
9 “Indochinese Refugee Assessment,” Secretarial Report, U.S. De­
partment of Health and Human Services, Sept. 28, 1979.
10 It should also be remembered that this study took place before
the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980. Thus, many of its conclusions
may reflect the uncertain budgetary circumstances under which the
resettlement program worked for several years.
" Recently, the Office of Management and Budget turned down a
request from the Department of Labor to change the Employment
Service reporting form to identify refugees. As a consequence, it will
be extremely difficult to determine whether refugees who are not en­
rolled in other job training or placement services, but receiving cash


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

assistance, are complying with the law and registering with the Ser­
vice. In addition, the Secretary of Labor, who has to report to the
Coordinator for Refugee Affairs on the steps taken to increase refugee
participation in the Department’s programs, will not be able to report
on their level of Employment Service use.
12“Indochinese Refugee Assessment,” U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services.
" T h e In d o c h in e s e E x o d u s : A H u m a n ita r ia n D ile m m a , U.S. General
Accounting Office, Apr. 24, 1979, p. 88.
14 “A review of the Indochinese Refugee Program,” L a b o r N o tes,
Feb. 22, 1980, p. 8.
15 For example, see Barry N. Stein, “Occupational Adjustment of
Refugees: the Vietnamese in the United States,” I n te r n a tio n a l M ig r a ­
tio n R ev ie w , January 1979, pp. 25-45.
16 Data are not reported for 379 persons; also excluded are 40 per­
sons claiming nationality in other than the three countries listed.
17 See Robert L. Bach, “Employment Characteristics of Indochinese
Refugees, January 1979,” M ig ra tio n T o d a y, forthcoming, 1980.
18See, for example, Darrel Montero, V ie tn a m e se A m e ric a n s : P a tte r n s
o f R e s e ttle m e n t a n d S o c io e c o n o m ic A d a p ta tio n in th e U n ite d S ta te s
(Boulder, Colo., Westview Press, 1979).
14 Linda W. Gordon, “Settlement Patterns of Indochinese Refugees
in the United States,” presented at the annual meeting of the South­
western Social Science Association, Houston, Tex., Apr. 2 -5 , 1980,
p. 8.
"Julia Valda Taft, David S. North, and David A. Ford, R e fu g e e
(Washington, New
TransCentury Foundation, 1979).
21 Bach, “Employment Characteristics . . . .”
R e s e ttle m e n t in th e U .S .: T im e f o r a N e w F o cu s

"" Robert L Bach, “Secondary Migration of Indochinese Refugees to
Los Angeles, California,” unpublished paper, mimeo, table 8.
As part of our research on refugees, we have been examining the
experiences of refugees resettled by the Lutheran Immigration and
Refugee Service. However, the design does not allow a comparison
with other agencies.

38

The new Cuban immigrants:
their background and prospects
Samples from immigration data show that
most early arrivals were young working-age men,
that education and skill levels are above average for Cuba,
and that the number of ex-offenders is significant
but includes many jailed for political reasons
R o b e r t L. B a c h

In mid-April 1980, the Cuban government, by announc­
ing it had withdrawn “protection from the Florida cor­
ridor,” triggered the flight of more than 123,000 new
Cuban refugees to the United States. This might have
been merely the latest addition to the exodus that began
in 1959, except that from the outset neither the Cuban
nor U.S. governments had control over the character or
volume of the immigrants. Cuban President Fidel Cas­
tro had evidently underestimated the response to the
advertised opportunity to leave. And the U.S. tradition
of accepting Cuban refugees with open arms was sud­
denly strained by the potential burden of unknown
numbers of new immigrants landing in south Florida.
Much of the confusion and bewilderment that caught
reporters’ eyes and overwhelmed some local officials re­
sulted from the international political dilemma and,
specifically, the Carter Administration’s delay in declar­
ing a legal status for the Cubans. The Administration
faced a tough policy question. The historical open-door
policy for Cuban immigrants and the Cuban-American
community’s expectations that this group would be
treated the same argued for accepting them quickly and
giving them full “refugee status” under the Refugee Act
of 1980. Foreign policy reinforced this view: once again,
here was a demonstration of the failure of the Castro
government.
Yet the Administration was wary not to create in
Robert L. Bach is assistant professor of sociology, State University of
New York, Binghamton.


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

haste an unwarranted precedent. Unlike the previous
flows, this one lacked order and due process, making it
impossible to screen undesirables before their departure
from Cuba.1 There was also the possibility that to em­
brace these migrants as refugees would open the Florida
coast to an onslaught of Caribbean poor. Fifteen thou­
sand Haitian “boat people” in Miami were enough to
give substance to that concern.
But clearly the most troublesome issue was the cost
of resettlement. In a period of fiscal restraint and reces­
sion, President Carter decided not to grant the Cubans
the generous benefits of refugee status (for example, 100
percent Federal reimbursement of refugee assistance
costs). Instead, in late June, the Administration an­
nounced that the newcomers would be treated as appli­
cants for asylum, and that special legislation would be
sought to resolve both the Cuban and Haitian legal sta­
tus issue. As a result, Cubans who arrived between
April 21 and June 19 (and all Haitians processed by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service before June 19)
had their parole status extended for 6 months.2
This solution was fashioned in the face of a tough po­
litical reality; in part, the consequence of an anti-immi­
gration public sentiment characteristic of bad economic
times. A Columbia Broadcasting System-Acw York
Times poll, for example, found that almost half of those
sampled nationwide opposed admitting more Cubans.
Lack of jobs was a primary reason. The State Depart­
ment received calls and telegrams that ran heavily
against the boatlift, and Senator Lawton Chiles (Demo39

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • The New Cuban Immigrants
crat-Florida) reported an 80 percent negative constitu­
ent response.3
Some responsibility for this public mood must lie
with the public characterization of these Cubans.
Granma, the Cuban Communist party newspaper,
charged that those who left were “social dregs,” “delin­
quents,” and “scum.” “Lumpen,” short for lumpenproletariat, became the standard phrase for the new refu­
gees. Many reports in U.S. newspapers echoed the
theme, focusing attention on the number of “social un­
desirables” : prisoners, the disabled, mental patients, and
others.
Compared to the “Golden Exile” of the 1960’s, when
wealthy businessmen, professionals, and managers mi­
grated en masse, this latest wave of Cubans fared poor­
ly. But how poorly? Did the disorganization of their
flight or the current political climate unfairly color our
impressions? Based on an analysis of data collected by
the Immigration Service during processing, the new ar­
rivals were neither the “upper-crust” nor the bottom
layer of Cuban society. They generally possess educa­
tion and skill levels above the average for those remain­
ing in Cuba and about the same as those who arrived in
the 1970’s. The sample data examined in the following
sections were based on Immigration Service files from
two processing centers in Miami and from Eglin Air
Force Base, where later (and allegedly less desirable)
refugees were processed.

The Miami profile
The registration records of the Cuban Refugee Emer­
gency Center in Coral Gables represent a good starting
point. President Eisenhower established the center in
1960 to process the first wave of Cuban immigrants,
and President Kennedy expanded the resettlement pro­
gram (and its facilities) 1 year later. Thus the Center
was the logical place to receive this latest group.
The center registered nearly 2,000 of the first to reach
Miami. But, as the influx accelerated and processing re­
sponsibility passed to the Federal Emergency Manage­
ment Agency,4 processing operations moved to Tamiami
Park and, subsequently, to Opa Locke Airport in North
Miami. President Carter later opened another process­
ing center in Florida (Eglin Air Force Base), followed
by the use of military bases in Arkansas, Pennsylvania,
and Wisconsin.
I extracted from the Center’s registration records a
50 percent systematic random sample, including infor­
mation on age, sex, education, and occupation. There
were 1,937 records in all, and each person had arrived
before April 29. A 10-percent subsample included addi­
tional information on marital status, knowledge of Eng­
lish, last place of residence in Cuba, and relatives and
friends in the United States.
Because these registrations represented only the earli­
40


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

est arrivals, biographical data forms for 633 persons
processed at Opa Locke Airport also were examined.
These were later arrivals, between May 9 and 13. The
Immigration Service prepares these forms only for per­
sons 14 years old and over. Given the pace of process­
ing at the airport, only 10 percent of these records
could be used, thus yielding a rather small sample size.
Nevertheless, the two samples taken together provide a
clear profile of those arriving in the Miami area.5
Most of the early arrivals had jumped the gates of
the Peruvian Embassy in Havana, thus initiating this
latest flight. They were older than those processed at
Opa Locke and less likely to have relatives or friends
already in the United States. There were also more men
in this first group and fewer who were married. But
these differences are inconsequential compared to the
overall profile. The majority from both samples were
working-age men, many came with families, and over 70
percent had relatives or friends awaiting them.
Additional information available only for the earliest
arrivals (Coral Gables) indicated that 90 percent had
been residing in the province of Havana. Most lived in
the capital city. Almost no one (5 percent) could speak
or understand English, even though their average years
of schooling in Cuba was about the same as earlier Cu­
ban refugees who could. Their 9 years of school, on av­
erage, was much lower than the Cuban refugees leaving
in the early 1960’s, but similar to those arriving in the
1970’s.
From a labor force point of view, it is difficult to see
how those arriving in Coral Gables could be called “so­
cial dregs,” “undesirables,” or “lumpenproletariet.”
Only one person sampled among the earliest arrivals
was unemployed prior to arrival and only 18 percent
would be considered “out of the labor force” by U.S.
labor force classifications: 11 percent reported they were
students, 6 percent were homemakers, 10 persons were
retired, and two were in the military. Nor were many of
the arrivals “marginally employed.” By U.S. labor force
classifications, the majority at Coral Gables were solidly
employed: craftworkers, factory laborers, equipment op­
erators, and professionals or technicians. This included
mechanics, plumbers, crane and large-equipment opera­
tors, carpenters, and masons. Twenty percent of the
professionals were teachers and, of those sampled, there
were physicians, nurses, professors, accountants, and
computer operators. Evidently, many skilled workers
were among the first to accept the offer to leave.
The Cubans arriving later and registering at Opa
Locke reported fewer skilled jobs. There were fewer
professionals, more bus, taxi, and truck drivers, and far
more service workers. Yet the greatest difference was
the proportion who neither held nor sought a job. The
Cubans processed at Opa Locke were nearly twice as
likely (32 percent) as the earlier group to be homemak-

ers, students, or retired.
The immigrants in both samples generally had occu­
pational experiences in Cuba that are remarkably simi­
lar to the types of jobs most likely obtainable in the
Miami economy.6 This is, as an aside, unlike other
groups of recent refugees resettled in the United States,
who reportedly lack urban industrial skills.
Skeptics, however, will and should object to the con­
clusions drawn from these samples. There are at least
two reasons why those processed in Miami may be
more highly skilled and better educated than most other
1980 arrivals. First, if Castro did empty jails and men­
tal hospitals when the flow was greatest, as the allega­
tions run, these “undesirables” would have arrived later
than the period covered by these samples. They also

would be more likely to have been processed at a mili­
tary base. In addition, Federal officials decided early in
the processing operations at Key West to send family
groups to Miami and single men and women elsewhere.
The larger share of families in the sample from Opa
Locke, compared to those registered at the emergency
center, is a consequence of this decision.
To check on these probable biases, I examined the
Immigration Service biographical data forms for the
Cubans processed at Eglin Air Force Base. This repre­
sents the first step of a project to document the back­
ground characteristics of the approximate 123,000
Cubans who arrived since April 20, 1980. The project is
being carried out with the cooperation of the Office of
the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs, the Immigra-

History of U.S. immigration law
Until 1965, U.S. permanent immigration law made no
explicit provision for the refugee. All immigration is regu­
lated by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as
amended (most recently in 1980). The predecessor to the
1952 act set a ceiling on immigration and established a sys­
tem of distributing visas by nationality (defined in most
cases by the country of birth). The number, or quota, of
visas allotted to each nationality corresponded to the share
it had already contributed to the U.S. ethnic make-up. This
resulted in a large quota for the United Kingdom and
small quotas for southern and Eastern Europe. While the
large German quota enabled many refugees from the Hitler
regime to enter the United States as regular immigrants,
postwar displaced persons and refugees from Eastern Eu­
rope who wished to come to the United States had no
choice but to wait or accept the terms offered by other
countries of immigration.
At first the United States, responding to this need, tried
to speed up displaced-person admissions without changing
the quota system. About 80,000 Poles, Balts and southern
Europeans (about half of them refugees) were admitted un­
der a December 1945 directive by President Truman to use
the quota numbers accumulated during the war. And the
215,000 displaced persons admitted under the Displaced
Persons Act of 1948 were to be charged against the quotas
of future years. It was only with the Refugee Relief Act of
1953 that the United States went outside the quota system
by authorizing distribution of 215,000 special nonquota im­
migrant visas to a number of eligible groups of Europeans
and Chinese. The McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, amending
the immigration and nationality law, had eliminated the
clause excluding Asians as immigrants but had retained the
quota system.
Refugees were first mentioned explicitly in the general
immigration law in the amendments passed in 1965. The
law abolished the national origins quota system and set up
in its place a hierarchy of preferences for visa distribution
based on personal qualities: that is, relationship with U.S.
citizens, accomplishments, labor skills, and so forth. First
preference went to the sons and daughters of U.S. citizens:
the seventh (and last) to refugees. Hemispheric immigra­


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

tion ceilings established by this law were put together in
1978 to form a worldwide ceiling of 290,000 immigrants
per year. Refugees received 6 percent of the ceiling, or
17,400. Refugees, however, did not enter the country on
the same terms as others. [As] conditional entrants, [they
had to] wait 2 years [under pre-1980 laws] before they
could apply for status as immigrants.
There was a definition of the refugee given in the 1965
law; it was narrower than that [in a] 1951 U.N. convention.
Refugee programs dependent upon American initiative and
funds spanned the globe. And yet the U.S. immigration law
of 1965, following the practice of the 1950’s, continued to
tie refugee status to communism and turmoil in the Middle
East. Thus, under the 1965 law, refugees were persons who
“because of persecution on account of race, religion, or po­
litical opinion . . . have fled from any Communist or Com­
munist-dominated country or area, or from any country in
the general area of the Middle East, and are unable or un­
willing to return to such country on account of race, reli­
gion, or political opinion.”
. . . Thus limited by its immigration laws, the United
States could not have admitted as many refugees as it has in
the past 14 years if the executive branch had not had use of
a special authority known as the parole. Instituted by the
McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, the parole clause authorized
the Attorney General to admit to the United States tempo­
rarily, for “emergent reasons” or for reasons deemed in the
national interest, any alien applying for admission. Refer­
ring to the use of the parole to admit over 30,000 Hungari­
an refugees between 1956 and 1958, Congressman Walter
said: “We never anticipated anything of this magnitude, but
we did know this sort of situation would arise. That is why
the provision was put in the law.” The parole enabled the
United States to admit refugees from non-Communist
countries, such as Chile, after 1973. And in the absence of
other authority, the executive branch has had to resort to
the parole to admit large numbers of refugees in emergency
situations.
— H a r r y F. Y o u n g
“R e f u g e e s —
D e p a r tm e n t o f S ta te B u lle tin ,

”
December 1979, pp. 13-14.

A n I n te r n a tio n a l O b lig a tio n ,

41

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • The New Cuban Immigrants
tion and Naturalization Service, and the Department of
Labor.7 The data from Eglin Air Force Base are pres­
ented here for the first time.

The Eglin profile
Interest in these records was the same: what are the
Cubans’ background characteristics? Do they differ
from previous Cuban refugees now residing in Miami?
Do their occupational histories show that few are em­
ployable? And if there are a significant number with
prison records, who are they and how long had they
been incarcerated?
The sample was a 10-percent systematic random se­
lection that identified for study 925 asylum applicants
arriving throughout May. As was true of the registra­
tion data from Opa Locke, Immigration officials
interviewed only persons age 14 or older. Information
included age, sex, marital status, last place of residence
in Cuba, and occupational histories.
The Eglin sample further documents the familiar ob­
servation that these Cubans are young, working-age
adults. Sixty-four percent at Eglin were age 20 to 34,
compared to 58 percent of all those in Miami. The aver­
age age was 33 at Eglin.
Much attention has focused on the predominance of
single men in this flow: it is believed that single men are
more difficult than family groups to resettle. In fact,
and as anticipated by the manner of processing at Coral
Gables, there were many single men at Eglin. Men
outnumbered women nearly 9 to 1, representing 89.3
percent of the total camp population. At least one-third
of both men and women reported they were currently
married, with the women more likely to be so than the
men: 43.4 percent versus 33.2 percent.
Because most of the new arrivals were in their late
twenties and early thirties, they not only have many
years ahead in the U.S. labor force, but they also had a
chance to accumulate substantial employment experi­
ence in Cuba. The nature of this experience is critical to
judging them “socially undesirable.” How, then, do
those sent to Eglin fare?
Whereas unemployment was virtually negligible in
both Miami samples, 2.8 percent of the Eglin group re­
ported no employment as their longest held activity in
Cuba (“principal job”). This unemployment rate in­
creased to 4.7 percent immediately prior to departure.
However, because most were single men, only 15 per­
cent were out of the labor market in Cuba; that is, they
were homemakers, students, patients, or soldiers. This
compares to one-third of the sample at Opa Locke.
Clearly the Cubans at Eglin are used to work and will
undoubtedly seek it in the United States.
But what are their occupational experiences? Like
those in Miami, they are concentrated in four occupa­
tional categories: laborer (25 percent), craftworker (22.7
42


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

percent), machine operative (14.1 percent), and trans­
port operative (11.2 percent). The Eglin group also con­
tains nearly the same share of professional and technical
workers and service workers. As shown in table 1, the
three samples provide a consistent occupational profile.
The Cubans at Eglin had held what would be consid­
ered skilled or semiskilled jobs. As craftworkers and la­
borers, they worked primarily in manufacturing and
construction. All three samples show a large number of
mechanics, painters, masons, carpenters, heavy equip­
ment operators, electricians, and bakers. Machine oper­
atives at Eglin included lathers, sanders, welders, meatcutters, and press operators. Of course, transportation
workers were mainly drivers of trucks, taxis, and buses.
The proportion of professional and technical workers
at Eglin also matched that of the Miami groups. Teach­
ers at all grade levels were the largest number of such
workers. This possibly reflects the reported significant
cutbacks in educational enrollment in Cuba, especially
at the university level. There were also a few doctors,
nurses, and medical technicians, as well as a number of
entertainers and athletes.
These people can hardly be said to have been margin­
al to the Cuban economy, nor unemployable in the
United States. Yet the charge of “undesirable” does not
rest solely on occupational background. The most
alarming stories concerned the prevalence of criminals.
Ex-offender data. A key question concerning ex-offen­
ders among the refugees is what does a prison record in
Cuba mean. In what manner are they “socially undesir­
able”? For instance, the United States has accepted po­
litical prisoners from Cuba as part of normal immi­
gration for several years. Those admitted in the fall of
1979 averaged 10.4 years in prison. Still it is a reason­
able and unanswered question whether those with pris­
on records in this most recent, massive flow committed
Table 1. Last occupation in Cuba for refugees, age 14
and over, processed in Florida
Occupation

Total employed ..
Professional and
technical ....................
Manager and
administrator .............
Sales .............................
Clerical ..........................
C ra ft...............................
Operative ......................
Transport operative . . . .
Laborer ..........................
Farm la b o re r..................
Farmer ..........................
Service ..........................
Private household...........

Coral Gables
Emergency Center

Opa Locke
Airport

Eglin Air
Force Base

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

’ 641

100.0

43

100.0

2 732

100.0

67

10.5

3

7.0

52

7.1

11
9
45
197
73
86
108

1.7
1.4
7.0
30.7
11.4
13.4
16.9
0.0
0.3
6.7

1
1
4
6
4
12
3
0
3
6
0

2.3
2.3
9.3
14.0
9.3
27.8
7.0

11
7
45
166
103
82
183
8
0
74
1

1.5
1.0
6.1
22.7
14.1
11.2
25.0
1.1

0
2
43
0

0.0

1One occupation unspecified.
2 Data unrecorded for 18 persons, 1.9 percent of the total.

0.0
7.0
14.0

0.0

0.0
10.1
0.1

similar “political” crimes.
The Immigration Service data show how many refu­
gees reported prison records, as well as the duration of
their confinement. An initial screening process separated
more than 800 former felons who were sent to Federal
prisons. Most other ex-offenders remained with the gen­
eral refugee population. However, only occasionally is it
possible to determine why these persons were in jail.
Thus, caution is necessary: the following information re­
fers to all persons in the Eglin sample who reported a
former offense, regardless of the reason.
Immigration officials recorded that 16.4 percent, or
152 of the sampled emigrants at Eglin, had spent some
time in jail.8 Less than half, however, were in prison at
the time of departure: 44.1 percent of the ex-offenders,
or only 7.2 percent of the total camp population. Evi­
dently, most of these latest refugees left Cuba from
their homes, not through prison gates.
The majority (55.2 percent) of the ex-offenders spent
less than 3 years in jail: 6.2 percent for less than 60
days, 7.9 percent for less than 1 year, 24.7 percent be­
tween 1 and 2 years, and 16.4 percent from 2 to 3
years. Reasons given for these jail terms included rob­
bery (1 to 2 years), drugs (2 to 3 years), vagrancy, re­
fusing military service or to work for the state, and
caught trying to escape to the United States.
Six percent of all those with prison records specifi­
cally stated they were political prisoners. This is un­
doubtedly an underestimate. Another 3 percent could
be included for refusing service to the state, either mili­
tary or labor. And a small but significant proportion
had been in prison dating from the early 1960’s, when
many political prisoners were first jailed. But the most
im portant reason for the probable undercount is simply
that most ex-offenders did not report the nature of their
crime. Consequently, I would argue that between 9 per­
cent and 20 percent of those at Eglin who reported a
prior offense could be classified as political prisoners.

Out of
labor market

Unemployed

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Total Eglin sample:
Principal job . .
Last j o b ...........

152
139

16.7
15.3

21
36

2.8
4.7

Ex-offenders:
Principal job . .
Last j o b ..........

61
72

40.1
47.7

5
9

5.5
11.4

Evidently, the ex-offenders shared with all the Eglinbound refugees a significant increase in economic hard­
ship prior to leaving. But ex-offenders suffered doubly,
perhaps because of their prior offense.
What can be learned from this background profile?
Evidently, the refugees’ experiences in Cuba do not jus-

Principal and last occupation in Cuba for total Eglin AFB sample and for ex-offenders, age 14 and over
Ex-offenders

Total Eglin
Principal job

Occupation

Total employed........................
Professional and technical ..................
Manager and administrator..................
Sales ...................................................
C lerical.................................................
C ra ft.....................................................
Operative ............................................
Transport operative .............................
Laborer .................................................
Farm laborer........................................
F arm er.................................................
Service.................................................
Private household ...............................

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

'756
56
10
10
44
170
115
82
168
8
2
69
1

100.0
7.4
1.3
1.3
5.8
22.5
15.2
10.8
22.2
1.1
0.3
9.1
0.2

2768
52
11
7
45
166
103
82
183
8
0
74
1

100.0
6.8
1.4
0.9
5.9
21.6
13.4
10.7
23.8
1.0
0.0
9.7
0.1

91
7
2
2
5
18
13
10
22
1
0
6
0

1Data unrecorded for 17 persons, 1.8 percent of total.
2 Date unrecorded for 18 persons, 1.9 percent of total.


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

Last job

Principal job

Last job

Percent
3100.0
7.7
2.2
2.2
5.5
19.8
14.3
11.1
24.2
1.1

0.0
6.5

0.0

Number

Percent

-vi
CO

Table 2.

Do these ex-offenders account for an identifiable mi­
nority? Evidently not. The average age of the ex-offen­
ders was 32.6, virtually the same as the total Eglin
sample. Both groups also had a similar proportion mar­
ried, and only slightly more of the ex-offenders were
men. The only significant difference was in their occupa­
tional backgrounds. (See table 2.)
Overall, ex-offenders were about as likely as the total
Eglin group to be employed in each occupational cate­
gory, with two exceptions. Just prior to departure, ex­
offenders had experienced an overall shift out of opera­
tive jobs and into nonfarm laborer positions. There was
also a less significant shift out of the professional and
service sector and into construction. There could be
many reasons for such a shift, but by U.S. standards,
this represents a downward slide in skill requirements,
status, and wages.
Along with this shift, the ex-offenders encountered a
doubling of their unemployment rate (which had al­
ready been twice that of the total Eglin group), as
shown in the following tabulation:

100.0
5.1
1.3
2.5
3.8
20.2
5.1
10.1
36.7

4
1
2
3
16
4
8
29
0
0
3
0

0.0
0.0
3.8

0.0

3 Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
4 Data unrecorded for 1 person.

43

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • The New Cuban Immigrants
tify the alarming charges of social undesirability, espe­
cially in terms of their occupational histories. Rather
than on the margins of the labor market, the recently
arrived Cubans have served the mainstream of the ur­
ban Cuban economy. But what of their future in the
United States? What jobs are they likely to find?

Role

o f e x is tin g e n c la v e

The future of the 1980 Cuban refugees can not be
separated from the history of the entire post-revolution
exodus. The Cubans who came before should serve not
only as an example of what may come but, given the
resettlement program’s special emphasis on family re­
unification and sponsorship, as active participants in the
process of adaptation to American life. For many new
arrivals, the presence and vitality of the Cuban-American community will cushion the adjustments usually re­
quired of those involved in such migrations. In this
ethnic enclave, many will find jobs, often without the
need to learn English. And, socially, many things will
remain the same; for in Miami, you “can be born, or
die and be buried, Cuban style.”9
Like most refugee migrations, the Cuban exodus has
developed through a series of outflows, with each group
projecting distinct background profiles and encounter­
ing diverse experiences in the United States. The impor­
tance of this sequential migration is that each wave sets
the stage for the next. The earliest Cuban refugees were
the landowners, bankers, government officials, and
businessmen who benefited greatly from U.S. connec­
tions and who, as a result, had much to lose from the
revolution. Besides their wealth and status, they also
had attained a level of education far exceeding the re­
mainder of the native Cuban population. A 1962 sample
showed that 36 percent of this first wave had 12 years
or more of formal schooling. At the time, only 4 per­
cent of the entire Cuban population had such advanced
education.10
The Cuban missile crisis stopped the outflow in 1962;
it restarted 3 years later, when the two governments
agreed to a series of flights— the “aerial bridge” — that
would bring any person who desired to the United
States (except those of military age and in strategic eco­
nomic positions). Approximately 40 percent of the total
exodus, excluding the most recent group, arrived on
these flights from 1965 to 1973.
These aerial-bridge refugees also represented the up­
per socioeconomic strata of pre-revolutionary Cuba. As
one journalist reported it then,
to a great extent these people represent the professional and
business class of Cuba; the able, the educated, the success­
ful. The struggle in most Latin American countries is to
build a stable middle class; that of Cuba has been gutted.
This exodus is the biggest brain drain the Western Hemi­
sphere has known.11
44


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

A survey in 1968 added support. The aerial-bridge
arrivals had a level of formal schooling that still
outstripped the source population. Eleanor Rogg found
that virtually the same percentage (37 percent) in 1968
had 12 years or more of education, as in the earlier
wave.12
The earliest exiles were able, in effect, to transplant
their prerevolutionary Cuban social position into fertile
U.S. economic soil. Many in the first wave brought
money with them or, more likely, had transferred sub­
stantial funds to the United States before their depar­
ture. Upon arrival, both Federal and private-business
loans were readily available, as were substantial Federal
funds for education and assistance. Some U.S. employ­
ers also rehired their former employees from Cuban
subsidiaries.
Nevertheless, many experienced downward social mo­
bility as they took whatever jobs were available— a
characteristic common to refugees and immigrants. Pro­
fessionals also experienced initial licensing problems,
forcing many of them to accept jobs well below their
level of training. Consequently, much of the apparent
success of these early arrivals once in the United States
resulted simply from their substantial initial underem­
ployment and the fact that their subsequent upward
mobility was merely a return to their former statuses.13
The vitality of this Cuban-American enclave today is
considerable, as a recent albeit self-congratulatory pro­
file of the Miami enclave testifies.14 In Dade County,
Cubans account for 16 (out of 62) bank presidents, 250
vice presidents, and more than 500 other bank officers.
Approximately one-third (18,000) of the businesses in
Miami are Cuban owned or operated. On the labor
side, 85 percent of the garment industry’s factory
workforce is Cuban-American. Cubans staff most of the
hotels, and their share of construction workers has re­
portedly reached nearly 75 percent.
But neither should the enclave’s success be over­
stated. The same article notes that the average income
of the Cuban head of household in Miami is only
$15,000 per year, with 31 percent earning less than
$12,000. Nationwide, Cubans have an unemployment
rate significantly higher than the total civilian labor
force, even though they are, on average an older
group— typically less subject to joblessness.15
The Cuban flow has also significantly changed in
background composition. Lourdes Casal and Andres
Hernandez, for example, have noted a steady decline in
the average educational levels of each successive cohort
of Cuban refugees. This began in the later years of the
aerial bridge and has continued.16
The compositional change has had an impact on Cu­
ban communities in the United States. The later arrivals
have, in a sense, become the working class— lower
waged and skilled— for the golden exiles of the 1960’s

and early 1970’s. Thus, there has been a total transplan­
tation of the prerevolutionary Cuban social structure to
Miami, with all the implications of unequal wealth,
power, and prestige. The recent emigrants will add to
the lower strata.

1973- 74 arrivals compared
Insight into how the new Cuban immigrants will
progress in the United States may be gained by study­
ing a similar group who entered during 1973-74. This
comparison, although not precise, demonstrates not
only the changing composition of the Cuban migration,
but identifies the ability of the ethnic enclave to incor­
porate subsequent newcomers.
The comparison group comprises 590 Cuban men
who arrived after the close of the aerial-bridge. Most
left Cuba several years before and had spent time in
Spain. Interviewed for the first time upon arrival, they
were tracked and reinterviewed in 1976-77 and again in
1979. The series of interviews provides a profile of their
experiences over 6 to 7 years in the United States.17
The 1973-74 group shares with the recent arrivals a
distinctly working-class character. Only 22 percent had
attained 12 years of formal schooling. This was signifi­
cantly lower than the earlier refugees, but still higher
than the Cuban population. Their average education,
8.6 years, was virtually the same as those sampled re­
cently in Miami. And, reflecting their lower education,
the 1973-74 sample shared with the recent arrivals a
significant lack of English knowledge.
The occupational histories of the 1973-74 immi­
grants correspond to the contemporary economic re­
forms in Cuba intended to socialize the remaining,
smaller scale sectors of the private urban economy. In
fact, although political pressures continued to be a pri­
mary reason for leaving, they were just as likely to
mention the inability of achieving, over a longer period,
a higher standard of living. The evidence that many of
the Eglin-based Cubans suffered increased economic
hardship prior to departure suggests that the motiva­
tions of the two groups may be similar, too.
About one-third (32.5 percent) of the 1973-74 group
derived their income in Cuba from either government or
educational institutions. Wholesale and retail sales
accounted for another 21.2 percent, and direct personal
services employed 15.1 percent. A rough approximation
with U.S. occupational classifications shows that nearly
30 percent were craftworkers or nontransport machine
operatives; including supervisors, artisans, plumbers,
electricians, carpenters, butchers, and bakers. Serviceworkers accounted for 19.7 percent. One-quarter held
white-collar or professional jobs: a category combining
professional and technical workers with clerical workers.
These occupational origins correspond rather closely
with the pattern among the 1980 arrivals, especially in

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

their common concentration in craft and operative jobs.
To the extent that these background experiences help in
the U.S. labor market, the progress of the 1973-74
group may provide a clue as to the future of the latest
arrivals. Both groups, by the way, arrived in the midst
of a recession, although the 1974-75 downturn was
probably more severe.
Almost all 1973-74 immigrants settled in Miami,
where 48 percent found their first employment as
craftworkers or machine operatives. This indicates a
substantial, overall shift to these categories from other
occupations held in Cuba. Another 38 percent were un­
skilled laborers, and only 5 percent were professionals
or managers. The majority located employment in man­
ufacturing (34.3 percent) or construction (22.0 percent).
After 3 years in the United States, most had regained
positions comparable to those abandoned in Cuba.
They earned, on average, a modest $7,764 per year. But
more importantly, 40 percent were employed by firms
that were owned or operated by other Cubans. In fact,
preliminary figures from the interviews 6 years later
show that the Cuban enclave still employed 40 percent
of these refugees.18
The 1973-74 arrivals were able to utilize their work­
ing-class skills in the U.S. labor m arket.19 Higher levels
of education and English knowledge were particularly
associated with greater earnings. But even more impor­
tant was the positive impact of enclave participation.
Within this 1973-74 group, those who worked for Cu­
ban owned or managed firms earned significantly more
each month.
By projecting this future on the majority of the re­
cent immigrants, it appears that they will find self-sus­
taining employment within a relatively short period as
part of the Cuban-American working class. Thus, in ad­
dition to its outpouring of emergency relief in Miami,
the Cuban enclave will also provide employment for a
substantial proportion of the new arrivals. This direct
contribution of the Cuban enclave is much more impor­
tant in the present context than before because the cur­
rent posture of the Carter Administration is to ask
more of the affected local communities than ever before.

Resettlement hampered
There are several reasons why this resettlement of Cu­
ban refugees may not succeed as well as previous efforts.
Most of the reasons have been well-played in the press
and pointed to in this article. The size of the influx
within such a short period made orderly processing ex­
tremely difficult. Recurring problems locating responsi­
ble sponsors were a consequence. Other characteristics
of these refugees, or the profiles of those not represented
in these samples, may also identify problems. The ap­
parently small but significant proportion of homosexuals
in this group is merely another example. And the cur45

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • The New Cuban Immigrants
rent recession, coupled with conservative fiscal policy to
combat inflation, promise difficulties for all job seekers.
In addition, there are two particular changes in prog­
ress that will not only have an effect on these Cubans,
but because of the timing of this influx, will be pushed
along with greater speed— and perhaps less care.
The new Cuban refugees came only weeks after Con­
gress passed legislation finally regularizing the procedure
for admitting refugees. (See box, p. 41.) The Cubans,
and with them the Haitians, became the first test of per­
haps the weakest section of the law, procedures for case
by case review of asylum applicants. As if someone had
studied the legislation to determine what it did not cov­
er, recent events touched the one area not contemplated
in detail beforehand— the United States as a country of
first asylum. Indeed, much of the delay in the Carter
Administration’s deliberations on the Cubans would be
attributed to an attempt to conceptualize the United
States as a place of first asylum. But searches for other
countries to accept large proportions of these Cubans
and appeals to the United Nations lacked the urgency of
other contemporary moves by countries of first asylum
to gain international cooperation. Recall that, in the
case of the Vietnamese “boat people,” the world re­
sponded only after Malaysia and Singapore began tow­
ing refugee-laden boats back out to sea.

Also like the Southeast Asian countries of first asy­
lum, the Carter Administration first held that it could
not afford to accept the entire flow— thus setting up a
monumental dilemma. U.S. refugee policy is traveling in
two opposing directions: at once reaching out to com­
pelling international and humanitarian problems, while
withdrawing from policies of domestic relief. The result
is a series of false steps in both directions and much be­
wilderment. Even the eventual offer of Federal payment
for some services provided Cuban and Haitian refugees
ended up as much less than it appeared. The plan to
make them eligible for certain social programs appar­
ently did not take into account the fact that Florida has
no programs for emergency assistance or medical help.20
The 1980 Cuban influx also occurred at a bad time,
not only because the public expressed an anti-immigra­
tion mood, with U.S. citizens pressed by unemploy­
ment, inflation, and foreign conflict, but because of the
effort to reform the immigration law. The combination
of these factors elevated the significance of the Cuban
immigration to unwarranted importance in relation to
other national problems. Immigrants became associated
with all kinds of social and economic ills, most com­
monly unemployment. But refusing to admit 123,000
people as refugees would not even begin to solve the
Nation’s unemployment problem.
□

FOOTNOTES

1Statement by Victor H. Palmeiri, U.S. Coordinator for Refugee
Affairs, in a press release on June 20, 1980.
2Initially, without a status, the new Cuban immigrants were actual­
ly undocumented aliens, illegally transported to the United States by
U.S. citizens. But, unlike other illegal aliens who are subject to depor­
tation, the Immigration and Naturalization Service promptly accepted
their application for status, gave them a visa, and authorization to
work.
' T h e W a sh in g to n Post, Apr. 26, 1980, p. A22.
4 Part of the reason for this change of responsibility was that with­
out a declared refugee status for the Cubans, the Cuban Refugee
Emergency Center, which is funded by the Department of Health and
Human Services, could not have remained involved.
' For more detail, see Robert L. Bach, “A Profile of the Recent Cu­
ban Refugees Arriving in Miami,” M ig ra tio n T o d a y, forthcoming.
6 Ib id .

" Quoted in Reynaldo A. Cue and Robert L. Bach, “The Return of
the Clandestine Worker and the End of the Golden Exile: Recent
Mexican and Cuban Immigrants in the United States,” paper present­
ed at the Conference on the New Immigration, Research Institute on
Immigration and Ethnic Studies, Smithsonian Institution, Sept. 1517, 1976, p. 22.
12 Eleanor M. Rogg, T h e A ss im ila tio n o f C u b a n E x ile s:
(New York, Aberdeen Press, 1974).
13 Dale Truett, Chapter 5, in University of Kentucky,

T h e R o le o f

C o m m u n ity a n d C la ss

N e g ro E m ­

p lo y m e n t in th e S o u th .

14Arboleya, “The Cuban Community 1980 . . . .”
15The data used for this statement are from 1977. See Morris J.
Newman, “A Profile of Hispanics in the U.S. work force,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R ev ie w , December 1978, pp. 3-14. The 1977 data are useful
here because they provide sufficient time for the aerial-bridge group to
recover from any initial disorientation, but do not include those enter­
ing later or those under special arrangements to release political pris­
oners.

By the time this article is published, the profile of all 123,000 or
so will be available from either the author or the Coordinator’s office.
*Of course, whether the applicants told the truth is debatable. Al­
though there is no way to check, my impression is that the incentive
was there to be truthful. Immigration and Naturalization Service in­
terviewers were instructed to ask for detail if an applicant could not
account for blocks of time in his or her occupational history, plus the
applicants knew that they would also be interviewed and cleared
through the Federal Bureau of Investigations and Central Intelligence
Agency.

18Alejandro Portes and Juan M. Clark, “Cuban Immigration to the
United States, 1972-79: A Preliminary Report of Findings,” mimeo,
Center for International Studies, Duke University, Durham, N.C.,
May 13, 1980.

Carlos J. Arboleya, “The Cuban Community 1980. Coming of
Age, as History Repeats Itself,” self-published letter, p. 5.
10Alejandro Portes, Juan M. Clark, and Robert L. Bach, “The New
Wave: A Statistical Profile of Recent Cuban Exiles to the U.S.,” C u ­
b a n S tu d ie s, January 1977, pp. 1-32.

Alejandro Portes and Robert L. Bach, “Immigrant Earnings: De­
terminants of Economic Attainment Among Cuban and Mexican Im­
migrants in the United States,” I n te r n a tio n a l M ig ra tio n R eview ,
forthcoming.
20 T h e T a m p a T rib u n e, June 23, 1980.

46


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

16 Lourdes Casal and Andres R. Hernandez, “Cubans in the U.S.: A
Survey of the Literature,” C u b a n S tu d ie s, July 1975, pp. 25-51.
See Portes, et al., “The New Wave: . . . ,” for a detailed descrip­
tion of the research design.

Immigration and employment:
a need for policy coordination
In coming years, immigrants may constitute as
much as 45 percent of U.S. labor-force growth;
efforts are needed to ensure that national goals
for immigration and employment are complementary
D

a v id

S. N

orth a n d

P h i l i p L. M

a r t in

All nations have immigration policies, usually quite ex­
plicit, and all nations have labor market policies, which
are at least implicit. In most industrial democracies, the
two policies are strongly linked and may even be ad­
ministered by the same government agency. In the
United States, however, there is often little coordination
between the two, despite the major impact of interna­
tional migration on the U.S. labor market.
Logic would seem to suggest that there should be a
close relationship between these policies. First, the Gov­
ernment is in a stronger position to alter the size and
characteristics of the alien work force than it is to make
similar adjustments in the resident labor force.
Secondly, international migrants have made a major
contribution to the growth of the U.S. labor force,
which increased from 82.3 million in 1968 to 102.5 mil­
lion in 1978, or by about 2 million per year.1 In its in­
termediate growth rate model, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics projects that this rate of increase will continue
through 1985 and will then drop to 1.2 million annually
through 1990.2
Since the beginning of fiscal 1978, the number of le­
gal migrants recorded by the Immigration and Natural­
ization Service has been about 600,000 per year, a flow
which seems destined to remain constant or even in­
crease, given the continuing entry of refugees. About
one-half of the immigrants join the labor force within 2
years of their arrival. This proportion will rise in the

David S. North is director of the Center for Labor and Migration
Studies, New TransCentury Foundation, Washington, D.C. Philip L.
Martin is an associate professor of agricultural economics at the Uni­
versity of California at Davis.


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

following two decades as grown immigrant children
join the labor force.3
The 300,000 aliens who become employed soon after
arrival (15 percent of the current rate of increase in the
labor force) represent only legal immigrants. The laborforce impact of foreign-born workers should be adjusted
upwards to account for illegal or undocumented work­
ers. These workers may equal or substantially exceed
the number of legal immigrants. Thus, 30 to 45 percent
of the annual growth of the labor force may consist of
newly arrived aliens.
New immigrants, both legal and illegal, are spread
unevenly throughout the Nation. They tend, as have
previous generations of immigrants, to settle where they
expect to find a supporting community, economic op­
portunities and a familiar climate. For example, in
1975, 38.9 percent of the arriving legal immigrants set­
tled in 10 cities, which accounted for only 9.8 percent
of the Nation’s resident population.4 However, as table
1 indicates, the labor markets in which the migrants
cluster often have higher unemployment rates than the
national average, which was 5.8 percent in 1979.
With these preliminary observations recorded, we
turn to four questions:
1. What are the objectives of U.S. policies regarding
immigration and employment?
2. How are these policies made?
3. How do these policies interact with each other?
4. What, if anything, should be done to change the
situation?
Policy objectives. U.S. employment policies have multiple
goals. The primary objective is full employment— de47

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Immigration and Employment Policies
fined as an economic climate in which anyone “able,
willing, and seeking work” can find a job. Employment
policies may also be intended to curb inflationary pres­
sure, encourage adequate wages and safe and decent
working conditions, increase job satisfaction, and pro­
mote production efficiency and more widespread use of
collective bargaining. There is an alternative view, that
employment policy should seek primarily to increase the
gross national product. Those who hold this view feel
that the forces of the free market should generally de­
termine the rewards for and the conditions of work.
Employment policy goals are not always mutually
compatible at any time. For example, increasing job
satisfaction may temporarily slow productivity growth
and intensify inflationary pressures. Fortunately, certain
policy tools— counseling and training, labor-market in­
formation exchanges, wage and training subsidies, and
direct public service employment— permit remedial ef­
forts to be concentrated on labor markets experiencing
special bottlenecks or on groups of workers with unique
economic problems.
The goals of the current de jure immigration policy
are also multiple: to admit relatives of U.S. citizens and

permanent resident aliens; to recruit a few needed work­
ers; and to absorb some portion of the world’s refugee
population, generally those fleeing Communist coun­
tries. In 1978, the United States admitted 132,780 refu­
gees and 30,877 workers and family members in the oc­
cupational preference categories. Virtually all of the
remaining 437,785 entrants were accepted because they
were relatives of U.S. residents.
The only immigrants screened for labor-market char­
acteristics are the workers for whom the occupational
preferences are sought. These workers receive labor certi­
fications from the U.S. Department of Labor if their
would-be employers can prove that their skills are need­
ed, and that their presence will not depress the U.S. la­
bor market. However, the state of the labor market is
not considered in admitting the great majority of work­
ers. In fact, the total flow of immigrants is affected
more by individual decisions of U.S. residents seeking
the admission of relatives, and the actions of foreign of­
ficials creating flows of refugees than it is by the U.S.
Government.
The Nation also has a de facto immigration policy,
which permits the entry and presence of millions of ille-

Table 1. Major immigrant receiving cities, by immigrant-to-resident ratio, 1978, and by unemployment rate, labor force size,
and number of persons unemployed, 1979
[Ranked in ascending order of ratios]

City of
intended residence

Ratio of 1978
immigrants
to resident
population1

1979 unem­
ployment
rate2
(in percent)

1:15
1:49
1:57
1:68
1:78
1:83
1:83
1:84
1:92
1:92
1:93
1:98
1:98

6.8
8.9
7.1
7.8
12.2
8.7
4.4
4.7
5.3
8.1
4.0
6.2
6.6

2101
54.6
326.4
158 7
67.5
3,019.0
58.4
113.8
54.3
50.6
73.1
1,434.9
387.2

143
4.9
23.2
124
8.2
264.0
2.5
5.4
2.9
4.1
2.9
89.5
25.4

7.7

6,008.6

459.7

69
11.7
9.1
6.2
5.3
7.3
5.3
10.1
3.5
7.2
5.7
5.0
6.4

74 9
158.1
101.8
93.9
47.0
1115
328.2
604
874.0
78.6
281.5
98.2
1,458.0

52
18.5
9.3
5.8
2.5
82
17.5
6.1
30.9
5.7
16.1
4.9
93.2

5.9

3,766.1

223.9

Miami, Fla................................
Elizabeth, N.J..........................
San Francisco, Calif................
El Paso, Tex............................
Paterson, N.J..........................
New York, N.Y........................
Pasadena, Calif.......................
Santa Ana, Calif......................
Alexandria, Va.........................
New Bedford, Mass................
Glendale, Calif........................
Los Angeles, Calif...................
San Diego, Calif......................
Average/total

Hartford, Conn........................
Newark, N.J............................
Jersey City, N.J......................
Las Vegas, Nev......................
Dearborn, Mich.......................
Fresno, Calif...........................
Seattle, Wash.........................
Stockton, Calif........................
Houston, Tex...........................
Providence, R I........................
San Jose, Calif........................
Fort Lauderdale, Fla...............
Chicago, III..............................
Average/total

1:100
1:102
1:105
1:110
1:114
1:114
1:124
1:124
1:125
1:129
1:136
1:138
1:146

Number of
Labor force
unemployed
(in thousands)
(in thousands)

1Population data are 1977 estimates.
2 Data are annual averages. The national annual unemployment rate for 1979 was 5.8 per­
cent. Average unemployment rate calculated by dividing the total labor force for each group of
cities into the total number of unemployed for the group.
N ote :

48

Cities selected were those with populations of more than 100,000 (in 1970), and im­


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

City of
intended residence

Torrance, Calif..........................
Tacoma, Wash..........................
Hialeah, Fla...............................
Sacramento, Calif.....................
Berkeley, Calif...........................
Portland, Oreg...........................
Bridgeport, Conn.......................
Long Beach, Calif......................
Tampa, Fla................................
Anaheim, Calif...........................

Ratio of 1978
immigrants
to resident
population1

1979 unem­
ployment
rate2
(in percent)

1-1S?
1:152
1:155
1 1SQ
1:162
1:164
1:170
1:171
1:175
1:175
1:176
1:180

Average/total

Salt Lake City, U ta h ...............
Yonkers, N.Y.............................
Washington, D.C.......................
Denver, Colo.............................
Dallas, Tex................................
Hollywood, Fla..........................

1 202
1:205
1:207
1:208
1:209
1219
1:222
1:234

Average/total

Labor force
(in thousands]

Number of
unemployed
(in thousands)

4.1
8.0

73.2
75.9

3.0
6.1

5.5
7.4
7.4
5.7
7.1
5.6
5.1
4.4

65.4
148.5
68.1
230.7
69.3
172.8
163.3
136.9

3.6
11.0
5.1
13.2
4.9
9.7
8.3
61

6.1

1,623.1

991

50
4.5
5.1
7.5
5.3
64
3.6
5.8

6? 7
106.5
109.6
3200
257.3
144 7
524.9
67.9

4.8
5.6
24.0
13.7
92
19.0
3.9

5.2

1,593.6

83.3

migrant arrivals totaling more than 500 in fiscal 1978.
S ource : Ratio of 1978 arriving immigrants to population computed from IN S Annual Report,
1978, table 12A (for immigrants), and S ta tistica l A bstract o f the U nited States, 1979, table 24

(for population): 1979 labor-market data from computer printout supplied by the Division of Lo­
cal Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

gal migrants. The “goals” of this policy include the cre­
ation of a substantial work force without legal rights for
the benefit of some U.S. employers, while permitting
Mexico and other less developed countries to export a
substantial percentage of their excess labor force.
Policymaking. The formation of labor-market policy
might be compared with the continuous cooking of a
stew; the flavor changes as ingredients are added, but
the process is an ongoing one and the changes are not
abrupt. Employment policy operates through a series of
vehicles, such as the setting of the minimum wage, ad­
justment of the unemployment insurance and workers’
compensation systems, change in the laws and the per­
sonnel of the National Labor Relations Board, and
variation in the funding and emphasis of the Compre­
hensive Employment and Training Act ( c e t a ). Many of
these decisions are Federal, but some are also made at
the State and local levels. Policymaking in this arena in­
volves the interested parties in a never-ending round of
legislative, executive, and judicial exercises, alternatively
battling and compromising with each other. The focus
is essentially domestic, far more concerned with infla­
tion, unemployment, poverty, and productivity than
with immigration.
In contrast, immigration policymaking is not continu­
ous, and its focus is heavily influenced by international
considerations. The basic structure of the immigration
law is changed about once a generation (most recently
in 1965, when the 1921 country-of-origin quota system
was eliminated). Immigration policy develops in fits and
starts, as policymakers react negatively to existing prac­
tices and because of its international elements, its re­
sults are harder to predict and control.
A further complication is the locus of employment
and immigration policymaking. The congressional labor
and taxation committees dealing with employment poli­
cy do not deal with immigration policy, which is han­
dled by the judiciary committees, and vice versa.
Similarly, the U.S. Department of Labor plays a lead
role in making employment policy, but only a minor
one in immigration policy, which is administered by the
Departments of State and Justice.
Policy interactions. Given the different objectives of both
the de facto and de jure immigration policies on one
hand and operative employment policy on the other,
and the different ways in which decisions are made in
these fields, it should be no surprise that there is little
policy coordination.
The principal area of conflict is between the full em­
ployment and improved jobs goals of employment poli­
cy and the treatment of illegal immigrants. The U.S.
Government devotes S20 billion annually to unemploy­
ment insurance to cope with the short-term effects of

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

unemployment, and $ 8 billion more to CETA in a search
for longer term solutions to the problem. Simultaneous­
ly, however, it tolerates the presence of perhaps millions
of low-wage illegal immigrant workers, who compete
with some U.S. residents for jobs, and tend to depress
wages and working conditions of millions of others. The
distributional effects of immigrant labor, especially if il­
legal, are not well understood, but it is clear that some
employers, workers, and consumers are benefiting while
others lose. Even more ambiguous are the consequences
of the long-term use of so many illegal migrants.
The alternatives available. Bearing in mind the diffi­
culties inherent in immigration policymaking, the Con­
gress in 1978 created the Select Commission on
Immigration and Refugee Policy to address these and
other complex issues. The Commission, headed by Fa­
ther Theodore Hesburgh, president of Notre Dame Uni­
versity, will report its findings to the Congress and the
President next year.
Early indications are that the Commission recognizes
the conflicts between existing immigration and related
labor-market policies, and prefers to diminish them.5
With regard to its final recommendations, the Commis­
sion appears to have several options:
• One is the preservation of the status quo, unhappy as
it may be, as a rough compromise, the best available
in an imperfect world.
• Another would be to leave the thrust of de jure immi­
gration policy essentially as it is, but to devote more
resources to its enforcement.6
• A third approach would be, simultaneously, to seek
to change the law so that it comes closer to today’s
realities, while seeking more vigorous enforcement of
the new immigration policy.
The third option is the most likely approach, and it
would be helpful if the Commission would stress the
need for coordination of the Nation’s labor-market and
immigration policies.
Specific alternatives open to the Commission include:
legalizing the presence of some of the undocumented
workers currently in the United States, making provi­
sions for larger flows of legal immigrants in the future,
and setting up a program of employer sanctions which
would make it illegal to hire aliens without proper
documentation. Or it might propose a guest- or non­
immigrant-worker program, as discussed elsewhere in
this issue.
Whatever the Commission decides, it will do so after
having faced the complex conflicts in employment and
immigration policymaking. That, in itself, is a welcome
development.7
49

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Immigration and Employment Policies
------ F O O T N O T E S
' E m p lo y m e n t a n d T ra in in g R e p o r t o f th e P r e sid e n t (U.S. Depart­
ment of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 1979), ta­
ble A -l, p. 233.
2I b id ., table E-2, p. 354.
David S. North and Allen LeBel, “Manpower and Immigration
Policies in the United States (Washington, National Commission for
Manpower Policy, 1978), Special Report 20, pp. 98-103, and pp. 2 4649.
See North and LeBel, op. cit., p. 95. For similar data on the cluster­
ing of the Indochinese refugees, see Julia V. Taft, David S. North, and
David A. Ford, R e fu g e e R e s e ttle m e n t in th e U .S .: T im e f o r a N e w F ocu s
(Washington, New TransCentury Foundation, 1979), pp. 179-87.
It should be noted that most European nations pursuing “active

manpower policies” place immigration under the jurisdiction of the
Ministry of Labor. For a description of the way in which Germany
made immigration contingent on unemployment throughout the
1960’s, see Philip L. Martin, G u e stw o r k e r P r o g r a m s: L esso n s f r o m E u ­
ro p e (U.S. Department of Labor, 1980).
6The Border Patrol, the uniformed police force of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service, had exactly one operative helicopter at
this writing. There are more policemen assigned to guard the Capitol
and the adjacent buildings of the Congress (1,167) than there are INS
investigators to enforce the immigration law in the interior of the Na­
tion (798).
7 Reprints of this article will be available from the Giannini Foun­
dation, University of California at Berkeley. No. 593.

Adjusting to democracy
. . . The immigrant must be taught that he must stand straight up
on his own feet; that the ward politician is dependent on him — on his
vote— and not he on the ward politician. In this way he first learns
that he is a part of the Government, and while this is done by indi­
rection, in a large sense, there is no other force that is doing it at all.
The Pole, the Bohemian, the Lithuanian, the Slovak, and to a much
lesser degree the Galician, have inherited the feeling that somehow
government is a thing inimical to their natural development . . . Being
weaker than it they must be silent in its presence, and if forced to
speak, lie, as for them to tell the truth would mean imprisonment or
death.

— C arroll D. W right
“Influence of Trade Unions on Immigrants,”
B u lle tin o f th e B u r e a u o f L a b o r,

January 1905, No. 56, p. 5.

50


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

M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
This list of collective bargaining agreements expiring in November is based on contracts on file in
the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering 1,000
workers or more.

Employer and location

Industry

Union1

Number of
workers

Apartment Building Owners and Managers Association of Chicago
(Illinois)

Services ................................

Service Employees ............................

3,000

Chicago Dry Cleaners Association (Chicago, 111.) ..................................

Services ................................

4,000

Chicago Real Estate Owners Council (Chicago, 111.) ..............................

Services ................................

Teamsters; and Laundry, Dry Cleaning,
and Dye House Workers (Ind.)
Service Employees ............................

Dana Corp., Parish Frame Division (Reading, Pa.) ................................

Transportation equipment . . . .

Steelworkers ....................................

1,800

Foster Grant, Inc. (Interstate) ..............................................................

Rubber ................................

Retail, Wholesale, and Department
Store Union

1,100

Gibson Products Corp. (Greenville, Mich.).............................................
Goulds Pumps, Inc. (Seneca Falls, N .Y .)...............................................

Electrical products.................
Machinery ............................

Auto Workers (Ind.)..........................
Steelworkers ....................................

3,000
1,100

Houston Food Council, Chain Food Stores2(Houston, Tex.) .................

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

Food and Commercial Workers........

1,850

ICI United States, Inc. (Charlestown, Ind.) ...........................................

Instruments ..........................

Chemical Workers ............................

1,000

Lockheed Aircraft Corp. (Burbank, Calif.).............................................
Louisville Gas and Electric Co. (Louisville, K y.)....................................

Transportation equipment . . . .
Utilities ................................

Engineers and Scientists Guild (Ind.)
Independent Protective Association of
Utility Workers (Ind.)

2,200
2,700

Olin Corp. (East Alton, 111.)..................................................................

Instruments ..........................

Machinists ......................................

3,750

Rohr Industries, Inc. (Chula Vista, Calif.) .............................................
Rohr Industries, Inc. (Riverside, Calif.).................................................
RCA Corp. (Interstate).........................................................................
RCA Corp. (Interstate).........................................................................
RCA Global Communications Inc., Communications Trade Division
(Interstate)

Transportation equipment . . . .
Transportation equipment . . . .
Electrical products.................
Services ................................
Communication.....................

Machinists ......................................
Machinists ......................................
Electrical Workers (IUE) .................
Electrical Workers (IBEW) ...............
Teamsters (Ind.) ..............................

3,000
1,300
5,650
2,300
1,000

Safeway Stores, Inc. (Texas)..................................................................

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

Food and Commercial Workers.........

1,300

Textile Maintenance Institute of Chicagoland (Illinois)............................

Services ................................

5,000

Trane Co. (Clarksville, Tenn.) ..............................................................
Tropicana Products, Inc. (Bradenton, Fla.).............................................

Machinery ............................
Food products .....................

Teamsters; and Laundry, Dry Cleaning
and Dye House Workers (Ind.)
Machinists ......................................
Teamsters (Ind.) ..............................

'Affiliated with a f l -


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

cio

except where noted as independent (Ind.)

4,500

1,300
1,500

industry area (group of companies signing same contract).

51

Developments in
Industrial Relations
Job protection stressed in telephone contracts
A scheduled mid-August strike against American
Telephone and Telegraph Co. and its operating and
manufacturing arms was averted when the Communica­
tions Workers accepted a 3-year offer for the 525,000
workers it represents in the Bell System. As usual, the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers settled
on similar terms for its 119,000 workers, as did the
Telecommunications International Union for 56,000
workers. During the bargaining, which began in June,
the three labor organizations worked together on for­
mulating demands and in responding to company pro­
posals. Although there were no strikes over national
issues, there were several brief strikes over local issues,
including a 16-hour walkout and later a 19-hour walk­
out by 33,000 CWA members employed by the New
York Telephone Co., and a 30-hour walkout involving
70,000 CWA members at Pacific Telephone Co. in Cali­
fornia and Nevada. The last national strike against the
Bell System, lasting 5 days, preceded the 1971 settle­
ment.
CWA President Glenn Watts valued the settlement
package at 34.9 percent. Union officials calculated the
two wage escalator adjustments (August of 1981 and
1982) on the assumption that the Consumer Price Index
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers ( c p i -w )
would rise 9.5 percent in the year ending May 1981 and
9.7 percent in the year ending 1982. There was no im­
mediate comment on the settlement by the Council on
Wage and Price Stability, but Watts said the annual in­
crease in compensation was “comfortably within” the
Administration’s 7.5 to 9.5 percent annual guideline,
which is based on assumed 7.5 percent annual rises in
the CPI-W and also permits the exclusion of certain in­
creases in the cost of benefits.
CWA officials estimated that the August 1980 initial
wage increase would average 9.24 percent, or $28.82 a
week. Pay rates were not increased for employees in the
first step of the progression schedules, but those at the
top of the schedules received 10.2 percent increases and
those in intermediate steps received a smaller increase.
“Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben
and other members of the staff of the Division of Trends in Employee
Compensation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is largely based on in­
formation from secondary sources.

52


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

For the 1981 and 1982 increases, workers in the top
progression step will receive 3 percent increases; those
in the intermediate steps will receive a smaller increase.
The union estimated the increases at 2.67 percent, or
$9.16 weekly, in 1981 and 2.68 percent, or $10.17, in
1982. In addition, telephone operators received a twostage “upgrading” increase up to a maximum of $7.50 a
week for those at the top step.
The two wage escalator adjustments will be calculat­
ed at the new rate of 55 cents a week plus 0.65 percent
of the individual’s weekly rate for each 1 percent in­
crease in the CPI-W. The previous rate was 50 cents a
week plus 0.6 percent of the weekly rate for each 1 per­
cent index rise. According to the union, the new formu­
la will recover about 80 percent of price increases
measured by the CPI-W, compared with 75 percent for
the previous formula.
The settlement included 14 provisions that, according
to the union, dealt with “the interrelated issues of job
security and job pressures” stemming from “an ailing
economy and the rapidly changing state of technology.”
Included were:
• Four paid and one unpaid “excused work days” a
year for regular employees (instead of three paid and
one unpaid), in addition to a one-time excused day
on December 26, 1980.
• Three weeks of paid vacation after 7 years of service
(formerly 8 years), effective in 1981.
• A new procedure for scheduling vacations.
• Termination of the practice of monitoring some calls
handled by operators.
• Establishment of a joint committee to assist employ­
ees affected by technological changes.
• Adoption of a plan protecting 15-year employees
downgraded because of technological changes from
pay reduction for the balance of the contract term,
with an increasing reduction to apply afterwards.
• A 50-percent increase in supplemental income protec­
tion payments to laid-off workers, bringing the pay­
ment rate to 40 percent of the basic weekly wage plus
$8 per year of service (maximum payment of
$18,000). Eligibility was extended to employees who
are age 62 with 20 years of service and those whose
age plus service total 75.
• An understanding that “traditional” telephone work
will not be contracted out if it “will currently and di-

rectly cause layoffs or part-timing of employees.”
• A “successorship memorandum of agreement” pro­
viding various income and job security protections
for employees transferred because of a reorganization
of the Bell System.
Major changes in pensions included provisions for (1)
two “guaranteed cost-of-living” adjustments in benefits;
(2) retirement at full benefit rates for 30-year employees,
(previously, the employee’s pension was reduced 3 per­
cent for each year under age 55 at retirement); (3) an
improved and simplified normal pension formula— the
October 1980 increases (for employees retiring after Au­
gust 1980) range from $12.11 to $29.85 a month for
each year of service, depending on preretirement earn­
ings, August 1981 increases range from $13.35 to
$32.73, and August 1982 increases range from $14.78 to
$35.98; and (4) increases in minimum pensions, ranging
from 48 percent after 20 years of service to 115 percent
after 40 years.
Other provisions called for improvements in health,
dental, life insurance, and vision care benefits and an in­
crease in the mileage allowance for authorized use of a
personal automobile.

First woman on AFL-CIO Executive Council
The AFL—CIO’s Executive Council selected Joyce D.
Miller as its first female member. Miller is a vice presi­
dent of the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers
Union and president of the Coalition of Labor Union
Women. In order to elect a woman, the Council waived
its rules that a member be a chief officer of a union and
that two representatives of the same union could not
serve on the 35-member council. Murray Finley, presi­
dent of the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Work­
ers, was already a council member. AFL-CIO President
Lane Kirkland said he hoped the time would come
when women as well as minorities would gain election
to union presidencies, making special rules unnecessary.
The chief item of business at the summer session was
the Council’s endorsement of President Jimmy Carter
for re-election, calling him the “clear choice” for Ameri­
can workers. The Council said it would ask the Federa­
tion’s General Board to endorse the Democratic ticket
and to plan a vigorous campaign to inform union mem­
bers about the candidates and issues in the 1980 elec­
tion campaign.
The Council took steps to direct pension money into
“socially desirable” investments beneficial to labor by
endorsing the creation of a Government-guaranteed
“super” fund of pension assets. The purpose of the fund
would be to (1) encourage investments in “job-creating”
industries such as construction and transportation; (2)
coordinate pension funds proxy votes on issues before

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

shareholders; (3) provide a clearinghouse to assist inves­
tors in avoiding companies with poor labor relations;
and (4) encourage unions to press for a larger role in
managing pension funds.

Airline workers get new contract
American Airlines and the Transport Workers Union
negotiated a 30-month agreement providing for general
wage increases of 6 percent retroactive to March 1980,
2 percent in September 1980, 4 percent in March and
September of 1981, and 4 percent in March of 1982.
The agreement, which covered 12,400 ground service
employees, continued the cost-of-living clause, providing
annual adjustments of 1 cent for each 0.3-point rise in
the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index
(1967=100) in September of 1980 and 1981 and Au­
gust of 1982, with maximum adjustments of 18, 22, and
22 cents, respectively (the previous contract allowed 34
cents over its 30-month term).
Longevity pay was increased to a maximum of 15
cents an hour (from 13 cents). Paid vacation was liber­
alized by providing for 4 weeks after 10 years of service
(formerly 12 years) and 5 weeks after 17 years (formerly
20) beginning in 1981. Employees can accumulate up to
130 days of sick leave effective in 1981 (formerly 120
days) and 140 days in 1982 and will receive $25 for
each day of unused sick leave at retirement (previously,
employees received $12 for each unused day at the end
of each year).
Subject to government approval, all previous pension
contributions were to be refunded and workers were to
receive pension credit for years in which they did not
contribute. Other improvements included a 25-cent pay­
ment for the first government license held and 20 cents
for the second, effective in December 1980 (formerly 20
and 15 cents), increasing to 35 and 30 cents in Decem­
ber 1981. Line-pay for mechanics, fleet, and ground
service employees was increased to 10 cents (formerly 5
cents), effective in September 1981.

Initial contract at Southern textile firm
A 9-year dispute between the Clothing and Textile
Workers union and Wellman Industries, Inc., ended
when the parties agreed on an initial contract for 1,000
workers in Johnsonville, S.C. In addition, the textile
firm agreed to an affirmative action plan and cash set­
tlements to workers who were affected by seven Nation­
al Labor Relations Board findings that Wellman had
engaged in unfair labor practices.
Wellman employees voted in April 1972 for represen­
tation by the Textile Workers Union of America. How­
ever, subsequent efforts to negotiate a contract were
unsuccessful and the union complained to the National
53

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Developments in Industrial Relations
Labor Relations Board that Wellman was engaging in
unfair labor practices. The Board upheld the charges
and rejected the company’s contention that it did not
have to negotiate with the union because its employees
were not permitted to vote on the Textile Workers
Union of America and the Clothing Workers merger
that resulted in formation of the a c t w u .
Under the settlement, Wellman will pay a total of
$465,000 to employees who lost earnings as a result of
layoffs or reductions in pay or who were improperly
discharged. Under a consent decree entered in U.S. Dis­
trict Court, the company agreed to increase, within 3
years, the number of black employees to 48 percent of
skilled jobs, 35 percent of office jobs, and 15 percent of
officials and managers. To help in this effort, Wellman
will set up a $100,000 fund for training employees.
The contract provided for a 9-percent wage increase
and for reopening bargaining on wages and benefits in
both the second and third years. Other terms included a
seventh paid holiday and adoption of funeral leave, jury
duty, and military duty pay.
In another development involving ACTWU, the union
charged that J. P. Stevens & Co., had not agreed to a
July 1980 wage increase for the unionized employees at
its Roanoke Rapids, N.C., plant to punish them and to
“chill the union organizing activities elsewhere.” (See
Monthly Labor Review, September 1980, p. 60, for infor­
mation on wage increases that were granted or negotiat­
ed at other southern textile companies in July 1980.)
The a c t w u , which for 6 years has been trying to
negotiate an initial contract at the plant, recalled that
the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint
against Stevens for denying a 1979 wage increase to the
3,000 workers. The complaint asserted that the compa­
ny had withheld the increase from the employees be­
cause they had joined or supported the union for
mutual protection and to engage in collective bar­
gaining.

Workers agree to purchase printing firm
Employees agreed to purchase Dayton (Ohio) Press,
Inc., to avert a possible closing of the magazine printing
firm. The agreement between the parent Charter Co.
and 13 unions calls for Charter to receive a $35-million
long-term note. The employees would borrow $100 mil­
lion, of which $70 million would be used for new ma­
chinery and $30 million for operating expenses. To
partly offset these costs, the employees agreed to a
14-percent wage reduction. An official of the Graphic
Arts union, which represents 850 of the workers, said
that the purchase was contingent on obtaining long­
term printing contracts, as well as on arranging the
financing.
Prior to the decision to sell the plant to the employ­
54


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

ees, Charter had considered moving the operation to
Tennessee, Virginia, or Georgia; selling the business to
another firm; or investing $70 million in new rotagravure presses necessary for the firm to be competitive
with other magazine printers.
The company ruled out buying new presses after the
unions refused to accept a wage freeze that Charter said
was necessary to equalize labor costs with its competi­
tors. The rejected proposal, made in February 1980,
was for a 15-year contract with wages to be frozen until
the five competitors’ wages equalled those at Dayton
Press, which was expected to occur in 1983. During the
balance of the 15-year period, employees would have re­
ceived the average amount of the increases received by
the employees of the five companies. According to a
union official, straight-time pay for the unionized work­
ers at Dayton Press ranged from $15,674 to $20,072 a
year at the time of the proposal.
Dayton Press has been losing money for the past 4
years. In February, employment was 2,600, including
700 on layoff, compared with 5,700 in 1970.

Benzene standard overturned
The Supreme Court ruled by a 5 to 4 vote that the
U.S. Department of Labor’s 1977 standard for worker
exposure to benzene was invalid because the Depart­
ment had not proved it was necessary. Justice John
Paul Stevens, writing for four members of the Court,
said that the Occupational Safety and Health Adminis­
tration in issuing the standard had failed to prove that
it was “reasonably necessary and appropriate” to reme­
dy a “significant risk of material health impairment.”
Stevens said OSHA had acted incorrectly in reducing the
allowable exposure level to one part of benzene per mil­
lion parts of air, from 10 ppm, because the agency had
not obtained “empirical evidence” or “opinion testimo­
ny” that “exposure to benzene at or below the 10 ppm
level had ever in fact caused leukemia.” He said that
OSHA’s rationale for tightening the standard was its
long-standing position that exposure to cancer-causing
agents must be reduced to the lowest possible level be­
cause there is no such thing as a “safe level.”
Charles Dibona, president of the American Petroleum
Institute, said that the court’s ruling establishes that
“health regulations in this country must be made on the
basis of scientific fact rather than pure speculation.”
Edmund B. Frost, general counsel of the Chemical
Manufacturers’ Association, said, “Congress did not
m andate— nor can OSHA achieve— a perfectly risk-free
society. OSHA can now regulate only significant, not
theoretical, risks.”
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor Basil Whiting
conceded that the ruling will make it more difficult to
set standards but said OSHA will “press forward in regu-

lating benzene, as well as in regulating other cancercausing and toxic substances.”
The legal challenge to the benzene standard, initiated
by the American Petroleum Institute, had resulted in a
ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New
Orleans that the standard was unreasonable because of
a lack of evidence of significant health benefits. The ap­
peal before the Supreme Court that resulted in the up­
holding of the lower courts’ ruling was Industrial Union
Department (of the A F L - C I O ) vs. American Petroleum
Institute. (For a fuller discussion of the case, see “Sig­
nificant Decisions in Labor Cases,” September 1980, pp.
53-54.)

Minority quotas for U.S. contracts upheld
In one of the most important civil rights cases in re­
cent years, the Supreme Court decided that Congress
has constitutional power to earmark Federal funds for
minority groups to compensate for discrimination. In
rejecting, by a 6 to 3 vote, an appeal of a decision up­
holding a 1977 law allocating 10 percent of a public
works appropriation to minority contractors, the Court
said Congress may favor a minority group whenever it
finds racial discrimination and tailor the remedy to end
that discrimination. The Court said that the findings of
discrimination need not be as specific as when a judge
imposes a remedy and that the people adversely affected
by corrective programs need not have been found guilty
of discrimination. (See “Significant Decisions in Labor
Cases,” September 1980, pp. 54-56.)

Kahn denounces construction agreements
Construction settlements in California drew attention
as a number of unions negotiated 3-year contracts that,
according to industry officials, would raise labor costs
by more than 40 percent. Alfred E. Kahn, chairman of
the Council on Wage and Price Stability, denounced
these settlements— and some others in the industry— as
inflationary and called on John T. Dunlop, head of the
tripartite Pay Advisory Committee, to investigate the
problem. Dunlop immediately began discussions with
construction industry and union leaders to determine if
1980 settlements alter traditional wage relationships be­
tween the various crafts and, thus, create competition
among crafts. During his tenure as leader of the former
Construction Industry Stabilization Committee, Dunlop
worked to stabilize these pay relationships as part of his
plan to moderate construction settlements.
Perhaps the most noteworthy settlement was between
Plumbers District Council 16 and the various employer
associations for 12,000 workers in a 13 county area, in­
cluding Los Angeles. It provided for an $8.85 increase
in the previous $20-an-hour wage-benefit cost. Wages

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

were increased to $15.25 an hour on July 1, 1980 (from
$13.83), to $16.85 on July 1, 1981, and to $18.69 on
July 1, 1982. The balance of the package consisted of
increases in employer payments into various benefit
funds and increases in travel pay and subsistence.
William Deel, head of the Plumbing Contractors As­
sociation, said that the association was forced to settle
on the $8.85 package because 500 independent compa­
nies continued to work during the 2-week strike, put­
ting the 180 companies in the association at a
competitive disadvantage. According to Deel, the inde­
pendent companies, which employ 7,000 of the 12,000
workers, had signed interim agreements that bound
them to accept whatever terms were negotiated by the
association.
Deel indicated that the settlement may cause a trend
toward nonunion construction because “the nonunion
firms pay anything they want, and skimp or even skip
entirely the fringe benefits, such as pensions.” However,
a plumbers union official said plumbers average about
$20,000 a year, calling that “hardly excessive” for
skilled craft workers.
The other settlements involved a number of crafts
and generally provided for $6.37 packages over the
3-year contract duration.

Insurer to yield job data
The U.S. Department of Labor withdrew a 2-day-old
order barring Prudential Insurance Co. from holding
Federal government contracts after the company agreed
to supply the computerized employment data the De­
partment had been seeking. The accord, worked out
with the assistance of Federal District Judge Herbert
Stern, provided that Prudential will supply the informa­
tion regarding its employees back to July 1, 1976, on
condition that the Government keep the records confi­
dential.
The Department had been seeking the information as
part of an investigation to determine if Prudential en­
gaged in any discriminatory employment practices. Pru­
dential had agreed to supply printouts of certain data
but not the actual computer tapes, contending that this
would have violated the privacy of its employees. This
stalemate led to the order that would have cost Pruden­
tial more than $200 million a year in income from Gov­
ernment contracts.
Judge Stern, who heard Prudential’s appeal of the
order, scheduled a September hearing on the Depart­
ment’s request that Prudential also supply information
for earlier years to enable it to make comparisons with
the later information. Prudential contended that it was
not required to supply the earlier information because it
was covered by a 1976 conciliation agreement resolving
previous employment matters.
□
55

Book Reviews
American universities: making the grade?
American Academics: Then and Now. By Logan Wilson.
New York, Oxford University Press, 1979. 309 pp.
$13.95.
American Higher Education in Decline. By Kenneth H.
Ashworth, foreword by Logan Wilson. College Sta­
tion, Tex., Texas A & M University Press, 1979.
105 pp. $7.95.
Both distinguished educators, the authors of these
books have written rather different accounts of the insti­
tutional behavior of higher education in the recent past.
Logan Wilson’s book, the more scholarly of the two, fo­
cuses on the people who staff the classrooms, laborato­
ries, and offices of colleges and universities, while
Kenneth H. Ashworth’s essay examines the institutions
of government, enterprise, and accreditation which, it
claims, largely account for higher education’s “decline.”
Though neither author dwells on economic factors, both
books provide penetrating glimpses of the firms and
markets which generate and channel higher education’s
economic activity.
Wilson’s book is really a sociological profile of Amer­
ican academics— “then,” by which Wilson means the
early 1940’s (when he previously analyzed the academic
profession in The Academic Man), and “now” in the
late 1970’s. As in the earlier book, he begins by tracing
the life cycle of an average academician as professional
recruit, student, and apprentice, staff member, and
“professor administrant.” Progression through these
stages, he observes, is basically a matter of competence
rather than political or market power. Thus, in
succeeding chapters, Wilson describes the ways that
competence is discovered and nurtured in academia and
how these processes lead to differentials in status and
prestige for institutions as well as individuals.
It is the chapters on status appraisal, professional
and economic status, and university and individual
prestige that reveal the importance to economic under­
standing of mastering the sociology of the profession.
One finds in universities an intellectual values structure
which assumes negligible differences in the “value” of
knowledge among the various fields and a commitment
to the advancement of knowledge in all disciplines rath­
er than to personal self-interest or pecuniary profit. Ac­

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

cordingly, faculty are judged by their intellectual
quality and scholarly output rather than by the sub­
stantial differences between their market prices in
nonacademic opportunities. Wilson has laced the last
few chapters of the book with illustrations of how this
desire for interfield equality has led to shortages and
hence potential qualitative declines in specialties where
opportunity wages are high, and to institutional reliance
on assorted compensatory nonmonetary remuneration
schemes designed to widen real incentive structures de­
spite constraints on salaries. Thus, the devices of mar­
ket adjustment are clearly evident amid the sociological
trappings of the Wilson volume.
While Ashworth in American Higher Education in
Decline does not deny the link between social organiza­
tion and market performance, he implies that the link is
moot so long as three institutional actors continue to
undermine academia’s values structure: the Federal bu­
reaucrats who “harass” and “subjugate” higher educa­
tion, the entrepreneurs of “freeze-dried” nontraditional
education who, in a new version of Gresham’s law, pro­
duce the least rigorous off-campus programs, and impo­
tent regional accrediting associations which ought to
know better but relax standards anyway. These three
actors and their constituencies have become interdepen­
dent through Federal largess, which Ashworth argues
has propelled American higher education into decline.
Fortunately, in Ashworth’s view, the latest cycle of
governmental interaction with higher education is draw­
ing to a close as Federal monies for student support dry
up. But a new cycle, propelled by urgent public needs
for the unique services academia can provide, those ser­
vices oriented more towards technological research and
social understanding than to the current cycle’s focus
on broadened access, may be just around the corner. If
so, Ashworth calls for stiffened backs and wiser choices
in the halls of ivy, lest government be allowed to inter­
vene once again into higher education’s internal pro­
cesses and priorities.
Ashworth’s attitude towards markets for higher
education services, therefore, is ambivalent: he mistrusts
the allocative processes of free markets, expecially the
leveling influence of entrepreneurial activity on stan­
dards of academic excellence; yet he abhors the regula­
tory threat of Federal and State employees who lack
understanding of what a university is and how it works.

If not regulation, then what? Self-regulation, he seems
to be saying, and his objectives in such a system would
be merit at the expense of equality, and excellence at
the expense of the “prevailing standard of mediocrity.”
Both books are written for a general audience,
though I suspect that the majority of the readers will be
educators or perhaps government bureaucrats who keep
files on their enemies. The Wilson book should also ap­
peal to aspiring academicians eager to catch a glimpse
of the institution to which they may be committing
their life’s work.
Both books add marginally to previous literature on
the current academic malaise— the Wilson book pri­
marily to the sociology of the academic profession, the
Ashworth polemic to the public debate about the quali­
ty of educational outcomes. Readers should be warned
that Ashworth’s tell-it-like-it-is style substitutes opinion
for evidence on almost every page; it will not persuade
cautious readers unless they already harbor a similar set
of prejudices about the roles of government, nontraditional suppliers, and standard-setting in American
higher education.
------- G o r d o n K . D

oug lass

James Irvine, Professor of Economics
Pomona College

The work ethic: battered but unbowed
The Work Ethic in Industrial America, 1850-1920. By
Daniel T. Rodgers. Chicago, The University of
Chicago Press, 1978. 300 pp. $5.95, paper.
In Daniel T. Rodgers’ words, “This is at bottom a
study not of work but of ideas about work.” The book
focuses on the question, “What happened to work val­
ues among middle-class northerners when work itself
was radically remade?” The issue of the work ethic in
early industrial America has obvious appeal to the stu­
dent of American history, but, because of Rodgers’ lu­
cid and concise treatment of this ever controversial
issue, it will perhaps reach a wider audience. Although
his penetrating analysis of the relationship between
workers and their machines draws from a wide-range of
literary vehicles and historical figures, he tends to con­
centrate on a particular genre or a few influential per­
sons in many of his chapters.
The early 19th century marked the beginning of the
transformation of the American economy from an agri­
cultural to an industrial base. However, home produc­
tion, or the “putting-out” system of handmade goods,
still flourished. Thus, work was still primarily autono­
mous and associated with self-fulfillment and personal
independence. By the mid-19th century, disparate
strands of view, some of which were rooted in the Prot­

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

estant Reformation and others in the era of the Ameri­
can Revolution, all came together to reaffirm that work
was the core of moral life. “Work made men useful in a
world of economic scarcity; it staved off the doubts and
temptations that preyed on idleness; it opened the way
to deserved wealth and status; it allowed one to put the
impress of mind and skill on the material world.”
Industrialization drove an unbridgeable void between
the notion of work for self-fulfillment and work for
monetary gain. The debasing and monotonous nature of
factory work, together with the issue of wage employ­
ment, led to continuous worker efforts, most of which
failed, to render industrial toil more humane. “From
the cooperatives’ attack on hireling wage labor, to the
progressive moralists’ campaign against factory monoto­
ny, to the restless discontent of industrial workers,
northerners had tilted against the industrial regime,
where time and discipline were screwed to an unfamiliar
pitch, skills split and autonomy undermined.” To trace
these developments, Rodgers leaves no stone unturned,
extracting material from sermons, lectures, children’s
literature, editorials, essays, poems, speeches, and car­
toons. To represent the honest workingman, for exam­
ple, he vividly describes the square-jawed, papercapped, bare-armed, muscled blacksmith holding the
tools of his trade— a commonplace figure of the indus­
trial era.
“The first issue to trouble the moralist was the matter
of wage working.” To some wage labor seemed little dif­
ferent than slavery if a worker could not realistically as­
pire to a business of his own. Counterattacks on the
wage system included the formation of cooperative
workshops, profit-sharing, piecework, and finally an in­
dustrial democracy crusade (which in today’s interna­
tional circles would be known as “codetermination”),
whereby employees and employers share in the
decisionmaking process. Obviously, some of the labor
issues of yesterday are still with us today. Piecework
points to another example. To individualize payment, it
was necessary to find precisely how long a worker
should take to do a particular job. This gave birth to
the still controversial time and motion studies. What
bound all these causes together was an unwillingness to
let go of the idea that work, if it was worthwhile, re­
quired the self-direction of the worker.
Industrial monotony drove a second wedge between
work ideals and work realities and proved to be as vex­
ing and unsettling as the question of a worker’s eco­
nomic freedom. In the chapter, “ Mechanicalized Men,”
Rodgers traces the evolution of the problem and subse­
quent worker reactions through the works of four lead­
ing labor experts or reformers of the factory system.
Carroll D. Wright, first Commissioner of the Federal
Bureau of Labor in 1885, argued that factories had im­
posed moral order on moral chaos. In contrast, two
57

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Book Reviews
Englishmen— John Ruskin and William M orris— advo­
cated abandoning or severely restricting the machine.
This attack eventually led to the short-lived handicraft
movement— arts and crafts societies fashioning their
wares by hand. Ultimately, Jane Addams concluded
that, since machines were inviolable, factory workers
might become more happily adjusted if they knew their
work was part of something larger. She started the “in­
dustrial betterment movement,” with teamwork as the
dominant motif. This led to a turn-of-the century surge
in industrial education based on the notion that m onot­
ony could be conquered by proper mental preparation.
However, against Addams protests, the schools were
refashioned along factory lines, and classes were job-fo­
cused rather than worker-focused. “So the critics of
routinized work turned at last toward leisure.”
“Vacations were a new habit for the suburban middle
class in the 1850’s.” In the chapter, “Play, Repose, and
Plenty,” Rodgers analyzes 19th century theorizing on
rest, relaxation, and consumption. Play and recreation
are praised by American ministers, most notably Henry
Ward Beecher, as an offsetting influence to the excesses
of work. As an alternative to play, a growing library of
books advocated the power of repose to rekindle the
mind or to regenerate spiritually troubled souls. Plenty
refers to the age-old argument that overproduction and
underconsumption would result in supply outrunning
demand, leading to a general economic glut. This led to
the thinking, that still somewhat besets us today, that
“the best cure for national impoverishment was not to
tighten one’s belt but to let it out a notch” and con­
sume. An era of surplus had arrived.
The erosion of the scarcity ideology was the most evi­
dent sign of a shift in values. “Yet the striking
phenomenon of the age was not change but persistence
amid change,” the endurance of the work ethic, but a
work ethic more and more independent from work it­
self. Rodgers tracks a splintering of the old phrases and
old homilies associated with work ideals from the roll­
ing confusion of everyday life through stories written
for boys growing up in the 19th- and early 20th-century
America. These tales intertwined lessons of work and
discipline. Although they moved from instruction to instruction-within-amusement, from stories of work to
stories of play and heroic endeavor, the code of duty
among heroes endured; a faith in work survived.
There was still the question of “How much of a man’s
life should work consume?” In a somewhat less provoc­
ative chapter, “Sons of Toil,” Rodgers documents the
clashes between employer and employee over worktime.
Workers relief from toil was manifested in absenteeism,
quits, slowdowns, and a call for a shorter than a sunto-sun workday. Shouts of “a fair day’s wage and a fair
day’s work” became the commonplace cry of the land.
The final chapters deviate from Rodgers’ chronologi­
58


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

cal organization scheme to cover the work ethic with re­
gard, first to women, and then to political rhetoric. “We
also shall have our share of honored and socially useful
toil,” says Olive Schreiner in Women and Labor (1911).
The theme that binds two influential women of the time
— Harriet Beecher Stowe and Charlotte Perkins
Gilman, who stand at either end of the industrial years
and view women’s status differently— is their repeated
insistence on work. Stowe saw work as a way to break
down the conventions that often forced single women
into marriage. Gilman argued that women’s economic
dependence on men was catastrophic, stifling their inde­
pendence, and the only solution was for women to go
to work. However, feminist versions of the work ethic
were never more than a single strand of thread in the
tangled debate over the status of women. By the early
20th century, the issue of women working outside the
home was no longer in doubt among many feminists.
Rodgers’ retrospective prediction, “To turn women’s
restlessness into a demand for work was to tap an im­
mense reservoir of moral feeling, perhaps the largest
that lay open to 19th and 20th century feminists,” has
indeed been borne out. Although women have entered
the work force in record numbers throughout the postWorld War II era, they have only recently begun to
make inroads into male-dominated occupations.
Beggars and millionaires, who they were and whence
came their unearned incomes, were matters that divided
turn-of-the century northerners into bitterly contending
political camps. Rodgers details the evolution of this
struggle in “Political Uses of the Work Rhetoric.” An
epilogue that discusses Charles W. Eliot’s writings—
concerned with work and the conditions both of mind
and circumstance that made work a rewarding, ener­
gizing, joyful activity, or otherwise— concludes the
book.
Today, the work ethic may be reflected in what is
called the “linear life plan,” a progression from school
in youth, through work during the middle years, to re­
tirement in the later years. (See the Fred Best-Barry
Stern article in the July 1977 issue of the Review.) It is
argued, however, th at— given the tremendous changes
that have occurred in our society, such as the increases
in education, technology, and life expectancy— such a
plan may no longer fit, or be optimal for, many work­
ers. More workers than ever before want direct personal
involvement in determining when and how they will
work. Ergo, the conflict over the work/leisure issue per­
sists as workers continue to strive for more freedom of
choice; Rodgers has given us an insightful historical
perspective to this struggle.
— R o b e r t W . B e d n a r z ik
Office of Current E m ploym ent A nalysis
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Education as an escape from the ghetto
The Education o f Black Philadelphia: The Social and Ed­
ucational History o f a Minority Community, 1900—
1950. By Vincent P. Franklin. Philadelphia, Univer­
sity of Pennsylvania Press, 1979. 298 pp. $19.95.
Vincent P. Franklin has written the first historical
and social study of education in black Philadelphia, be­
tween 1900 and 1950, within the changing social, politi­
cal, and economic context of the black minority. From
the perspective of the black community, the major pur­
pose of public and community educational activities was
the advancement of Afro-Americans in the city. Educa­
tion was perceived as an important vehicle for improv­
ing the depressed conditions of black citizens caused by
discrimination in employment, housing, and public ac­
commodations. Community educational programs were
also geared toward those problems facing the black
population. Black leaders, parents, and educators strug­
gled persistently to ensure that the schooling that was
made available to black children and adults at public
expense also functioned to bring about improvements in
the overall social status of black Philadelphians.
The first part of this book concentrates on the period
from the turn of the century and the publication of
W. E. B. DuBois’ The Philadelphia Negro (1899) to the
Onset o f the Great Depression. In chapter 1, Franklin
discusses the origins and development of the Phila­
delphia black community in the 18th and 19th centuries
and presents a detailed examination of social conditions
prior to 1920, especially the impact of the Great Migra­
tion. Chapter 2 examines public and private schooling
of black Philadelphians in the 19th and early 20th cen­
turies. The progressive education movement had a sig­
nificant effect on public education in Philadelphia as
school officials attempted to come to grips with the
problem of increasing black and immigrant enrollments.
According to the author, the increase in public school
segregation in the wake of the Great Migration led in
the 1920’s to a campaign by members of the black com­
munity to change official school board policies and
practices. Chapter 3 examines the social, political, eco­
nomic, and educational conditions in black Philadelphia
during the 1920’s, and describes the unsuccessful cam­
paign to end the practice of segregating black students
and teachers in the public school system. The lack of
black political power in the city meant that demands
for desegregation of public schools would not be met in
that decade.
Various historical and literary societies, church and
fraternal groups, and social improvement associations
organized communitywide educational activities to in­
form black Philadelphians about their heritage and con­
temporary social issues and problems. Chapter 4

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

presents an analysis of the educational programs that
flourished between 1900 and 1930.
In Part II, the author discusses the effect of the Great
Depression, New Deal, World War II, and changing
race relations on black Philadelphia. The economic
depression of the 1930’s caused even greater poverty
and discrimination against blacks in the local and na­
tional job market. Chapter 5 examines the social, eco­
nomic, and political changes for black Philadelphia
during the decade. The reemergence of the Democratic
Party in Philadelphia during the early 1930’s led to in­
creased competition between the two major parties for
the large black vote. Chapter 6 details the successful
campaign for the appointment of a black to the school
board and the official desegregation of the public school
system. The increase in black political power was ex­
tremely important in bringing about a change in the
policies of the politically appointed Board of Public Ed­
ucation.
The national defense mobilization in the late 1930’s
signaled the beginning of a major shift in black-white,
majority-minority relations in the United States. In
Philadelphia, the increased demand for skilled workers
led to the training and hiring of blacks in areas where
they were previously barred. Chapter 7 describes race
relations in Philadelphia in the 1930’s and 1940’s and
the campaigns to educate black and white citizens in or­
der to bring about greater interracial cooperation and
understanding. Chapter 8 examines conditions in the
public secondary schools of the city and the vocational
training available to black youths. In the last chapter,
Franklin examines the question of change and continu­
ity in the social and educational conditions of black
Philadelphia.
In this reviewer’s opinion, it is important to note that
other racial, religious, and cultural minority groups
have been the victims of discrimination and have used
public schooling and community educational programs
to improve their socioeconomic conditions.
This study is richly researched and should take its
place along such classic studies as: Cronin, The Control
o f Urban Schools (1973); Drake, St. Clair Black Metrop­
olis (1945); Huggins, Harlem Renaissance (1971);
Lyman, The Black American in Sociological Thought
(1972); Spear, Black Chicago (1967); and Tyack, One
Best System (1974).
It is the author’s hope that this study will stimulate
other comparative analyses of the social and educational
history of racial and cultural minorities in urban America.

— C l a u d e U ry
Professor, School of Education
University of Colorado

59

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Book Reviews

Three quiet revolutionaries
Moving the Mountain: Women Working for Social
Change. By Ellen Cantarow with Susan Gushee
O’Malley and Sharon Hartman Strom. Old
Westbury, N.Y., The Feminist Press, 1980. 166
pp., bibliography, $4.75, paper.
Underlying every movement for social reform is a
“second echelon” of leadership— the unacclaimed men
and women who work behind the scenes to achieve the
changes advocated by their more visible colleagues.
Ellen Cantarow, Susan Gushee O’Malley, and Sharon
Hartman Strom attempt to give credit where credit is
due by profiling the careers of three remarkable but lit­
tle known American activists: suffragette and labor
leader Florence Luscomb, civil rights activist Ella
Baker, and United Farm Workers organizer Jessie
Lopex de la Cruz. All three have participated in an im­
pressive array of progressive organizations and their
contributions to their respective causes are, as this book
reveals, quite substantial.
To give the reader a greater feeling for these women
and their work, the authors have fashioned an “oral his­
tory” of the life and times of their subjects. After each
woman is sketched in a brief historical and biographical
introduction, the story is turned over to the inverviewee
who reflects on her years of activism. Comments by the
authors interspersed with the narrative put these recol­
lections into historical perspective.
Has this innovative approach to biography worked?
It has certainly succeeded in drawing colorful and evoc­
ative portraits of three delightfully feisty women. Flor­
ence Luscomb, born in 1877 to a wealthy Lowell, Mass,
family, traces her activism back to the early suffrage
movement. She organized the first union for clerical
workers in 1937, ran for Congress and the governorship
of Massachusetts, and wrote the first anti-Vietman war
pamphlet that appeared in Massachusetts in 1953. She
emerges as a reformer in the grand New England tradi­
tion: genteel and steely, prim and powerful, she relin­
quished the privileges of her upper-class background to
parti ,,pate in working-class movements.
Ella Baker, now 77, started her career with an edito­
rial position on the black newspaper American West
Indian News. In 1938, she began her lifelong association
with the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People ( n a a c p ), becoming president of the
New York City branch in 1954. In the early sixties, she
midwifed the birth of the Student Nonviolent Coordi­
nating Committees (SNCC) and worked extensively with
the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. She ap­
pears as a woman of quiet strength whose activism is
tempered by a self-effacing view of her contributions:
“The kind of role I tried to play was to pick up pieces
60


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

or put together pieces out of which I hoped an organi­
zation might come. My theory is, strong people don’t
need strong leaders.”
A visit from Cesar Chavez in 1962 got Californiaborn Jessie Lopex de la Cruz involved in La Causa—
the efforts to organize migrant farmworkers into a
union. By 1967, she had become an official union orga­
nizer. The 59-year old de la Cruz now works with her
husband and family on a cooperative ranch and is ac­
tively engaged in trying to break the power of the cor­
porate growers in the San Joaquin Valley and open the
land to small farmers. As these women relate their ex­
periences, the reader grasps something of the inner fire
that animates them and their efforts to achieve social re­
form.
Unfortunately, the editorial commentary does not
match the quality of the interviewees’ narrative. The au­
thors’ enthusiasm and respect for their subjects make
this book a lively and readable history, but their admi­
ration overwhelms them on occasion, resulting in an
embarrassment of gushing prose. Clichés such as “leg­
endary activist” and “passion for justice,” and observa­
tions like “It took courage to oppose the Cold War”
become tedious and dehumanizing. The three activists
might have been better served, and their accomplish­
ments more creditably described in an understated and
less partisan style.
A more serious flaw is the authors’ tendency to over­
simplify historical analysis. Objectivity is sacrificed for
polemic and rhetoric, and at times, the tone becomes al­
most sophomoric. Complex historical developments like
the Cold War, the Depression, and the Civil Rights
Movement are explained only in the most simplistic
terms; little effort is made to give a thoughtful account­
ing of the social forces behind the events. For example,
the Cold War is dismissed in a single sentence as a sys­
tematic attack by the United States on the Soviet
Union, China, and Western European Communist
parties; the Depression is described as a frenzied at­
tempt by big business to expand by overinvesting. One
appreciates the authors’ wish to keep their own com­
ments brief, but such brevity may not be appropriate to
a discussion of intricate social issues.
Despite these drawbacks, the book does achieve its
declared goals: it brings to light the contributions of
three dynamic reformers whose work has not received
the general recognition it deserves. This sharing in the
feelings and experiences of those who stand just behind
the noisy vanguard of social reform gives the reader a
greater appreciation of the patience, courage, and deter­
mination required to bring about reform.
— K ate F arrell
Office of Publications
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Publications received
Agriculture and natural resources
Anderson, Alan, Jr., “Energy in Transition,” Across the
Board, August 1980, pp. 53-60.
Baumöl, William J. and Sue Anne Batey Blackman, “Unprof­
itable Energy Is Squandered Energy,” Challenge, JulyAugust 1980, pp. 28-35.
Primack, Phil, “Soft Energy and Hard Times,” Working Pa­
pers for a New Society, July-August 1980, pp. 15-23.

Robinson, Joan, “Time in Economic Theory,” Kyklos, Vol.
33, Fasc. 2, 1980, pp. 219-29.

Industrial relations
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research,
Youth Employment Legislation: The Youth Act of 1980.
Washington, 1980, 62 pp. (Legislative Analysis 20, 96th
Cong., 2d sess.)
Brett, Jeanne M., “Why Employees Want Unions,” Organiza­
tional Dynamics, Spring 1980, pp. 47-59.

Salamon, Sonya, “Ethnic Differences in Farm Family Land
Transfers,” Rural Sociology, Summer 1980, pp. 290-308.

Bulmer, Charles and John L. Carmichael, Jr., Employment
and Labor-Relations Policy. Lexington, Mass. D.C. Heath
and Co., Lexington Books, 1980, 276 pp. $24.50.

Talbot, Ross B., “The International Fund for Agricultural
Development,” Political Science Quarterly, Summer 1980,
pp. 261-76.

Clark, Kim B., “The Impact of Unionization on Productivity:
A Case Study,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review,
July 1980, pp. 451-69.

Economic and social statistics

Dennehy, Daniel T., “The Status of Lie Detector Tests in La­
bor Arbitration,” Labor Law Journal, July 1980, pp. 430
-40.

Brown, Randall S., Marilyn Moon, Barbara S. Zoloth, “Occu­
pational Attainment and Segregation by Sex,” Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, July 1980, pp. 506-17.
Ehrenberg, Ronald G., “Retirement System Characteristics
and Compensating Wage Differentials in the Public Sec­
tor,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, July 1980,
pp. 470-83.
Svejnar, Jan, “On the Empirical Testing of the Nash-Zeuthen
Bargaining Solution,” Industrial and Labor Relations Re­
view, July 1980, pp. 536-42.
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Local Area Personal In­
come, 1973-78: Vol. I, Summary (180 pp., Stock No.
003-010-00066-0, $6); Vol. 2, New England Region (42
pp., Stock No. 003-010-00067-8, $3.25); Vol. 3, Mideast
Region (77 pp., Stock No. 003-010-00068-6, $3.75); Vol.
4, Great Lakes Region (142 pp., Stock No. 003-01000069-4, $5); Vol. 5, Plains Region (184 pp., Stock No.
003-010-00070-8, $5.50); Vol. 6, Southeast Region (322
pp., Stock No. 003-010-00071-6, $7.50); Vol. 7, Southwest
Region (118 pp., Stock No. 003-010-00072-4, $4.25); Vol.
8, Rocky Mountain Region (74 pp., Stock No.
003-010-00073-0, $3.75); Vol. 9, Far West Region, Includ­
ing Alaska and Hawaii (74 pp., Stock No. 003-01000074-1, $3.75). Washington, U.S. Department of Com­
merce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, 1980. Available
from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington
20402.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Information Processing at
BLS. By Rudolph C. Mendelssohn. Washington, 1980, 21
pp. (Report 583.)

Freedman, Audrey, “Plant Closed — No Jobs,” Across the
Board, August 1980, pp. 12-18.
Great Britain, Department of Employment, “Throwing the
Book: Trade Union Rules on Admission, Discipline and
Expulsion,” by John Gennard, Mark Gregory, Stephen
Dunn, Employment Gazette, June 1980, pp. 591-601.
Juris, Hervey A. and Myron Roomkin, The Shrinking Perime­
ter: Unionism and Labor Relations in the Manufacturing
Sector. Lexington, Mass., D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington
Books, 1980, 226 pp.
Lanoff, Ian D., “The Social Investment of Private Pension
Plan Assets: May It Be Done Lawfully Under ERISA?”
Labor Law Journal, July 1980, pp. 387-92.
Miles, James M., “How to Establish a Good Industrial Rela­
tions Climate,” Management Review, August 1980, pp.
42-44.
Neumann, George R., “The Predicability of Strikes: Evidence
from the Stock Market,” Industrial and Labor Relations
Review, July 1980, pp. 525-35.
Princeton University, Japanese Industrial Relations: Lessons
for the West. (Prepared by Kevin Barry.) Princeton, N.J.,
Princeton University, Industrial Relations Section, May
1980, 4 pp. (Selected References, 202.) 50 cents.
Smith, Arthur B., Jr., “The Law and Equal Employment Op­
portunity: What’s Past Should Not Be Prologue,” Indus­
trial and Labor Relations Review, July 1980, pp. 4 9 3 505.

------Major Programs. Edited by Rosalind Springsteen. Wash­
ington, 1980, 57 pp. (Report 552.)

Smith, J. Clay, Jr. and John D. Schmelzer, “Overlapping Ju­
risdiction of the EEOC and NLRB,” Labor Law Journal,
July 1980, pp. 393-402.

Economic growth and development
Eckstein, Otto, “Economic Choices for the 1980s,” Challenge,
July-August 1980, pp. 15-27.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Analysis of Work Stoppages,
1978. Washington, 1980, 76 pp. (Bulletin 2066.) Stock
No. 029-001-02484-3. $3.50, Superintendent of Docu­
ments, Washington 20402.

Katona, George with James N. Morgan, Essays on Behavioral
Economics. Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan, In­
stitute for Social Research, Survey Research Center,
1980, 108 pp. $10.50.

------Work Stoppages in Government, 1978. By Michael H.
Cimini and Jane S. Gelman. Washington, 1980, 32 pp.
(Report 582.)

Mayer, Thomas, “Economics as a Hard Science: Realistic
Goal or Wishful Thinking?” Economic Inquiry, April
1980, pp. 165-78.

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

Industry and government organization
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Pro­
posals for Railroad Regulatory Reform. Washington, 1980,
61

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Book Reviews
52 pp. (Legislative Analysis 16, 96th Cong., 2d sess.)
“Canada: Regions of Promise for U.S. Business,” by Kenneth
L. Fernandez; “British Columbia,” by Paul J. Glasoe;
“Alberta,” by Dennis M. Grimmer; “Manitoba and Sas­
katchewan,” by A. L. A. Goodman; “Ontario,” by Rob­
ert W. Mustain; “Quebec,” by Patrick T. O’Connor;
“Atlantic Provinces,” by Robert S. Ayling, Business
America, The Journal of International Trade, Mar. 24,
1980, pp. 3-16.
Davidson, James Dale, The Squeeze. New York, Summit
Books, 1980, 281 pp. $11.95.
Loving, Rush, Jr., “The Railroads’ Bad Trip to Deregula­
tion,” Fortune, Aug. 25, 1980, pp. 44-48.
Miller, James C. Ill and Bruce Yandle, “Benefit/Cost Analy­
sis: New Thermostat for the Regulatory Caldron,”
Business, March-April 1980, pp. 15-18.
Porter, Bruce D., “Parkinson’s Law Revisited: War and the
Growth of American Government,” The Public Interest,
Summer 1980, pp. 50-68.

International economics
Danielsen, Albert L., “The Theory and Measurement of
OPEC Stability,” Southern Economic Journal, July 1980,
pp. 51-64.
Darby, Michael R., “The Monetary Approach to the Balance
of Payments: Two Specious Assumptions,” Economic In­
quiry, April 1980, pp. 321-26.
Hewitt, Gary, “Research and Development Performed
Abroad by U.S. Manufacturing Multinationals,” Kyklos,
Vol. 33, Fasc. 2, 1980, pp. 308-27.
Mutti, John H., “The American Presence Abroad and U.S.
Exports,” Southern Economic Journal, July 1980, pp. 4 0 50.
“Oil Greases the Skids for the World Economy: A Chart
Portfolio,” Fortune, Aug. 11, 1980, pp. 134-39.
Volcker, Paul L., “The Recycling Problem Revisited,” Chal­
lenge, July-August 1980, pp. 3-13.

Labor and economic history

Grant, James H. and Daniel S. Hamermesh, Labor Market
Competition Among Youths, White Women and Others.
Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re­
search, Inc., 1980, 19 pp. (NBER Working Paper Series,
519.) $1.
Gustman, Alan L. and Thomas L. Steinmeier, Labor Markets
and Evaluations of Vocational Training Programs in the
Public High Schools— Toward a Framework for Analysis.
Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re­
search, Inc., 1980, 31 pp. (NBER Working Paper Series,
478. ) $1.
Leveson, Irving with Jane Newitt and Maryellen Pitcairn,
Generational Crowding: Economic, Social and Demograph­
ic Effects of Changes in Relative Cohort Size. Croton-onHudson, N.Y., Hudson Institute, 1980, 161 pp., bibliog­
raphy.
McCafferty, Stephen, “Vacancies, Discouraged Workers and
Labor Market Dynamics,” Southern Economic Journal,
July 1980, pp. 21-29.
Mincer, Jacob and Haim Ofek, Interrupted Work Careers.
Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re­
search, Inc., 1980, 30 pp. (NBER Working Paper Series,
479. ) $1.
Ratner, Ronnie Steinberg, Labor Market Inequality and Equal
Opportunity Policy for Women: A Cross-National Compari­
son. Wellesley, Mass., Wellesley College, Center for Re­
search on Women, 1979, 160 pp., bibliography, $7,
paper.
Rosen, Ellen I., Unemployed Women: You Can't Go Home
Again. Wellesley, Mass., Wellesley College, Center for
Research on Women, 1979, 24 pp., bibliography. $1.50,
paper.
Rothschild, Kurt W., “A Note on Female Labour Supply,”
Kyklos, Vol. 33, Fasc. 2, 1980, pp. 246-60.
The Vice President’s Task Force on Youth Employment, A
Summary Report of the Vice President's Task Force on
Youth Employment. Washington, The White House, 1980,
70 pp., bibliography.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Measuring Labor Force Move­
ments: A New Approach. By Alan Eck, Van Anthony, and
Hall Dillon. Washington, 1980, 24 pp. (Report 581.)

Luckhardt, Ken and Brenda Wall, Organize or Starve! The
History of the South African Congress of Trade Unions.
New York, International Publishers, 1980, 520 pp. $16.

Management and organization theory

Nelson, Daniel, Frederick W. Taylor and the Rise of Scientific
Management. Madison, The University of Wisconsin
Press, 1980, 259 pp. $19.50.

Beldt, Sandra F. and Donald O. Jewell, “Where Have the
Promotions Gone?” Business, March-April 1980, pp. 24
-30.

Labor force

Bell, Chip R., “Training and Development in the 1980s,” Per­
sonnel Administrator, August 1980, beginning on p. 23.

Baker, Nancy C., Act II: The Mid-Career Job Change and
How to Make It. New York, The Vanguard Press, 1980,
263 pp.

Bunker, Barbara Benedict and Lisa Richer Bender, “How
Women Compete: A Guide for Managers,” Management
Review, August 1980, pp. 55-61.

Clark, Kim B. and Lawrence H. Summers, Demographic Dif­
ferences in Cyclical Employment Variation. Cambridge,
Mass., National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1980, 27 pp. (NBER Working Paper Series, 514.) $1.

Cash, William B., Jr., “Our Hidden Managers . . . Why Inept
Bosses Are So Hard to Spot,” Management Review, Au­
gust 1980, pp. 23-26.

Cogan, John F., Fixed Costs and Labor Supply. Cambridge,
Mass., National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.,
1980, 30 pp. (NBER Working Paper Series, 479.) $1.
“Full Employment: An America That Works,” The AFL-CIO
American Federationist, June 1980, pp. 1-4.
62

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

Cummings, Paul W., Open Management: Guides to Successful
Practice. New York, AMACOM, A division of American
Management Associations, 1980, 225 pp. $14.95.
Donnell, Susan M. and Jay Hall, “Men and Women as Man­
agers: A Significant Case of No Significant Difference,”
Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1980, pp. 60-77.

Douglass, Merrill E. and Donna N. Douglas, Manage Your
Time, Manage Your Work, Manage Yourself. New York,
AMACOM, A division of American Management Asso­
ciations, 1980, 277 pp. $15.95.
Drucker, Peter F., Managing in Turbulent Times. New York,
Harper & Row, Publishers, 1980, 239 pp. $9.95.
Greenlaw, Paul S. and John P. Kohl, “Selection Interviewing
and the New Uniform Federal Guidelines,” Personnel Ad­
ministrator, August 1980, pp. 74-80.
Harbaugh, Norman R. and Leslie W. Rue, “Do You Have
Time To Manage Your Time?” Business, March-April
1980, pp. 19-23.
Harlan, Anne and Carol Weiss, Career Opportunity for Wom­
en Managers. Wellesley, Mass., Wellesley College, Center
for Research on Women, 1979, 18 pp., bibliography.
$1.50, paper.
Harley, Joan and Lois Ann Koff, “Training Traps: Reasons,
Results and Remedies,” Personnel Administrator, August
1980, pp. 34-38.
Jelinek, Mariann and Anne Harlan, MBA Goals and Aspira­
tions: Potential Predictors of Later Success Differences Be­
tween Males and Females. Wellesley, Mass., Wellesley
College, Center for Research on Women, 1979, 20 pp.,
bibliography. $1, paper.
Louis, Meryl Reis, “Career Transitions: Varieties and Com­
monalities,” Academy of Management Review, July 1980,
pp. 329-40.
Malone, Paul B. Ill, “Humor: A Double-Edged Tool for To­
day’s Managers?” Academy of Management Review, July
1980, pp. 357-60.
Near, Janet P., Robert W. Rice, Raymond G. Hunt, “The
Relationship Between Work and Nonwork Domains: A
Review of Empirical Research,” Academy of Management
Review, July 1980, pp. 415-29.
Payne, Stephen L., “Organization Ethics and Antecedents to
Social Control Processes,” Academy of Management Re­
view, July 1980, pp. 409-14.
Reed-Mendenhall, Diana and C. W. Millard, “Orientation: A
Training and Development Tool,” Personnel Administra­
tor, August 1980, pp. 40-44.

McMillin, W. Douglas and Thomas R. Beard, “The Short
Run Impact of Fiscal Policy on the Money Supply,”
Southern Economic Journal, July 1980, pp. 122-35.
Reilly, Ann M., “Can the Budget Process Survive?” Dun's Re­
view, August 1980, pp. 39-42.

Prices
Greenlees, John S., “Gasoline Prices and Purchases of New
Automobiles,” Southern Economic Journal, July 1980, pp.
167-78.
Okun, Arthur M., “Uniting Against Inflation,” The Brookings
Bulletin, Winter 1980, pp. 1-3.
Oswald, Rudy, “The CPI: An Honest Measure,” The AFLCIO American Federationist, June 1980, pp. 16-20.
Rosen, Gerald R., “How Much Will the Recession Cut
Prices?” Dun's Review, August 1980, beginning on p. 32.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Detailed Report, May
1980. Washington, 1980, 80 pp. $2.25, Superintendent of
Documents, Washington 20402.
------Relative Importance of Components in the Consumer Price
Indexes, 1977. Washington, 1980, 23 pp. (Report 595.)
von Furstenberg, George M. and William H. White with
Kellett W. Hannah, “The Inflation Process in Industrial
Countries Individually and Combined,” Kyklos, Vol. 33,
Fasc. 2, 1980, pp. 261-86.

Urban affairs
Brady, Joe, “No-Fare Transit— A Valuable Experiment,” The
AFL-CIO American Federationist, June 1980, pp. 5-10.
Brown, David S., “Housing for the Elderly: Federal Subsidy
Policy and Its Effect on Age-Group Isolation,” University
of Detroit Journal of Urban Law, Winter 1980, pp. 25793.
Hoyt, Charles King, Public, Municipal and Community Build­
ings. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1980, 213
pp. $27.50.
“The Revitalization of Inner-City Neighborhoods,” Urban Af­
fairs Quarterly, June 1980, pp. 371-501.

Vardi, Yoav, “Organizational Career Mobility: An Integrative
Model,” Academy of Management Review, July 1980, pp.
341-55.

Wages and compensation

Walters, Roy W., “Developing Future Managers— A Systems
Approach,” Personnel Administrator, August 1980, pp. 47
-52.

Burnim, Mickey L„ “The Earnings Effect of Black Matricula­
tion in Predominantly White Colleges,” Industrial and
Labor Relations Review, July 1980, pp. 518-24.

Winterscheid, Beverly C., “A Career Development System Co­
ordinates Training Efforts,” Personnel Administrator, Au­
gust 1980, beginning on p. 28.

Douty, H. M., The Wage Bargain and the Labor Market.
Baltimore, Md., The Johns Hopkins University Press,
1980, 150 pp. $12, cloth; $4.95, paper.

Monetary and fiscal policy
Abken, Peter A., “The Economics of Gold Price Movements,”
Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond,
March-April 1980, pp. 3-13.
Goodfriend, Marvin, James Parthemos, Bruce Summers, “Re­
cent Financial Innovations: Causes, Consequences for the
Payments System, and Implications for Monetary Con­
trol,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Rich­
mond, March-April 1980, pp. 14-27.


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

Gordon, Roger H. and Alan S. Blinder, Market Wages, Reser­
vation Wages, and Retirement. Cambridge, Mass., Nation­
al Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1980, 58 pp.
(NBER Working Paper Series, 513.) $1, paper.
Gustman, Alan L., Analyzing the Relation of Unemployment
Insurance to Unemployment. Cambridge, Mass., National
Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1980, 73 pp. (NBER
Working Paper Series, 512.) $1, paper.
Murray, Thomas J., “Work-Sharing Is Working in Califor­
nia,” Dun's Review, August 1980, pp. 62-65.
63

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Book Reviews
Ratner, Ronnie Steinberg, Report on Wellesley Conference on
Equal Pay and Equal Opportunity Policy in the United
States, Canada, and Western Europe: Analytic Summary
of Themes and Issues. Wellesley, Mass., Wellesley Col­
lege, Center for Research on Women, 1979, 59 pp. $2.50,
paper.

Welfare programs and social insurance

Tavernier, Gerard, “How American Can Manages Its Flexible
Benefits Program,” Management Review, August 1980, p.
8-13.

Burkhauser, Richard V., “The Early Acceptance of Social
Security: An Asset Maximization Approach,” Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, July 1980, pp. 484-92.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Area Wage Surveys: York,
Pennsylvania Metropolitan Area, February 1980 (Bulletin
3000-11, 26 pp., $1.75); St. Louis, Missouri— Illinois
Metropolitan Area, March 1980 (Bulletin 3000-12, 40
pp., $2.25); Toledo, Ohio— Michigan Metropolitan Area,
May 1980 (Bulletin 3000-13, 28 pp., $1.75). Available
from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington
20402, GPO Bookstores, or BLS regional offices.

Dickinson, Peter A., Sunbelt Retirement. New York, E. P.
Dutton, 1980, 338 pp. $14.95, cloth; $8.95, paper.

------Employee Benefits in Industry: A Pilot Survey. Washing­
ton, 1980, 16 pp. (Report 615.)

American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Mil­
itary Retirement: The Administration's Plan and Related
Proposals. Washington, 1980, 86 pp. (Legislative Anal­
ysis 19, 96th Cong., 2d sess.)

Gutchess, Jocelyn F., “Pension Investment: The European
Model,” The AFL-CIO American Federationist, June
1980, pp. 11-16.
Ehrbar, A. F., “How to Save Social Security,” Fortune, Aug.
25, 1980, pp. 34-39.
Horlick, Max, “Co-Ordinating Occupational and Public Pen­
sion Schemes: Experience in Four European Countries,”
International Social Security Review, No. 3, 1979, pp. 271
-87.

------Wage Chronologies: Berkshire Hathaway and the Clothing
and Textile Workers, 1943- 80 (Bulletin 2061, 44 pp.,
$3.25); North Atlantic Shipping Associations and the Inter­
national Longshoremen's Association (ILA), 1934-80 (Bul­
letin 2063, 78 pp., $3.50). Washington, 1980. Available
from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington
20402.

White, Richard N., Assessment of a WIN Quality Training
Demonstration Project, Phase I Report: Characteristics of
Participants. Washington, Bureau of Social Science Re­
search, Inc., 1980, 138 pp. (BSSR Report, 0595-1.)

Wessels, Walter J., “The Effect of Minimum Wages in the
Presence of Fringe Benefits: An Expanded Model,” Eco­
nomic Inquiry, April 1980, pp. 293-313.

Winpisinger, William W., “Correcting the Shortage of Skilled
Workers,” The AFL-CIO American Federationist, June
1980, pp. 21-25.

Worker training and development

Organizing to preserve wages
. . . The immigrant is, in the first instance, a wage-reducer, either
directly or indirectly, although the extent of his influence upon wages
can not well be stated; but as a prospective wage-reducer he is met by
the trade union in self-defense, just as the trade union meets female
and child labor, except in this, the union seeks to organize the immi­
grants, while it seeks by legislation to prohibit or limit the work of
women and children— that is, the union seeks the aid of the state to
prevent wage reductions by means of female and child labor, and it
seeks by organizing the immigrants to prevent reduction of wages by
immigration.
— Carroll D. Wright
“Influence of Trade Unions on Immigrants,”
B u lle tin o f th e B u r ea u o f L a b o r,

January 1905, No. 56, p. 1.

64


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

Current
Labor Statistics
Notes on Current Labor Statistics

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

Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series

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

Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

.............................................................
Employment status of noninstitutional population, selected years, 1950-79 ................................................................
Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted ........................................................................................
Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted .......................................................................................................
Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted .....................................................................................................
Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................................
Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted .....................................................................
Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted ................................................................................................................

Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Employment by industry, 1950-79 .......................................................................................................................................
Employment by State ...............................................................................................................................................................
Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group .................................................................................
Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonallyadjusted ..........................................
Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, 1977 to date .........................................................................................................
Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by major industry group ...................................................................................
Hours and earnings, by industry division, 1949-79 ..........................................................................................................
Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group ..............................................................................
Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ......................................
Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................
Hourly Earnings Index, by industry division, seasonally adjusted . ..............................................................................
Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................
Gross and spendable weekly earnings, in current and 1967 dollars, 1960 to date ......................................................

Unemployment insurance data. Definitions and notes
21. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations

67
67
68
69
70
71
71
71
12
73
73
74
75
76
76
77
78
79
80
80
81
82
83

83

..........................................................................................................................................
Consumer Price Index, 1967-79 .............................................................................................................................................
Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected items ...........................................................
Consumer Price Index, cross classification of region and population size class ..........................................................
Consumer Price Index, selected areas .....................................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing ..................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings .............................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings ................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ................................................................................................................
Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries
................................................................................

84

Productivity data. Definitions and notes
31.
32.
33.
34.

66

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

Price data. Definitions and notes
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

66

.......................................................................................................................
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,1950-79 ............................................
Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1969-79 .............................................
Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted ...................
Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices . .

Labor-management data. Definitions and notes

.......................................................................................................
35. Wage and benefit settlements in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to date ..................
36. Effective wage rate adjustments going into effect in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to d a t e .....................
37. Work stoppages, 1947 to date ...............................................................................................................................................


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

85
85
91
92
93
94
96
96
96
99

99
100
100
101
102

102
103
103

NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS

This section of the Review presents the principal statistical se­
ries collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A brief introduction to each group of tables provides defi­
nitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually
found in footnotes.
Readers who need additional information are invited to
consult the BLS regional offices listed on the inside front cov­
er of this issue of the Review. Some general notes applicable to
several series are given below.
Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect of such factors as climatic conditions, industry
production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying
periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short­
term movements of the statistical series. Tables containing these data
are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated
on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are com­
puted each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for sev­
eral preceding years. For a technical discussion of the method used to
make seasonal adjustments, see X - l l V a ria n t o f th e C en su s M e th o d I I
S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t P ro g ra m . Technical Paper No. 15 (Bureau of the
Census, 1967).
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 2 - 7 were last revised
in the February 1980 issue of the R e v ie w to reflect the preceding year’s
experience. Beginning in January 1980, the BLS introduced two major
modifications in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force
data. First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new proce­
dure called X- l l / ARI MA, which was developed at Statistics Canada
as an extension of the standard X- l l method. A detailed description
of the procedure appears in T h e X - l l A R I M A S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t
M e th o d by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No.
12-564E, September 1979). The second change is that seasonal factors
are now being calculated for use during the first 6 months of the year,
rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year for
the July-December period. Revisions of historical data continue to be
made only at the end of each calendar year.
Annual revision of the seasonally adjusted payroll data in tables
11, 13, 16, and 18 begins with the August 1980 issue using the
X- l l ARIMA seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal fac­
tors for productivity data in tables 33 and 34 are usually intro­

duced in the September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent
changes from month to month and from quarter to quarter are
published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series.
However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U.S.
average All Items CPI. Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are
available for this series.
Adjustments for price changes. Some data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing
current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate
component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given
a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of
150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is
$2 ($3/150 X 100 — $2). The resulting values are described as
“real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars.
Availability of information. Data that supplement the tables in this
section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety of
sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information
published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published
according to the schedule given below. The H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r S ta tis ­
tic s 1 978, Bulletin 2000, provides more detailed data and greater his­
torical coverage for most of the statistical series presented in the
M o n th ly L a b o r R eview . More information from the household and es­
tablishment surveys is provided in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, a
monthly publication of the Bureau, and in two comprehensive data
books issued annually — E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n ite d S ta te s and
E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, S ta te s a n d A reas. More detailed informa­
tion on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining appears in
the monthly periodical, C u r re n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts. More detailed
price information is published each month in the periodicals, the C P I
D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P rices a n d P ric e In d ex es.

Symbols
p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series,
preliminary figures are issued based on representative
but incomplete returns.
r = revised. Generally this revision reflects the availability
of later data but may also reflect other adjustments,
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified.

Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series
T itle a n d fr e q u e n c y

R e le a s e

P e r io d

R e le a s e

P e r io d

M L R ta b le

( m o n t h l y e x c e p t w h e r e i n d ic a t e d )

d a te

c o v e re d

d a te

co v e re d

num ber

October 3

Employment s itu a tio n ...............................................................................

September

November 7

October

1 -1 1

October 3

September

November 7

October

2 6 -3 0

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

October 24

September

November 25

October

2 2 -2 5

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

October 24

September

November 25

October

1 4 -2 0

November 26

3d quarter

Producer Price Index
Consumer Price Index
Real earnings

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

Productivity and costs (quarterly):
Nonfarm business and manufacturing

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

October 27

3d quarter

October 27

1st 9 months

Work sto p p a g e s.........................................................................................

October 28

September

November 28

October

37

_.a:' 0 i turnover in manufacturing ............................................................

October 30

September

November 28

October

1 2 -1 3

Nonfmancial corporations ..............................................................
Maior collective bargaining settlements (quarterly) .............................

66

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

3 1 -3 4
3 1 -3 4
3 5 -3 6

EM PLOYM ENT DATA FROM THE H O U SEH O LD SURVEY

E m p l o y m e n t d a t a in this section are obtained from the
Current Population Survey, a program of personal interviews
conducted monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of about 65,000
households beginning in January 1980, 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.

Definitions
Employed persons are (1) 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 regular jobs
because of illness, vacation, industrial 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 illness and
had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did
not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new
jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed.
The unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as a
percent of the civilian labor force.
The civilian labor force consists of all employed or unemployed
persons in the civilian noninstitutional population; the total labor
force includes military personnel. Persons not in the labor force are

1.

those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes
persons retired, those engaged in their own housework, those not
working while attending school, those unable to work because of
longterm illness, those discouraged from seeking work because of
personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle.
The noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years of age
and older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions,
sanitariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy.
Full-time workers are those employed at least 35 hours a week;
part-time workers are those who work fewer hours. Workers on parttime schedules for economic reasons (such as slack work, terminating
or starting a job during the week, material shortages, or inability to
find full-time work) are among those counted as being on full-time
status, under the assumption that they would be working full time if
conditions permitted. The survey classifies unemployed persons in
full-time or part-time status by their reported preferences for full-time
or part-time work.

Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a decennial census,
adjustments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to
correct for estimating errors during the preceding years. These
adjustments affect the comparability of historical data presented in
table 1. A description of these adjustments and their effect on the
various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of E m p lo y m e n t
a n d E a rn in g s.

Data in tables 2 - 7 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1979.

Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-79

[Numbers in thousands]
T o t a l la b o r f o r c e

C iv i lia n la b o r f o r c e

T o ta l n o n ­
Year

E m p lo y e d

U n e m p lo y e d
N o t in

in s t it u t io n a l
p o p u l a t io n

N um ber

P e rc e n t o f

T o ta l

N o n a g r i-

P e rc e n t o f

la b o r f o r c e

p o p u l a t io n
T o ta l

A g r ic u l t u r e

c u l tu r a l

N um ber

i n d u s t r ie s

la b o r
fo rc e

1950

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

106,645

63,858

1955

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

112,732

68,072

59.9
60.4

65,023

62,170

6,450

55,722

2,852

4.4

44,660

1960

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

72,142

60.2

69,628

65,778

5,458

60,318

3,852

5.5

47,617

75,830

59.6

73,091

69,305

4,523

64,782

3,786

5.2

51,394

77,178

59.7

74,455

71,088

4,361

66,726

3,366

4.5

52,058

1964

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

119,759
127,224

1965

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

129,236

1966

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

131,180

78,893

60.1

62,208

75,770

58,918

72,895

7,160

3,979

51,758

68,915

3,288

2,875

5.3

3.8

42,787

52,288

1967

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

133,319

80,793

60.6

77,347

74,372

3,844

70,527

2,975

3.8

52,527

1968

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

135,562

82,272

60.7

78,737

75,920

3,817

72,103

2,817

3.6

53,291

1969

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

137,841

84,240

61.1

80,734

77,902

3,606

74,296

2,832

3.5

53,602

1970

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

140,182

85,903

61.3

82,715

78,627

3,462

75,165

4,088

4.9

54,280

1971

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

142,596

86,929

61.0

84,113

79,120

3,387

75,732

4,993

5.9

55,666

1972

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

145,775

88,991

61.0

86,542

81,702

3,472

78,230

4,840

5.6

56,785

1973

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

148,263

91,040

61.4

88,714

84,409

3,452

80,957

4,304

4.9

57,222

1974

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

150,827

93,240

61.8

91,011

83,935

3,492

82,443

5,076

5.6

57,587

1975

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

153,449

94,793

61.8

92,613

84,783

3,380

81,403

7,830

8.5

58,655

1976

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

156,048

94,773

87,485

3,297

84,188

7,288

7.7

59,130

1977

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

158,559

99,534

628

97,401

90,546

3,244

87,302

6,855

7.0

59,025

1978

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

161,058

102,537

63.7

100,420

94,373

3,342

91,031

6,047

6.0

58,521

1979

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

163,620

104,996

64.2

102,908

96,945

3,297

93,648

5,963

5.8

58,623


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

96,917

62.1

67

M O N T H L Y LA B O R REV IEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: H ousehold D ata

2.

Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
A nnual averag e

1979

1980

E m p lo y m e n t s ta tu s
1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

TOTAL

Total nonlnstitutional population' ...............................
Total labor force

164,106

164,468

164,682

164,898

165,101

165,298

165,506

165,693

165,886

166,105

166,391

166,578

105,218

105,586

105,688

105,744

106,088

106,310

106,346

106,184

106,511

107,230

106,634

107,302

107,139

161,532

161,801

162,013

162,375

162,589

162,809

163,020

163,211

163,416

163,601

163,799

164,013

164,293

164,464

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

100,420

102,908

103,128

103,494

103,595

103,652

103,999

104,229

104,260

104,094

104,419

105,142

104,542

105,203

105,025

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

94,373

96,945

97,004

97,504

97,474

97,608

97,912

97,804

97,953

97,656

97,154

96,988

96,537

96,996

97,006

3,342

3,297

3,315

3,364

3,294

3,385

3,359

3,270

3,326

3,358

3,242

3,379

3,191

3,257

3,180

.........

91,031

93,648

93,689

94,140

94,180

94,223

94,553

94,534

94,626

94,298

93,912

93,609

93,346

93,739

93,826

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

6,047

5,963

6,124

5,990

6,121

6,044

6,087

6,425

6,307

6,438

7,265

8,154

8,006

8,207

8,019

Agriculture

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

Nonagrlcultural Industries
Unemployed

163,620

163,891

104,996

158,941

Civilian labor force
Employed

161,058
102,537

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

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

Civilian non institutional population'

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

6.0

5.8

5.9

5.8

5.9

5.8

5.9

6.2

6.0

6.2

7.0

7.8

7.7

7,8

7.6

Not In labor force .........................................

5u,521

58,623

58,673

58,519

58,780

58,937

58,810

58,791

58,951

59,322

59,182

58,657

59,471

59,091

59,439

68,293

68,417

69,664

69,756

M en , 20 y e a rs and o v e r

Civilian nonlnstitutional population'
Employed

68,804

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

67,006

69,047

69,140

69,238

69,329

69,428

69,532

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

53,464

54,486

54,597

54,735

54,760

54,709

54,781

54,855

55,038

54,996

55,114

55,467

55,220

55,398

55,474

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

51,212

52,264

52,311

52,453

52,443

52,374

52,478

52,279

52,531

52,300

51,868

51,796

51,510

51.668

51,792

2,361

2,350

2,375

2,377

2,371

2.438

2,427

2,387

2,435

2,394

2,320

2.384

2,270

2,292

2,286

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

48,852

49,913

49,936

50,076

50,072

49,936

50,051

49,892

50,096

49,906

49,548

49,412

49,240

49,376

49,506

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

2,252

2,223

2,286

2,282

2,317

2,335

2,303

2,577

2,507

2,696

3,246

3,671

3,710

3,730

3,682

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

4.2

4.1

4.2

4.2

4.2

4.3

4,2

4.7

4.6

4.9

5.9

6.6

6.7

6.7

6.6

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

13,541

13,807

13,820

13,787

13,937

14,095

14,159

14,192

14,102

14,242

14,215

13,961

14,312

14,266

14,282

78.211

Civilian labor force
Agriculture

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

Nonagricultural industries
Unemployed

Unemployment rate
Not in labor force

68,522

68,697

68,940

W om en , 20 ye ars and o ve r

Civilian nonlnstitutional population'
Employed

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

76,860

77,006

77,124

77,308

77.426

77,542

77,656

77,876

77,981

78,090

78,360

78,473

37,416

38,910

39,304

39,239

39,362

39,445

39,659

39,878

39,857

39,751

40,137

40,246

40,125

40,471

40,589

35,180

36,698

37,000

37,075

37,112

37,248

37,402

37,574

37,604

37,496

37,602

37,576

37,769

37,961

582
36,914

552

616

37,530
541

37,051

36,960

36,989

565
37,204

37,413

Agriculture

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

Nonagricultural Industries
Unemployed

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

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

77,766

586

591

600

628

572

612

582

540

567

34,593

36,107

36,400

36,447

36,540

36,636

36,820

37,034

37,037

2,213

2,304

2,164

2,250

2,197

2,257

2,304

2,254

2,236

2,534

2,702

2,628

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

6.0

5.7

5.9

5.5

5.7

5,6

5.7

5.8

5.7

5.7

6.3

6.6

65

6.7

38,073

37,949

37,702

37,885

37,946

37,981

37,883

37,778

37,909

38,125

37.844

37,844

38,086

37.889

6.5
37,884

16,367

16,326

B o th s e x e s , 1 6

2,255

2,670

2,596

548

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

Unemployment rate
Not in labor force

19 y e a rs

Civilian nonlnstitutional population'

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

16,447

16,379

16,377

16,370

16,360

16,317

16,305

16,302

16,291

16,281

16,271

16,268

16,235

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

9,540

9,520

9,473

9,498

9,559

9,497

9,365

9,346

9,168

9.429

9,197

9,334

8,962

7,981

9,512
7,984

9,227

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

7,693

7,976

7,919

7,986

8,032

7,818

7,859

7,683

7,616

7,497

7,560

7,253

395

356

340

359

335

381

370

379

380

401

346

7,628

7,353

7,617

350
7,682

325

7,586

351
7,568

7,952
344
7,608

7,493

7.478

7,313

7,237

7,117

7,159

6,907

Civilian labor force
Employed

75,489

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

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

Civilian labor force

Agriculture

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

Nonagricultural Industries
Unemployed

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

1,559

1,528

1,534

1,544

1,554

7,651
1,512

1,527

1,545

1,547

1,487

1,485

1,813

1,700

1,774

1,709

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

16.3

16.1

16.6

16.2

16.4

15.9

16.0

16.3

16.5

15.9

16.2

19.2

18.5

19.0

19.1

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

6,907

6,867

7,150

6,847

6,897

6,862

6,767

6,820

6,940

6,956

7,123

6,852

7,074

6,934

7,273

Unemployment rate
Not in labor force

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

W h ite

Civilian nonlnstitutional population'

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

139,580

141,614

141,822

141,981

142,296

142,461

142,645

142,806

142,951

143,115

143,254

143,403

143,565

143,770

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

88,456

90,602

90,759

91,082

91.147

91,242

91,579

91,852

91,977

91,821

92,083

92,535

92,096

92,456

143.900
92,294

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

83,836

86,025

85,976

86,425

86.454

86,571

86,894

86,895

87,081

86,148

85.792

86,063

85,981

4,577

4,783

4,657

4,693

4,671

4.685

4,957

4,896

86,822
4,999

86,385

4,620

5,698

6,386

6,303

6,392

6,313

5.2
51,124

5.1

5.3

5.1

5.1

5.1

5.1

5.4

5.3

5.4

6.2

6.9

6.8

51,011

51,161

50,900

51,149

51,219

51,066

50,954

50,975

51,294

51,171

50,868

51,469

6.9
51,314

51.606

19,979

20.214

20,261

20,301

20,346

20,523

20,564

Civilian labor force
Employed

Unemployed

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

Unemployment rate
Not in labor force

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

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

68

B la c k a n d o t h e r

Civilian nonlnstitutional population'

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

19,361

20,032

20,079

20,128

20,163

20,395

20,448

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

11,964

12,306

12,343

12,404

12,512

12,391

12,432

12,453

12,362

12,266

12,319

12,559

12,446

12,739

12,650

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

10,537

10,920

10,982

11,063

11,076

11,044

11,024

10,937

10,823

10,771

10,813

10,751

10,932

10,930

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

1,427

1,386

1,361

1,341

1,436

1,347

1,408

10,979
1,474

1.424

1,443

1.549

1,746

1,695

1,807

1,719

Civilian labor force
Employed
Unemployed

Unemployment rate
Not in labor force

19,918

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

11.9

11.3

11.0

10.8

11.5

10.9

11.3

11.8

11.5

11.8

12.6

13.9

13.6

14.2

13.6

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

7,397

7,612

7,639

7,264

7,567

7,737

7,731

7,761

7,899

8,035

8.027

7,836

8,002

7,784

7.914

'A s in table 1, population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
NOTE: The monthly data In this table have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through 1979.


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

3.

Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[ In thousands]
A nnual a v erag e

1979

1980

S e le c te d c a te g o r ie s
1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

97,006

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

Total employed, 16 years and over ..........................
Men

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

94,373

96,945

97,004

97,504

97,474

97,608

97,912

97,804

97,953

97,656

97,154

96,988

96,537

96,996

55,491

56,499

56,408

56,714

56,629

56,580

56,734

56,486

56,732

56,601

55,998

55,823

55,457

55,629

55,551
41,455

W o m e n ...................................................................

38,882

40,446

40,596

40,790

40,845

41,028

41,178

41,318

41,221

41,051

41,156

41,165

41,079

41,367

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

38,688

39,090

39,180

39,198

39,124

38,845

38,924

38,749

38,955

38,745

38,342

38,147

38,193

37,999

37,910

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

21,881

22,724

22,869

22,937

22,919

22,940

23,027

23,111

23,178

23,202

23,080

23,155

23,144

23,097

23,162

O C C U P A T IO N

White-collar w o r k e r s .....................................................

47,205

49,342

49,663

49,816

49,738

49,912

49,911

50,313

50,448

50,302

50,405

50,606

50,861

51,114

51,413

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

14,245

15,050

15,068

15,141

15,057

15,131

15,272

15,337

15,444

15,397

15,542

15,551

15,712

15,741

15,761

Managers and administrators, except
farm ...................................................................

10,105

10,516

10,698

Professional and technical

10,659

10,639

10,617

10,535

10,608

10,971

10,755

10,745

10,882

10,911

11,046

11,153

S a le sw o rke rs..........................................................

5,951

6,163

6,145

6,181

6,261

6,362

6,346

6,452

6,185

6,113

5,988

6,022

5,981

6,128

6,124

Clerical w o rk e rs .....................................................

16,904

17,613

17,752

17,835

17,781

17,802

17,758

17,915

17,848

18,037

18,129

18,152

18,256

18,199

18,375

Blue-collar w o rk e rs .......................................................

31,531

32,066

31,849

32,209

32,205

32,110

32,302

31,882

31,754

31,670

31,127

30,681

30,243

30,149

29,983

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

12,386

12,880

12,761

12,993

13,001

12,925

13,041

12,814

12,728

12,767

12,773

12,523

12,301

12,382

12,233

Operatives, except tra n s p o rt...............................

10,875
3,541

10,909

10,909

10,964

10,967

10,963

11,042

10,678

10,661

10,579

10,408

10,336

10,131

10,134

10,066

3,612

3,604

3,617

3,593

3,628

3,635

3,616

3,571

3,558

3,483

3,421

3,395

3,335

3,474

Craft and kindred workers

Transport equipment operatives

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

Nonfarm la b o re rs ...................................................

4,729

4,665

4,575

4,635

4,644

4,594

4,584

4,774

4,795

4,767

4,463

4,402

4,416

4,299

4,209

Service workers ............................................................

12,839

12,834

12,621

12,859

12,937

12,899

12,970

12,979

13,080

12,981

13,034

13,932

12,930

13,045

12,917

Farmworkers .................................................................

¿,798

2,703

2,707

2,722

2,695

2,718

2,694

2,660

2,764

2,733

2,658

2,745

2,606

2,689

2,601

Wage and salary w o rk e rs ....................................

1,419

Self-employed w o rk e rs .........................................

M A J O R IN D U S T R Y A N D C U S S
OF W ORKER

Agriculture:
1,413

1,384

1,399

1,381

1,475

1,451

1,428

1,417

1,449

1,370

1,405

1,365

1,352

1,263

1,607

1,580

1,614

1,642

1,602

1,622

1,596

1,554

1,648

1,600

1,591

1,662

1,590

1,631

1,648

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

316

304

310

325

313

310

310

293

283

300

281

289

269

292

273

Wage and salary w o rk e rs ....................................

84,253

86,540

86,912

86,982

87,020

87,578

87,419

87,221

86,741

86,631

86,257

86,407

86,508

Unpaid family workers
Nonagricultural industries:

86,421

87,384

Government ...................................................

15,289

15,369

15,279

15,407

15,423

15,358

15,397

15,414

15,540

15,622

15,668

15,799

15,891

15,760

15,495

Private in d u s trie s ...........................................

68,966

71,171

71,142

71,505

71,559

71,662

71,987

72,163

71,879

71,599

71,072

70,832

70,365

70,647

71,014

Private households ...............................

1,363

1,240

1,211

1,313

1,261

1,211

1,228

1,132

1,178

1,115

1,123

1,206

1,219

1,245

1,209

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

67,603

69,931

69,931

70,192

70,298

70,451

70,759

71,031

70,702

70,484

69,949

69,625

69,147

69,402

69,805

Self-employed w o rk e rs .........................................

6,305

6,652

6,689

6,731

6,812

6,781

6,737

6,752

6,899

6,825

6,813

6,648

6,666

6,765

6,879

472

455

450

449

430

417

409

379

397

376

363

411

445

441

399

Other industries
Unpaid family workers

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

PERSONS AT W O R K '

Nonagricultural industries

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

85,693

88,133

88,855

88,723

88,638

88,617

89,180

89,454

88,985

88,585

87,660

87,680

87,910

87,454

88,270

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

70,543

72,647

73,053

73,159

73,204

72,997

73,137

73,223

73,110

72,749

71,807

71,224

71,206

70,649

71,478

Part time for economic re a s o n s ..........................

3,216
1,249
1,967

3,281

3,298

3,167

3,315

3,392

3,406

3,418

3,816

4,349

3,999

4,113

4,148

1,325
1,956

1,401
1,897

1,273
1,894

1,354
1,961

1,413
1,979

3,519
1,491

3,513

Usually work full t im e ....................................
Usually work part t im e ..................................

2,028

1,549
1,964

1,380
2,026

1,463
1,955

1,709
2,107

2,064
2,285

1,781
2,217

1,847
2,266

1,692
2,456

Part time for noneconomic re a s o n s ...................

11,934

12,205

12,504

12,397

12,119

12,228

12,524

12,718

12,469

12,418

12,037

12,106

12,706

12,692

12,644

Full-time schedules

'Excludes persons "with a job but not at w ork” during the survey period for such reasons as
vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.


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

NOTE: The monthly data in this table have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through 1979.

69

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
4.

Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[Unemployment rates]
A nnual av erag e

1979

1980

S e le c te d c a t e g o r ie s
1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

Total, 16 years and o v e r .............................................

6.0

5.8

5.9

5.8

5.9

Men, 20 years and o v e r ......................................

4.2

4.1

4.2

4.2

4.2

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

5.8

5.9

6.2

6.0

7.8

7.7

7.8

7.6

4.2

4.7

4.6

6.2
4.9

7.0

4.3

5.9

6.6

6.7

6.7

6.6

C H A R A C T E R IS T IC

Women, 20 years and over ...............................
Both sexes, 1 6 -1 9 years

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

White, totai ............................................................
Men, 20 years and over

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

6.0

5.7

5.9

5.5

5.7

5.6

5.7

5.8

5.7

5.7

6.3

6.6

6.5

6.7

6.5

16.3

16.1

16.6

16.2

16.4

15.9

16.0

16.3

16.5

15.9

16.2

19.2

18.5

19.0

19.1
6.8

5.2

5.1

5.3

5.1

5.1

5.1

5.1

5.4

5.3

5.4

6.2

6.9

6.8

6.9

3.7

3.6

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

3.7

4.1

4.0

4.4

5.3

5.9

6.0

6.0

5.9

Women, 20 years and o v e r ........................

5.2

5.0

5.2

4.8

5.0

4.9

5.0

5.1

5.2

4.9

5.5

5.8

5.8

5.9

5.8

Both sexes, 1 6 -1 9 years ..........................

13.9

13.9

14.8

14.3

14.1

13.9

13.9

14.0

13.8

13.8

14.6

17.4

16.4

16.7

17.0

Black and other, to t a l...........................................

11.9

11.0

10.8

11.5

11.8

11.5

11.8

12.6

13.9

13.6

8.6

8.4

8.1

8.0

8.6

10.9
8,4

11.3

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

8.6

9.6

9.2

9.3

10.9

12.0

12.6

12.7

12.7

Women, 20 years and o v e r ........................

10.6

10.1

10.3

9.8

10.2

9.5

10.0

10.0

9.0

10.5

11.4

11.9

10.9

11.5

10.6

Both sexes, 1 6 -1 9 years ..........................

36.3

33.5

32.6

32.3

35.1

32.8

34.3

34.6

37.9

33.0

29.8

35.2

34.4

36.6

37.4

Men, 20 years and over

Married men, spouse p re s e n t.............................

11.3

2.7

2.9

4.1

4.7

4.9

5.1

4.9

Married women, spouse p re s e n t........................

5.5

5.1

5.3

4.8

5.2

4.8

5.0

5.2

5.4

5.3

5.7

6.3

6.1

6.2

6.1

8.5

8.3

7.9

7.7

8.4

8.4

8.4

9.2

8.5

8.7

9.3

8.3

8.4

8.9

8.9

2.9

2.9

2.9

3.4

3.1

3.4

13.6

Women who head fa m ilie s ..................................

2.8

2.8

14.2

Full-time w o rk e rs ..................................................

5.5

5.3

5.4

5.3

5.4

5.4

5.4

5.7

5.6

5.8

6.6

7.5

7.4

7.6

7.4

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

9.0

8.7

8.8

8.4

8.9

8.3

8.5

8.7

8.9

8.3

8.9

9.3

8.8

8.7

8.6

Unemployed 15 weeks and o v e r ........................

1.4

1.2

1.1

1.1

1.2

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.2

1.3

1.6

1.6

1.7

1.8

2.1

Labor force time lost'

6.5

6.3

6.4

6.2

6.4

6.4

6.4

6.7

6.6

6.8

7.5

8.8

8.3

8.5

8.3

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

O C C U P A T IO N

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

3.5

3.3

3.5

3.3

3.4

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.4

3.3

3.7

3.9

3.7

3.7

3.7

Professional and technical .................................

2.6

2.4

2.5

2.4

2.7

2.4

2.3

2.2

2.3

2.3

2.4

2.7

2.6

2.4

2.3

2.1
4.1

2.1

2.3

2.2

2.2

1.9

2.0

1.9

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.7

2.4

2.5

2.4

3.9

4.0

3.8

3.8

3.7

3.8

4.4

4.5

4.0

4.7

4.5

4.4

4.2

4.1

White-collar workers

Managers and administrators, except
farm ...................................................................
Salesworkers

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

4.9

4.6

4.9

4.5

4.7

4.4

4.6

4.8

4.7

4.5

5.1

5.4

5.3

5.4

5.4

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

6.9

6.9

7.3

7.1

7.2

7.5

7.2

8.0

9.7

11.3

11.5

4.5
8.4

4.7

4.3

4.6

4.9

4.4

4.8

5.4

6.7

8.1

8.0

11.5
7.4

11.4

4.6

8.0
4.9

7.7

Craft and kindred workers .................................

9.3

11.6

Clerical workers
Blue-collar workers

Operatives, except transport

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

14.0

13.8

14.6

13.6

5.2

5.4

6.2

6.1

5.6

5.2

5.0

6.9

6.7

6.6

8.9

9.0

10.5

10.5

10.0

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

10.7

10.8

11.3

11.0

10.7

12.2

12.2

12.3

12.0

13.0

14.1

15.4

16.2

16.1

16.5

Service w o rk e rs ............................................................

7,4

7.1

7.1

6.7

6.8

6.6

6.6

6.9

6.9

7.1

8.0

8.5

8.1

8.4

8.6

F a rm w o rk e rs .................................................................

3.8

3.8

3.9

4.1

4.3

4.5

4.3

4.4

3.9

4.0

5.0

4.8

4.2

4.8

5.6

Transport equipment operatives ........................
Nonfarm laborers

8.1

8.9

9.0

9.1

9.0

9.0

9.9

9.2

8.1

IN D U S T R Y

Nonagricultural private wage and salary w orkers2
Construction ..........................................................

5.9

5.7

6.0

5.9

5.8

5.8

6.2

6.0

6.2

7.1

8.2

8.3

8.2

8.0

10.6

10.2

10.1

9.6

9.9

10.2

10.3

10.8

10.5

13.0

15.1

17.5

16.5

16.1

18.3

M a n u fa ctu rin g .......................................................

5.5

5.5

5.9

6.0

5.8

6.0

5.9

5.9

6.7

6.4

6.5

7.9

9.9

9.9

10.3

9.3

Durable goods .............................................

4.9

5.0

5.4

5.3

5.5

5.6

6.7

6.3

6.4

8.3

10.5

11.2

11.2

10.2

6.3

6.4

6.8

7.1

6.8

6.3

5.5
6.4

6.8

6.7

6.7

7.4

8.8

8.0

8.8

7.9

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

3.7

3,7

3.7

4.0

3.8

4.2

4.1

4.4

4.4

3.8

4.6

5.1

5.2

5.8

5.7

Wholesale and retail t r a d e .................................

6.9

6.5

6.4

6.4

6.5

6.4

6.6

6.4

6.3

7.0

7.6

8.0

7.5

7.6

Nondurable g o o d s .........................................
Transportation and public utilities

Finance and service industries ..........................

5.1

6.5
4.9

5.2

4.7

4.9

4.6

4.7

4.6

4.6

4.9

5.7

5.7

5.6

3.9

3.7

3.7

3.3

4.0

3.6

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2

5.1
4.4

5.7

Government workers ..................................................

4.2

3.5

4.1

4.0

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

8.8

9.1

9.9

10.0

9.9

10.1

9.4

10.3

9.2

10.2

11.9

11.7

9 .7

10.8

13.8

Agricultural wage and salary workers

' Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a
percent of potentially available labor force hours.
2 Includes mining, not shown separately.

70


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

NOTE: The monthly data in this table have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through
1979.

5.

Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted
1979

A nnual a v erag e

1980

Sex and age

1978

Total, 16 years and o v e r ..............................................

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

6.0

5.8

5.9

5.8

5.9

5.8

5.9

6.2

6.0

6.2

7.0

7.8

7.7

7.8

7.6

16.3

16.1

16.6

16.2

16.4

15.9

16.0

16.3

16.5

15.9

16.2

19.2

18.5

19.0

19.1

16 to 17 years ..............................................

18.7

21.7

19.8

20.9

228

18 to 19 years ..............................................

16 to 19 years

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

19.3

18.1

18.5

16.9

18.4

17.3

18.0

19.0

18.7

17.4

14.2

14.6

15.4

15.6

15.0

14.7

14.5

14.0

15.1

14.7

14.4

17.7

18.0

17.7

16.6

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

9.5

9.0

9.3

9.2

9.6

8.8

9.8

10.1

9.5

9.7

11.4

12.7

12.4

12.3

11.9

25 years and o v e r ................................................

4.0

3.9

4.0

3.9

4.0

4.0

3.8

4.2

4.1

4.4

5.0

5.5

5.5

5.7

5.5

4.2

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.1

4,4

4.5

4.7

5.4

5.9

6.0

6.1

5.9

20 to 24 years

25 to 54 years ..............................................

4.2

4.1

55 years and o v e r .........................................

3.2

3.0

3.1

2.9

3.0

2.7

2.7

3.5

2.8

2.8

3.4

3.6

3.4

3.5

3.6

Men, 16 years and o v e r ......................................

5.2

5.1

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.7

5.5

5.7

6.7

7.7

7.8

7.8

7.7

16 to 19 years ..............................................

15.7

15.8

16.3

16.1

15.7

15.8

15.6

16.2

15.6

14.8

16.1

19.7

19.5

19.7

20.2

16 to 17 y e a r s .......................................

19.2

17.9

18.0

16.7

17.1

17.8

17.9

19.0

18.0

15.9

18.3

22.0

21.8

20.8

24.6

18 to 19 y e a r s .......................................

13.2

14.2

15.1

15.3

14.4

14.0

13.6

13.9

14.1

14.0

14.2

17.9

19.3

18.7

17.0

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

9.1

8.6

8.8

8.8

9.5

8.4

9.4

10.4

9.9

10.4

12.3

13.7

13.8

13.4

13.9

25 years and o v e r .........................................

6.

1979

3.3

3.3

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.2

3.7

3.6

3.9

4.7

5.5

5.6

5,4

25 to 54 y e a r s .......................................

3.4

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.5

3.8

3.4

3.8

3.8

4.2

5.0

5.7

5.8

6.1

5.7

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

3.1

2.9

3.1

3.4

2.8

2.8

2.6

2.6

3.5

2.6

2.7

3.4

3.5

3.8

3.9

4.0

Women, 16 years and over ...............................

7.2

6.8

7.0

6.6

6.9

6.6

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.8

7.3

7.8

7.5

7.8

7.6

5.3

16 to 19 years ..............................................

17.0

16.4

17.0

16.4

17.2

16,1

16.4

16.3

17.6

17.3

16.3

18.7

17.3

18.2

17.8

16 to 17 y e a r s .......................................

19.5

18.3

19.0

17.2

19.8

16.7

18.0

19.1

19.5

19.2

19.1

21.4

17.6

20.9

20.7

18 to 19 y e a r s .......................................

15.3

15.0

15.7

15.9

15.6

15.5

15.5

14.2

16.2

15.6

14.6

17.5

16.6

16.6

16.1

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

10.1

9.6

9.8

9.6

9.7

9.3

10.2

9.8

9.1

9.0

10.2

11.6

10.8

11.1

9.7

25 years and o v e r .........................................

5.1

4.8

4.9

4.6

4.9

4.7

4.7

4.9

4.9

5.0

5.5

5.7

5.6

5.7

25 to 54 y e a r s ......................................

5.4

5.2

5.3

5.0

5.2

5.0

5.1

5.2

5.4

5.5

6.0

6.1

6.1

6.2

6.2

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

3.3

3.2

3.2

2.9

3.4

2.9

2.9

3.4

3.0

2.9

3.4

3.6

2.8

3.0

3.0

June

J u ly

Aug.

4,360

5.7

Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
1979

1980

R e a s o n fo r u n e m p lo y m e n t
Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

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

2,680

2,632

2,731

2,729

2,728

2,988

2,907

3,047

3,611

4,301

4,625

4,558

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

915

855

929

987

944

1,019

1,031

1,129

1,424

1,944

2,117

1,975

1,692

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

1,765

1,777

1,802

1,742

1,784

1,969

1,876

1,918

2,188

2,357

2,508

2,583

2,668

Left las: j o b ..........................................................................................................

875

825

835

845

800

779

813

788

926

992

898

857

897

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

1,788

1,760

1,762

1,698

1,771

1,797

1,784

1,803

1,967

2,015

1,822

1,868

1,895

Seeking first j o b ...................................................................................................

745

801

804

736

858

811

827

805

743

884

863

930

867

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

100.0

100.0

100,0

100.0

100.0

100,0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Job lo s e r s ............................................................................................................

44.0

43.7

44.5

45.4

44.3

46.9

45.9

47.3

49.8

52.5

56.3

55.5

15.0

14.2

15.2

16.4

15.3

16.0

16.3

17.5

19.6

23.7

25.8

24.0

21.1

29.5

29.4

29.0

29.0

30.9

29.6

29.8

30.2

28.8

30.6

31.5

33.3

Job eavers ..........................................................................................................

29.0
14.4

13.7

13.6

14.1

13.0

12.2

12.8

12.2

12.8

12.1

10.9

10.4

11.2

Reentrants

29.4

29.2

28.7

28.3

288

28.2

28.2

28.0

27.1

24.6

22.2

22.7

23.6

12.2

13.3

13.1

12.3

13.9

12.7

13.1

12.5

10.3

10.8

10.5

11.3

10.8

2.6

2.5

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.9

2.8

2.9

3.5

4.1

4.4

4.3

4.2

NUM BER OF UNEM PLOYED

Los: las: job
On layoff

Other job losers
Reentered labor force

P E R C E N T D IS T R IB U T IO N

Total unemployed
On layoff

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

Other job losers

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

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

New e n tra n ts ...........................................................................................

54.4

UNEM PLOYED AS A PERCENT OF
T H E C IV IL IA N L A B O R F O R C E

Job lo s e r s ............................................................................................................
Job le a v e 's ..........................................................................................................

.8

.8

.8

.8

.8

.7

.8

.8

.9

.9

.9

.8

.9

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

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.6

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.9

1.7

1.8

1.8

New e n tra n ts .......................................................................................................

.7

.8

.8

.7

.8

.8

.8

.8

.7

1.9
,8

.8

.9

.8

Reentrants

7.

Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[N u m b e rs in th o u sa n d s]
1979

A nnual av erag e

1980

W e e k s o f u n e m p lo y m e n t

1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

Less than 5 w e e k s .......................................................

2,793

2,869

3,168

2,778

2,955

2,919

2,916

3,184

2,995

2,995

3,309

3,872

3,333

3,363

3,268

5 to 14 weeks ..............................................................

1,875

1,892

1,738

2,035

1,963

1,869

1,966

1,907

2,081

2,169

2,391

2,697

2,922

2,700

2,490

15 weeks and over

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

1,379

1,202

1,185

1,152

1,195

1,191

1,230

1,334

1,286

1,363

1,629

1,722

1,766

1,915

2,184

15 to 26 w e e k s .....................................................

746

684

658

644

678

660

711

795

790

776

953

1,014

1,027

1,057

1,259

27 weeks and over ..............................................

633

518

527

508

517

531

519

539

496

587

676

709

739

858

925

Average (mean) duration, in w e e k s ..........................

11.9

10.8

10.7

10.7

10.5

10.6

10.5

10.5

10.7

11.0

11.3

10.5

11.7

11.6

12.6

NOTE: The monthly data in these tables have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through 1979.


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

71

EM PLOYM ENT, HOU RS, AND EARNINGS DATA FRO M ESTABLISHM ENT SURVEYS

E mployment , hours , a n d earnings data in this section are
compiled from payroll records reported monthly on a volun­
tary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperat­
ing State agencies by 166,000 establishments representing all
industries except agriculture. In most industries, the sampling
probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most
large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An estab­
lishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant,
for example, or warehouse.) Self-employed persons and others
not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the
survey because they are excluded from establishment records.
This largely accounts for the difference in employment figures
between the household and establishment surveys.
Labor turnover data in this section are compiled from per­
sonnel records reported monthly on a voluntary basis to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperating State agencies.
A sample of 40,000 establishments represents all industries in
the manufacturing and mining sectors of the economy.

Bureau of Labor Statistics computes spendable earnings from gross
weekly earnings for only two illustrative cases: (1) a worker with no
dependents and (2) a married worker with three dependents.
Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or
nonsupervisory workers for which pay was received and are different
from standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the por­
tion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular
hours and for which overtime premiums were paid.
<

Labor turnover is the movement of all wage and salary workers
from one employment status to another. Accession rates indicate the
average number of persons added to a payroll in a given period per
100 employees; separation rates indicate the average number dropped
from a payroll per 100 employees. Although month-to-month changes
in employment can be calculated from the labor turnover data, the re­
sults are not comparable with employment data from the employment
and payroll survey. The labor turnover survey measures changes dur­
ing the calendar month while the employment and payroll survey
measures changes from midmonth to midmonth.

Notes on the data
Definitions
Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holi­
day and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the
12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 per­
cent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establish­
ment which reports them.
Production workers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker
supervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with
production operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 14-20 in­
clude production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction
workers in construction; and nonsupervisory workers in transporta­
tion and public utilities, in wholesale and retail trade, in finance, in­
surance, and real estate, and in services industries. These groups
account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private
nonagricultural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers
receive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime
or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special
payments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted to eliminate the effects
of price change. The Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from aver­
age hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two types
of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments:
fluctuations in overtime premiums in manufacturing (the only sector
for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes and
seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and lowwage industries. Spendable earnings are earnings from which estimat­
ed social security and Federal income taxes have been deducted. The

72


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

Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are
periodically adjusted to comprehensive counts of employment (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the re­
lease of June 1980 data, published in the August 1980 issue of the R e ­
view. Consequently, data published in the R e v ie w prior to that issue
are not necessarily comparable to current data. Complete comparable
historical unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a
Supplement to Employment and Earnings (unadjusted data from April
1977 through March 1980 and seasonally adjusted data from January
1974 through March 1980) and in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n ite d
S ta tes, 1 9 0 9 - 7 8 , BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods).
Data on recalls were shown for the first time in tables 12 and 13 in
the January 1978 issue of the R eview . For a detailed discussion of the
recalls series, along with historical data, see “New Series on Recalls
from the Labor Turnover Survey,” E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, Decem­
ber 1977, pp. 10-19.
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household
and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur­
veys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview , December 1969, pp. 9-2 0 . See also
B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s f o r S u rv e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bu­
reau of Labor Statistics, 1976).
The formulas used to construct the spendable average weekly earn­
ings series reflect the latest provisions of the Federal income tax and
social security tax laws. For the spendable average weekly earnings
formulas for the years 1978-80, see E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s,
March 1980, pp. 10-11. Real earnings data are adjusted using the
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
(CPI-W).

8.

Employment by industry, 1950 79

[N o n a g ricu ltu ra l p a yro ll data, in thousands]

C o n s tru e T o ta l

t io n

1950 ...................................................................

45,197

901

1951

47,819

929

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

M a n u fa c -

M in in g
tu r in g

2,364

15,241

2,637

T ra n s -

W h o le -

F in a n c e ,

p o r t a t io n

s a le

in s u r -

and

and

ance,

p u b lic

r e ta il

a n d re a l

u t ilit ie s

tra d e

e s ta te

4,034

16,393

9,386

4,226

9,742

2,635

6,751

2,727

7,015

1,888
1,956

G o v e rn m e n t

S e rv ic e s

S ta te
T o ta l

F e d e ra l

5,357

6,026

5,547

6,389

1,928

4,098

2,302

4,087

1952 ..............................................

48,793

898

2,668

16,632

4,248

10,004

2,812

7,192

2,035

5,699

6,609

2,420

4,188

1953 ..........................................................

50,202

866

2,659

17,549

4,290

10,247

2,854

7,393

2,111

5,835

6,645

2,305

4,340

1954 ............................................................

48,990

791

2,646

16,314

4,084

10,235

2,867

7,368

2,200

5,969

6,751

2,188

4,563

1955 .....................................................

50,641

792

2,839

16,882

4,141

10,535

2,926

7,610

2,298

6,240

6,914

2,187

4,727

1956 ......................................................................

52,369

822

3,039

17,243

4,244

10,858

3,018

7,840

2,389

6,497

7,278

2,209

1957 .....................................................

52,853

828

2,962

17,174

4,241

10,886

3,028

7,858

2,438

6,708

7,616

2,217

5,399

1958 ......................................................................

51,324

751

2,817

15,945

3,976

10,750

2,980

7,770

2,481

6,765

7,839

2,191

5,648

19591 ...................................................................

53,268

732

3,004

16,675

4,011

11,127

3,082

8,045

2,549

7,087

8,083

2,233

5,850

1960 ..................................................

54,189

712

2,926

16,796

4,004

11,391

3,143

8,248

2,629

7,378

8,353

2,270

6,083

1961

53,999

672

2,859

16,326

3,903

11,337

3,133

8,204

2,688

7,620

8,594

2,279

6,315

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

5,069

1962 ..................................................

55,549

650

2,948

16,853

3,906

11,566

3,198

8,368

2,754

7,982

8,890

2,340

1963 .................................................................
1964
.......................................................

56,653

635

3,010

11,778

3,248

8,530

2,830

8,277

9,225

2,358

6,868

634

3,097

16,995
17,274

3,903

58,283

3,951

12,160

3,337

8,823

2,911

8,660

9,596

2,348

7,248

9,036

10,074

2,378

7,696

1965 ..............................................................

60,765

632

1966 .................................................................

63,901

627

,

3,232

18,062

4,036

12,716

3,466

9,250

2,977

3,317

19,214

4,158

13,245

3,597

9,648

3,058

9,498

6,550

10,784

2,564

1967 ..................................................

65,803

613

3,248

19,447

4,268

13,606

3,689

9,917

3,185

10,045

11,391

2,719

8,672

1968 ................................................

67,897

606

3,350

19,781

4,318

14,099

3,779

10,320

3,337

10,567

11,839

2,737

9,102

1969 ................................................

70,384

619

3,575

20,167

4,442

14,705

3,907

10,798

3,512

11,169

12,195

2,758

9,437

1970 ............................................................

70,880

623

3,588

19,367

4,515

15,040

3,993

11,047

3,645

11,548

12,554

2,731

9,823

1971

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

8,220

71,214

609

3,704

15,352

4,001

11,351

3,772

11,797

12,881

2,696

10,185

1972 ..............................................................

73,675

628

3,889

19,151

4,541

15,949

4,113

11,836

3,908

12,276

13,334

2,684

10,649

1973 ...........................................

76,790

642

4,097

20,154

4,656

16,607

4,277

12,329

4,046

18,623

4,476

12,857

13,732

2,663

11,068

1974 ....................................

78,265

697

4,020

20,077

4,725

16,987

4,433

12,554

4,148

13,441

14,170

2,724

11,446

1975 ......................................

76,945

752

3,525

18,323

4,542

17,060

4,415

12,645

4,165

13,892

14,686

2,748

11,937

1976 ............................................................

79,382

779

3,576

18,997

4,582

17,755

4,546

13,209

4,271

14,551

14,871

2,733

12,138

1977 ......................................

82,471

813

3,851

19,682

4,713

18,516

4,708

13,808

4,467

15,303

15,127

2,727

12,399

1978 ..................................

86,697

851

4,229

20,505

4,923

19,542

4,969

14,573

4,724

16,252

15,672

2,753

12,919

1979 ...............................

89,886

960

4,483

21,062

5,141

20,269

5,204

15,066

4,974

17,078

15,920

2,773

13,147

'D a ta include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.

9.

Employment by State

[N o n a g ricu ltu ra l p a y ro ll da ta, in thousands]

Alabama

J u ly 1 9 7 9

Ju n e 1980

J u ly 1 9 8 0

1,332.1

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

1,369.8

1,345.2

A la s k a ...................

180.8

173.7

Arizona

952.3

981.1

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

964 4

S ta te

J u ly 1 9 7 9

Ju n e 1980

J u ly 1 9 8 0

M ontana........................................................................

291.9

292.8

281.9

N e b ra s k a .......................................................

630.5

632.9

622.2

Nevada .......................................................

388.0

400.3

403.3

Arkansas ..............

748.0

744.8

737.5

382.8

386.1

384.7

C a lifo rn ia ..............

9,602.5

9,820.5

9,673.0

New Jersey ..............................................................

3,077.1

3,089.7

3,076.6

Colorado ..............

1,219.2

New M e x ic o ......................................................................
New Y o r k ..........................................................

465.4

477.2

475.4

1,406.4

1,258.8
1,417.8

1,249.8

Connecticut .........

7,220.4

7,240.3

7,183.8

D e la w a re ..............

261.1

258.2

256.3

1,395.8

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

North Carolina ..........................................................

District of Columbia

635.5

622.1

F lo rid a ...................

3,339.0

3,515.3

3,474.0

Ohio

North Dakota .....................................................
.................................................................

G e o rg ia .................

2,106.0

2,127.1

2,125.8

H a w a ii...................

403.7

410.4

415.8

Oklahoma .................................................................
Oregon .................................................................

Id a h o ......................

338.5

330.7

326.0

Pennsylvania

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

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

4,930.8

4,831.2

4,819.3

Rhode Island

In d ia n a ...................

Illinois

2,280.2

2,217.0

2,201.3

South Carolina .......................................................

Iowa

1,109.1

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

1,125.0
941.4

953.6

936.7

Kentucky ..............

1,244,0

1,203.6

1,189.4

L o u is ia n a ..............

1,494.7

1,534.3

1,541.4

427.1

425.2

414.3

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

Kansas

Maine

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

1,090.3

South D a k o ta ...................................................................

2,355.4

2,429.9

248.0

250.0

247.9

4,511.1

4,436.6

4,363.1
1,136.0
1,019.4

1,094.7

1,142.2

1,053.7

1,043.2

4,852.6
397.1

4,831.1

1,177.4

1,188.5

244.5

395.0

245.9

1,164.0
241.1

Tennessee .................................................................

1,787.9

1,765.7

1,740.7

Texas
U ta h '

5,628.0

5,775.6

5,777.0

550.5

559.8

197.8

198.6

554.5
196.4
2,113.0

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

V e rm o n t..........................................................

M a ry la n d ..............

1,635.7

1,639.8

1,642.3

V irginia.....................................................

2,116.3

2,132.7

Massachusetts . . .
Michigan ..............

2,612.4

2,689.8

2,705.8

Washington

1,582.5

1,632.1

3,614.6

3,431.8

3,327.7

634.3

636.2

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

1,790.9

1,814.8

1,793.1

West Virginia ......................................................................
W isconsin..........................................................

650.9

Minnesota

1,979.5

1,991.6

1,974.4

Mississippi ..............

841.6

820.2

813.5

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

207.0

219.7

219.8

2,011.4

1,983.8

1,964.5
35.9

36.7

36.2

Missouri

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

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

Virgin Islands .................................................................

1,619.7

’ Revised series, not strictly comparable with previously published data.


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

73

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
10.

Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Nonagricultural payroll data, In thousands]
1980

1979

A nnual a v erag e
In d u s t r y d i v is i o n a n d g r o u p

TO TAL

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

M IN IN G

C O N S T R U C T IO N

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Production w o rk e rs ......................................
D u r a b le g o o d s

Production w o rk e rs ......................................

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly P

A u g .p

86,697

89,886

90,093

90,629

91,062

91,288

91,394

89,630

89,781

90,316

90,761

90,849

91,049

89,815

90,009

851

960

989

983

984

986

985

982

987

996

1,006

1,024

1,049

1,028

1,033

4,611

4,630

4,708
20,021

4,229

4,483

4,863

4,801

4,792

4,698

4,536

4,194

4,109

4,150

4,311

4,471

20,505

21,062

21,096

21,295

21,193

21,055

20,987

20,777

20,730

20,793

20,533

20,250

20,201

19,737

14,734

15,085

15,048

15,265

15,170

15,034

14,964

14,738

14,678

14,727

14,466

14,172

14,093

13,653

1,939

12,274

12,772

12,683

12,891

12,824

12,744

12,733

12,600

12,599

12,647

12,414

12,150

12,065

11,761

11,811

8,805

9,120

8,979

9,190

9,131

9,054

9,040

8,885

8,869

8,909

8,672

8,409

8,307

8,022

8,072

716.9

678.4

754.7

766.1

785.0

780.0

757.2

737.4

717.4

654.8

668.0

661.9

679.6

Furniture and fix tu re s ...........................................

494.1

499.3

497.1

499.6

502.5

503.1

501.8

498.0

494.6

494.1

488.7

469.1

460.8

437.7

444.0

Stone, clay, and glass products ........................

698.2

709.7

726.5

721.6

718.6

710.3

697.4

678.2

674.7

679.0

675.5

668.1

666.2

657.5

665.1

Primary metal in d u strie s......................................

1,214.9

1,250.2

1,250.6

1,250.6

1,231.4

1,222.6

1,209.9

1,207.2

1,205.1

1,203.7

1,193.8

1,149.8

1,112.9

1,056.7

1,055.9

Lumber and wood products ...............................

788.2

Fabricated metal products ..................................

1,672.6

1,733.8

1,733.3

1,725.2

1,696.8

Machinery, except e le c tric a l...............................

2,325.5

2,481.6

2,489.7

2,513.8

2,465.1

2,458.7

2,471.6

2,538.5

2,536.5

2,539.9

2,523.5

2,509.3

2,486.1

2,440.3

2,425.6

2,006.1

2,124.3

2,105.7

2,152.8

2,162.0

2,164.0

2,171.9

2,162.9

2,157.7

2,167.7

2,156.2

2,120.2

2,102.2

2,066.0

2,057.6

2,087.4

1,802.4

1,7237

1,711.7

1,731.4

718.9

Electric and electronic e q u ip m e n t......................

1,699.4

1,703.8

1,671.4

1,619.8

1,598.6

1,535.2

1,565.2

2,002.8

2,082.8

1,965.5

2,076.5

2,044.2

2,079.3

1,975.8

1,983.1

2,005.6

1,891.1

1,835.1

1,847.0

1,804.0

Instruments and related products ......................

653.1

688.9

693.7

691.6

694.6

694.9

698.8

697.7

700.5

703.6

702.2

699.4

702.9

697.9

695.9

Miscellaneous manufacturing .............................

451.5

445.6

454.5

457.1

459.7

455.5

439.4

427.7

428.8

432.9

433.0

424.6

420,1

403.9

419.4
8,210

Transportation e q u ip m e n t....................................

8,231

8,290

8,413

8,404

8,369

8,311

8,254

8,177

8,131

8,146

8,119

8,100

8,136

7,976

Production w o r k e r s ......................................

5,929

5,965

6,069

6,075

6,039

5,980

5,924

5,853

5,809

5,818

5,794

5,763

5,786

5,631

5,867

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts ..................................

1,724,1

1,728.1

1,828.8

1,834.5

1,781.8

1,736.3

1,706.2

1,659.9

1,644.1

1,641.1

1,626.2

1,638.5

1,676.8

1,711.7

1,783.6

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s

Tobacco manufactures

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

Textile mill p ro d u c ts ..............................................
Apparel and other textile products

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

70.6

69.9

73.8

77.5

77.4

68.6

70.8

69.1

67.1

64.4

62.9

62.7

64.6

62.5

70.4

899.1

888.5

886.8

885.0

886.1

890.4

889.7

884.0

884.6

886.9

882.1

870.6

853.2

819.5

854.1

1,332.3

1,312.5

1,308.1

1,308.8

1,317.3

1,305.8

1,287.1

1,282.0

1,305.8

1,318.4

1,304.2

1,299.0

1,310.5

1,234.9

1,307.7

6987

706.7

715.6

710.5

705.9

703.5

701.9

701.8

698.8

692.4

695.0

1,192.0

1,239.5

1,242.5

1,243.0

709.3
1,251.4

707.8

Printing and p u b lis h in g .........................................

1,262.0

1,268.5

1,266.3

1,270.4

1,272.1

1,270.4

1,267.8

1,271.3

682.3
1,263.4

1,262.0

Chemicals and allied products ..........................

1,095.5

1,110.7

1,119.0

1,112.7

1,113.7

1,113.9

1,114.2

1,113.1

1,112.1

1,118.1

1,120.6

1,119.5

1,122.2

1,109.8

1,105.3
211.4

Paper and allied products

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

689.2

Petroleum and coal products .............................

207.7

210.0

214.1

213.7

213.5

212.6

210.6

208.6

155.9

153.1

173.6

203.4

209.1

211.0

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products

754.5

775.6

774.1

770.2

770.8

765.9

755.6

750.3

746.3

746.5

737.2

702.4

688.5

659.5

682.7

Leather and leather products .............................

256.8

248.0

250.4

247.9

247.9

247.6

245.2

240.3

242.6

243.4

243.3

243.2

244.7

22&9

243.2

4,923

5,141

5,197

5,229

5,233

5,243

5,240

5,136

5,130

5,143

5,147

5,167

5,185

5,141

5,136

20,562

20,488

20,545

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T I L IT IE S

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E

W HO LESA LE TRADE

R E T A IL T R A D E

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

S E R V IC E S

GOVERNMENT

74

1978

19,542

20,269

20,296

20,425

20,474

20,756

21,114

20,325

20,155

20,226

20,373

20,497

4,969

5,204

5,243

5,239

5,266

5,282

5,264

5,241

5,250

5,269

5,265

5,263

5,287

5,271

5,278

15,208

15,474

15,850

15,084

14,905

14,957

15,108

15,234

15,275

15,217

15,267

14,573

15,066

15,053

15,186

4,724

4,974

5,068

5,015

5,025

5,039

5,047

5,052

5,061

5,085

5,104

5,137

5,201

5,228

5,223

16,252

17,078

17,315

17,238

17,297

17,284

17,271

17,135

17,317

17,478

17,636

17,747

17,846

17,961

17,951

16,651

16,556

16,394

15,672

15,920

15,269

15,643

16,064

16,227

16,214

16,029

16,292

16,445

15,602

15,392

F e d e ra l...................................................................

2,753

2,773

2,844

2,751

2,756

2,760

2,770

2,763

2,803

2,869

3,103

2,963

2,995

2,949

2,874

State and local .....................................................

12,919

13,147

12,425

12,892

13,308

13,467

13,444

13,266

13,489

13,576

13,548

13.593

13,399

12,653

12,518


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

11.

Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[N o n a g ricu ltu ra l p a y ro ll data, in thousands]
1979

1980

In d u s t r y d i v i s i o n a n d g r o u p
Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly p

A u g .p

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

90,222

90,283

90,441

90,552

90,678

91,031

91,186

91,144

90,951

90,468

90,047

89,865

90,066

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

974

976

982

985

992

999

1,007

1,009

1,012

1,023

1,029

1,011

1,017

TO TAL

M IN IN G

C O N S T R U C T IO N

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

4,499

4,507

4,529

4,553

4,615

4,745

4,659

4,529

4,467

4,436

4,379

4,319

4,355

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

21,055

21,071

21,043

20,966

20,983

20,971

20,957

20,938

20,642

20,286

20,014

19,812

19,903

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Production w o r k e r s ...............................................................................
D u r a b le g o o d s

Production w o rk e rs ...............................................................................
Lumber and wood products ........................................................................

15,046

15,058

15,025

14,948

14,956

14,911

14,871

14,850

14,550

14,186

13,931

13,757

13,846

12,782

12,822

12,764

12,693

12,706

12,681

12,715

12,707

12,442

12,140

11,947

11,807

11,829

9,103

9,129

9,069

9,001

9,009

8,953

8,967

8,961

8,686

8,386

8,205

8,082

8,101

737

764

767

768

757

746

743

745

689

654

648

645

659

Furniture and fix tu re s ....................................................................................

499

497

498

498

497

497

495

494

491

472

461

448

445

Stone, clay, and glass products .................................................................

710

708

709

704

704

705

705

700

680

663

647

642

650

Primary metal in d u strie s...............................................................................

1,250

1,242

1,236

1,230

1,219

1,215

1,214

1,209

1,193

1,144

1,096

1,050

1,055

Fabricated metal products ..........................................................................

1,713

1,723

1,723

1,722

1,718

1,707

1,711

1,711

1,678

1,620

1,584

1,548

1,567

Machinery, except e le c tric a l........................................................................

2,509

2,518

2,478

2,460

2,459

2,532

2,529

2,530

2,518

2,517

2,476

2,448

2,445

Electric and electronic e q u ip m e n t..............................................................
Transportation e q u ip m e n t.............................................................................

2,109

2,140

2,149

2,150

2,163

2,169

2,168

2,176

2,167

2,127

2,094

2,078

2,060

2,089

2,090

2,063

2,033

2,057

1,970

2,006

2,006

1,885

1,819

1,831

1,836

1,842

Instruments and related products ..............................................................

693

693

696

695

698

699

702

705

703

700

696

697

695

Miscellaneous manufacturing .....................................................................

446

444

444

444

445

444

440

439

438

424

414

415

411

8,273

8,249

8,279

8,273

8,277

8,290

8,242

8,231

8,200

8,146

8,067

8,005

8,074

Production w o r k e r s ...............................................................................

5,943

5,929

5,956

5,947

5,947

5,958

5,904

5,889

5,864

5,800

5,726

5,675

5,745

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts ..........................................................................

1,722

1,712

1,723

1,725

1,724

1,716

1,713

1,704

1,690

1,691

1,677

1,685

1,679

70

70

70

64

66

67

68

68

69

70

71

68

N o n d u r a b le g o o d s

Tobacco manufactures

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

Textile mill p ro d u c ts ......................................................................................
Apparel and other textile products
Paper and allied products

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

67

883

881

885

887

889

888

888

888

884

869

843

832

851

1,305

1,298

1,302

1,294

1,296

1,305

1,313

1,316

1,302

1,291

1,287

1,274

1,304

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

708

708

709

708

708

710

709

708

702

692

685

680

682

Printing and p u b lis h in g .................................................................................

1,244

1,245

1,251

1,259

1,261

1,269

1,273

1,274

1,272

1,268

1,269

1,265

1,263

Chemicals and allied products ...................................................................

1,121

1,123

1,097

1,110

1,110

1,114

1,116

1,118

1,121

1,123

1,120

1,112

1,101

Petroleum and coal products .....................................................................

209

211

212

212

213

214

161

157

175

203

205

206

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ...........................................

774

767

766

762

756

755

751

749

740

703

681

663

683

Leather and leather products .....................................................................

248

247

247

246

246

245

245

244

243

239

237

231

241

5,182

5,185

5,203

5,216

5,212

5,202

5,198

5,202

5,178

5,167

5,134

5,110

5,121

20,301

20,352

20,414

20,479

20,448

20,529

20,637

20,610

20,531

20,487

20,459

20,487

20,555

5,222

5,228

5,246

5,269

5,251

5,278

5,302

5,301

5,286

5,268

5,245

5,240

5,257

15,079

15,124

15,168

15,210

15,197

15,251

15,335

15,309

15,245

15,219

15,214

15,247

15,298

5,019

5,017

5,033

5,049

5,064

5,091

5,101

5,115

5,119

5,137

5,150

5,166

5,171

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S

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

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E

W HO LESA LE TR AD E

R E T A IL T R A D E

F IN A N C E , I N S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L E S T A T E

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

207

17,152

17,192

17,264

17,308

17,362

17,462

17,540

17,580

17,618

17,659

17,652

17,748

17,773

16,040

15,983

15,973

15,996

16,002

16,032

16,087

16,161

16,384

16,273

16,230

16,212

16,171

F e d e ra l............................................................................................................

2,811

2,762

2,769

2,773

2,773

2,791

2,826

2,886

3,115

2,960

2,951

2,893

2,840

State and local ..............................................................................................

13,229

13,221

13,204

13,223

13,229

13,241

13,261

13,275

13,269

13,313

13,279

13,319

13,331

S E R V IC E S

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

GOVERNMENT


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

75

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
12.

Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, 1977 to date

[Per 100 employees]
A nnual

Y ear

a v erag e

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

O c t.

S e p t.

Aug.

N ov.

Dec.

T o ta l a c c e s s io n s

1977 .......................................................

4.0

3.7

3.7

4.0

3.8

4.6

4.9

4.3

5.3

4.6

3.9

3.1

2.4

1978 .......................................................

4.1

3.8

3.2

3.8

4.0

4.7

4.9

4.4

5.4

4.9

4.3

3.3

2.4

4.1

3.0

2.2

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.4

3.8

3.9

4.7

4.8

4.3

3.8

3.3

3.5

3.1

3.4

3.9

p 3.8

1977 .......................................................

2.8

2.2

2.1

2.6

2.7

3.5

3.7

3.0

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.2

1.6

1978 .......................................................

3.1

2.5

2.2

2.7

2.9

3.6

3.9

3.3

4.2

3.9

3.5

2.6

1.7

1979 .......................................................

2.9

2.8

2.5

2.8

2.9

3.6

3.8

3.1

3.7

3.4

3.1

2.2

1.5

2.4

2.2

2.3

2.1

2.1

2.4

»2.1

.6

4.0

1979 .......................................................
1980 .......................................................

N e w h ir e s

1980 .......................................................

R e c a ll s

.6

.9

1.2

1.3

1.1

.9

.8

.8

1.0

.8

.7

1.0

.7

.8

.8

.8

.7

.8

.9

.7

.6

.5

.5

1979 .......................................................

.7

.9

.7

.7

.7

.8

.7

.9

.9

.8

.7

.5

.5

1.1

.9

.9

.8

1.0

1.2

p 1.4

1980 .......................................................

.9

.6

1977 .......................................................
1978 .......................................................

T o ta l s e p a r a tio n s

3.8

3.9

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.5

3.8

3.4

1978 .......................................................

3.9

3.6

3.1

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

4.1

5.3

4.9

4.1

3.5

3.4

4.0

3.8

3.2

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.3

5.7

4.7

4.2

3.8

3.5

4.1

3.5

3.7

4.7

4.8

4.4

p 4.2

1979 .......................................................
1980 .......................................................

3.5

4.3

4.9

3.4

1977 .......................................................

5.1

Q u it s

1977 .......................................................

1.8

1.4

1.3

1.6

1.7

1.9

1.9

1.9

3.1

2.8

1.9

1.5

1978 .......................................................

2.1

1.5

1.4

1.8

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.1

3.5

3.1

2.3

1.7

1,3

3.3

2.7

2.1

1.6

1.1

2.0

1979 .......................................................
1980 .......................................................

1.8

1.6

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.1

2.0

1.6

1.5

1.6

1.5

1.5

1.4

p 1.4

1,2

L a y o ffs

1977 .......................................................

1.1

1.7

1.4

1.0

.9

.8

.8

1.5

1.0

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.5

1978 .......................................................

.9

1.2

.9

.9

.8

,7

,7

1.1

8

.8

.9

1.0

1.4

1979 .......................................................

1.1

1.1

.8

.8

.9

.7

.9

1.4

1,3

1.1

1.2

1.5

1.7

1.6

1.2

1.3

2.3

2.5

2.2

p 2.0

1980 .......................................................

13.

Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by major industry group

[Per 100 employees]
S e p a ra tio n r a te s

A c c e s s io n r a te s

M a jo r in d u s try g ro u p

N e w h ir e s

T o ta l

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Seasonally a d ju s te d .................
D u r a b le g o o d s

J u ly

J u ly

June

J u ly

J u ly

June

J u ly

J u ly

June

J u ly

1979

1980

1980p

1979

1980

1980 p

1979

1980

1980 p

2.0

J u ly

June

J u ly

J u ly

June

J u ly

1979

1980

1980 p

1979

1980

1980 f

1979

1980

1980 p

0.9

1.2

1.4

4.3

4.4

4.2

2.0

1.4

1.4

1.4

2.2

3.9

5.1

3.8

1.9

1.4

1.3

1.3

2.9

1.7

4.0

4.5

4.0

1.7

1.1

1.1

1.1

2.6

2.1

5.0

3.6

2.1

2.3

.7

2.4

1.8

5.5

3.2

1.7

1.7

1.5

2.2

2.9

4.3

3.9

2.4

2.1

3.3

3.8
3.4

3.1

3.9

2.8

1.8

1.9

3.7

3.5

3.2

2.7

1.9

1.6

.7

1.2

1.4

.6
1.3

3.3
1.0

2.7

5.5

54

1.5

5.9

4.6

5.7

6.6

6.3

3.3

5.8

3.2

3.8

5.0
4.4

3.1

Furniture and fixtures

2.0

2.1

3.4

2.2

L a y o ffs

Q u it s

June

J u ly

Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ............
......................

T o ta l

R e c a ll s

Stone, clay, and glass products

4.3

4.2

4.1

2.0

.8

1.6

4.9

3.8

2.1

1.2

8

2.7

1.8

2.5
4,1

2.9

3.3

1.7

.8

.6

.5

1.9

1.8
2.4

3.8

Primary metal industries

3.1

6.7

.5

.5

1.1

5.4

3.7

3.9

3.1

2.1

1.9

.8

1,5

1.8

4.5

5.1

5.2
4.4

1.0

3.9

2.1

1.2

1.3

1.5

3.0

2.4

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

Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ..............

1.2

Machinery, except e le c tric a l............

3.0

2.6

2.2

2.3

1.8

1.3

.4

.5

.6

2.8

3.5

3.1

1.3

.9

.9

Electric and electronic equipment . .

3.5

2.9

2.6

2.5

1.9

1.3

.6

.5

.9

3.7

3.3
4.4

1.6

1.1

10
.8

.7

1.8

1.5

1.1

2.0

1.6

3.2

2.9

8

.9
2.5

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

3.3

3.9

3.1

1.9

1.5

1.4

.9

1.8

1.3

5.0

4.0
4,9

1.2

.8

Instruments and related products ..

2.7

2.4

2.2

2.9

1.8

.3

.3

.5

2.3

2.7

2.6

1.3

1.1

1.1

Miscellaneous m a n u fa ctu rin g.........

6.2

3.5
4.7

2.9
4.

5.3

4.4

3.0

3.0

1.5

1.5

2.2

6.1

5.0

5.5

2.6

1.7

1.9

2.2

2.4

5.2

4,5

4.5

3.8

3.1

2.8

1.2

4.8

4.2

4.6

2.5

1.8

1.6

1.9

7.6

6.5

5.2

4.8

2.5

2.7

6.0

5.0

5.8

3.3

2.3

18
2.4

1.4

7,9

1,2
2.4

1.5

9.2

1.8

1.9

2.6

2.1

.6

.3

.5

9

3.1
3.4

2.0

2.1

1.2
1.3

1.0

4.2
5.4

22
5.4

1.2

1.8

2.6

2.7

Transportation equipment

N o n d u ra b le g o o d s

Food and kindred products

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

.9

1.1

1.2

2.1

8

2.1

2.3

3.8

2.6

2.6

1.0

.6

10

5.5

5.4

3.9

3.3

3.3

1.8

1.4

1.9

2.7

2.0

2.6

2.9

2.2

1.8

1.3

.5

1.0

1.4

2.7

3.4

3.1

1.3

.8

8

6

1.9

1.5

2.9

2.9

4

.5

.5

3.3

3.3

3.1

1.7

.6

.9

8

1.7

.3
.7

.3

1.6

2.0

1.9

2,1
8

1.8

1.5

2.3
1.1

.6

6

.3
.4

.8
.7

8
.5

1.3
5.9

3.5

2.7
4.7

Tobacco m an u fa ctu re rs...................

4.2

2.8

Textile mill products

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

5.1

3.5

Apparel and other p ro d u c ts ............

6.0

4.9

Paper and allied products ..............

2.8

3.0

Printing and p u blishing.....................

3.5

3.5

1.9

2.2
3.7

2.9
1.5

Chemicals and allied products .
Petroleum and coal p ro d u c ts .........

.

2.5

5.2
4.1

7.1

6.3

2.6

2.3

2.9

2.0

.2
.1

.4

1.8

1.8

19

8

.6

.7

4.0

4.7

2.2

2.0

.9

1.4

2.3

1.7

1.6

4.3

4.4

2.6

1.2

3.1

6.2
5.7

2.9

7.8

5.5
114

5.4

5.8

4.0
4.7

9.0

4.2

2.9

3.3

Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products ..........................
Leather and leather p ro d u c ts .........

76


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

5.2
7.7

1.9

14.

Hours and earnings, by industry division, 1949-79

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls]

Year

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e

w e e k ly

w e e k ly

h o u r ly

w e e k ly

w e e k ly

h o u r ly

w e e k ly

w e e k ly

h o u r ly

w e e k ly

w e e k ly

h o u r ly

e a r n in g s

h o u rs

e a r n in g s

e a r n in g s

h o u rs

e a r n in g s

e a r n in g s

h o u rs

e a r n in g s

e a r n in g s

h o u rs

e a r n in g s

A v e ra g e

T o ta l p r iv a te

A v e ra g e

M in in g

A v e ra g e

C o n s tru c tio n

A v e ra g e

M a n u f a c t u r in g

1949 .....................

$50.24

39.4

$1,275

$62.33

36.3

$1,717

$67.56

37.7

$1,792

$53.88

39.1

$1,378

1950 .....................

53.13

39.8

1.335

67.16

37.9

1.772

69.68

37.4

1,863

58.32

40.5

1.440

1951 ......................

57.86

39.9

1.45

74.11

38.4

1.93

38.1

2.02

63.34

40.6

1.56

1952 ......................

60.65

39.9

1.52

77.59

38.6

2.01

82.86

38.9

2.13

66.75

40.7

1.64

1953 .....................

63.76

39.6

1.61

83.03

38.8

2.14

86.41

37.9

2.28

70.47

40.5

1.74

76.96

1954 ......................

64.52

39.1

1.65

82.60

38.6

2.14

88.91

37.2

2.39

70.49

39.6

1.78

1955 ......................

67.72

39.6

1.71

89.54

40.7

2.20

90.90

37.1

2.45

75.30

40.7

1.85

1956 ......................

70.74

39.3

1.80

95.06

40.8

2.33

96.38

37.5

2.57

78.78

40.4

1.95

1957 ......................

73.33

388

1.89

98.25

40.1

2.45

100.27

37.0

2.71

81.19

39.8

2.04

1958 ......................

75.08

385

1.95

96.08

38.9

36.8

2.82

82.32

39.2

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

78.78

390

2.02

103.68

40.5

2.56

108.41

37.0

2.93

88.26

40,3

2.19

1960 ......................

80.67

386

2,09

105.04

40.4

2.60

112.67

36.7

3.07

89.72

39.7

2.26

1959'

2.47

103.78

2.10

1961 ......................

82.60

38.6

2.14

106.92

40.5

2.64

118.08

36.9

3.20

92.34

39.8

1962 ......................

85.91

38.7

2.22

110.70

41.0

2.70

122.47

37.0

3.31

96.56

40.4

2.39

1963 .....................

88.46

388

2.28

114.40

41.6

2.75

127.19

37.3

3.41

99.23

40.5

2.45

1964 ......................

91.33

387

2.36

117.74

41.9

2.81

132.06

37.2

3.55

102.97

40.7

2.53

1965 ......................

95.45

38.8

2.46

123.52

42.3

2.92

138 38

37.4

3.70

107.53

41.2

2.61

1966 ......................

98.82

38.6

2.56

2.32

130.24

42.7

3.05

146.26

37.6

3.89

112.19

41.4

2.71

1967 .....................

101.84

38.0

2.68

135.89

42.6

3.19

154.95

37.7

4.11

114.49

40.6

2.82

1968 .....................

107.73

37.8

2.85

142.71

42.6

3.35

164.49

1969 .....................

114.61

37.7

3.04

154.80

43.0

3.60

181.54

37.9

4.79

129.51

40.6

3.19

1970 ......................

119.83

37.1

3.23

164.40

42.7

3.85

195.45

37.3

5.24

133.33

39.8

3.35

37.3

4.41

122.51

40.7

3.01

1971 ......................

127.31

36.9

345

172.14

42.4

4.06

211.67

37.2

5.69

142.44

39.9

3.57

1972 .....................

136.90

37.0

189.14

221.19

36.5

6.06

154.71

40.5

3.82

145.39

36.9

42.6
42.4

4.44

1973 .....................
1974 ...................

3.70
3,94

4.75

235.89

36.8

6.41

166.46

40.7

4.09

154.76

36.5

4.24

219.14

41.9

5.23

249.25

36.6

6.81

176.80

40.0

4.42

1975 ......................

163.53

36.1

4.53

249.31

41.9

5.95

266.08

36.4

7.31

190.79

39.5

4.83

36.1

4.86

36.8

7.71

5.22

1976 ......................

175.45

201.40

273.90

42.4

6.46

28373

209.32

40.1

1977 ......................

189.00

36.0

5.25

301.20

43.4

6.94

295.65

36.5

8.10

228.90

40.3

1978 .....................

2 0 370

35.8

5.69

332.88

43.4

7.67

318.69

36.8

8.66

249.27

40.4

6.17

1979 ......................

219.30

35.6

6.16

365.50

43.0

8.50

342.99

37.0

9.27

268.94

40.2

6.69

T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d p u b lic

F i n a n c e , in s u r a n c e , a n d
W h o l e s a l e a n d r e t a il t r a d e

u t ilit ie s

S e rv ic e s

re a l e s ta te

1949 ......................

$42.93

40.5

$1 060

$47 63

37 8

$1 260

1950 ......................

44.55

40.5

1.100

50.52

37 7

1 340

1951 ......................

47 79

40.5

1 18

54 67

37 7

1 45

1952 ......................

49.20

40.0

1.23

57 08

37 8

1 51

1953 ......................

51.35

39 5

1 30

59 57

37 7

1 58

1954 ......................

53 33

39 5

1 35

62 04

37 6

1 65

1955 ......................

55.16

39.4

1.40

63.92

37 6

1 70

1956 ......................

57 48

39 1

1 47

65 68

36 9

1957 ......................

59.60

38 7

1.54

67 53

36 7

1 78
1 84

1958 ......................

61.76
64.41

38.6

1 60

70 12

37 1

1 9 5 9 ' ...................

38.8

1.66

72 74

37 3

1 95

1960 ......................

66 01

38 6

1 71

75 14

37 2

2 02

1961 ......................

67.41

38 3

1 76

77 12

36 9

1 89

2 09

1962 ......................

69.91

38.2

1 83

80 94

37 3

2 17

1963 ......................

72.01

38 1

1 89

84 38

37 5

2 25

1964 ......................

5.68

$110.78
125.14

41.1

$2.89

74.66

37.9

1.97

85.79

37.3

2.30

$70.03

36.1

1965 ......................

41.3

3.03

76.91

37.7

2.04

88.91

37.2

2.39

736 0

35.9

2.05

1966 ......................

128.13

41.2

3.11

79.39

37.1

2.14

92.13

37.3

2.47

77.04

35.5

2.17

$1.94

1967 ......................

130.82

40.5

3.23

2.25

95.72

37.1

2.58

80.38

35.1

138.85

40.6

3.42

82.35
87.00

36.6

1968 ......................

36.1

2.41

101.75

37.0

2.75

83.97

34.7

2.29
2.42

1969 .....................

147,74

40.7

3.63

91.39

35.7

2.56

108.70

37.1

2.93

90.57

34.7

2.61

1970 ......................

155.93

40.5

3.85

96.02

35.3

2.72

112.67

36.7

3.07

96.66

34.4

2.81

40.1

4.21

1 9 7 1 ......................

168.82

101.09

35.1

36.6

3.22

103.06

339

3.04

1972 ......................

187.86

40.4

4.65

106.45

34.9

3.05

122.98

36.6

3.36

110 85

33.9

3.27

1973 ......................

203.31

40.5

111.76

34.6

3.23

129.20

36.6

3.53

117.29

33.8

3.47

1974 ......................

217.48

40.2

5.02
5.41

119.02

34.2

3.48

137.61

365

3.77

126.00

33.6

3.75

1975 ......................

233.44

397

5.88

126.45

339

3.73

148.19

36.5

4.06

134.67

33.5

4.02

256.71

288

117.85

1976 ......................
1977 ......................

4.27

143.52

2 7 890

39.9

6.99

142.52

33.3

4.28

165.26

36.4

4.54

153.45

33.0

4.65

1978 ......................

302.80

40.0

7.57

153.64

32.9

4.67

178.00

36.4

4.89

163.67

32.8

4.99

1979 .....................

325.98

39.9

8.17

164.96

32.6

5.06

190.77

36.2

5.27

175.27

32.7

5.36

39.8

6.45

133.79

33.7

3.97

155.43

364

33.3

4.31

1 Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.


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

77

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
15.

Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1979

A nnual averag e

1980

I n d u s t r y d i v is i o n a n d g r o u p

T O T A L P R IV A T E

1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly p

A u g .p

35,8

35.6

36.0

35.8

35.7

35.6

35.9

35.1

35.1

35.2

35.0

35.0

35.3

35.3

35.5

M IN IN G

43.4

43.0

43.1

43.4

43.7

43.6

43.9

43.4

43.2

43.4

428

42.7

43.2

41.6

41.4

C O N S T R U C T IO N

36.8

37.0

38.1

38.0

37.7

36.6

37.2

35.3

35.7

36.2

36.7

36.9

37.9

37.7

37.2

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

40.4

40.2

40.0

40.3

40.2

40.3

40.9

39.8

39.8

39.8

39,4

39.3

39.4

38.9

39.5

3.6

3.3

3.3

3.6

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.0

2.9

3.0

2.7

2.5

2.5

2.4

2.8

41.1

40.8

40.4

40.8

40.8

40.8

41.6

40.3

40.3

40.3

39.9

39.7

39.8

39.1

39.9

Overtime h o u r s .............................................
D u r a b le g o o d s

3.8

3.5

3.4

3.6

3.5

3.4

3.5

3.1

3.0

3.1

2.7

2.5

2.4

2.3

2.8

39.8

39.4

39.9

40.1

39.8

38.8

39.2

38.1

38.5

38.3

37.1

37.6

38.4

38.1

39.5

Furniture and fixtures ...........................................

39.3

38.7

38.8

39.0

39.3

39.3

39.9

38.4

38.4

38.5

37.9

37.3

37.3

36.5

Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ..........................

41.6

41.5

41.8

41.7

41.7

41.7

41.8

40.1

40.1

40.7

40.4

40.6

41.0

40.3

40.5

Primary metal in d u s trie s ......................................

41.8

41.4

40.8

41.3

40.9

40.7

40.9

40.7

40.7

40.7

40.6

39.3

39.1

38.6

39.6

Fabricated metal products

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

41.0

40.7

40.5

40.8

40.9

41.0

41.9

40.6

40.4

40.6

40.2

399

40.1

39.2

40.0

Machinery except e le c tric a l.................................
Electric and electronic equipment

Overtime h o u r s .............................................
Lumber and wood products

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

38.1

42.1

41.8

41.2

41.8

41.5

41.8

42.7

41.5

41.5

41.5

41.1

40.8

40.8

40.0

40.5

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

40.3

40.3

39.7

40.5

40.3

40.8

41.3

40.2

40.2

40.0

39.6

39.3

39.4

38.7

39.5

Transportation e q u ip m e n t....................................

42.2

41.1

40.5

40.7

41.3

40.8

42.7

40.0

40.4

40.4

39.8

39.9

39.9

39.4

40.2

Instruments and related products

40.9

40.8

40.4

40.7

40.8

41.4

41.7

41,0

40.8

40.6

40.4

40.3

40.5

39.5

40.4

Miscellaneous manufacturing

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

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

388

38.8

38.8

39.2

39.1

39.4

39.5

38.8

38.6

38.8

38.4

38.2

38.3

37.9

38.5

39.4

39.4

39.4

39.9
3.2

38.9
2.9

38.8
2.5

38.9

2.7

38.7
2.5

38.6

2.9

38.9
2.8

38.7

3.2

39.6
3.3

39.0

3.2

39.6
3.5

40.3

40.6

40.0

40.2

40.4

39.5

39.1

39.0

38.9

39.7

Overtime h o u r s .............................................

3.2

39.3
3.1

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts ..................................

39.7

39.9

N o n d u ra b le g o o d s

.

2.6

2.8

396

40.0

40.4

Tobacco m a n u fa ctu re s.........................................

38.1

38.0

37.6

39.2

38.9

38.8

39.4

37.3

36.9

37.7

38.2

38.7

38.3

36.7

37.2

Textile mill p ro d u c ts ..............................................

40.4

40.4

40.3

40.8

40.8

41.3

41.5

40.9

40.8

40.9

39.9

39.8

39.6

38.7

39,1

Apparel and other textile p ro d u c ts ......................

35.6

35.3

35.6

35.3

35.5

35.6

35.9

35.2

35.4

35.4

35.3

35.3

356

35.3

35.5

Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ....................................

42.9

42.6

42.6

42.7

42.7

42.9

43.5

42.7

42.4

42.4

42.2

41.6

41.7

41.5

41.8

37.5

37.9

37.9

37.2

37.0

36.9

36.7

36.8

37.1

41.8

41.8

41.7

42.2

42.2

41.7

41.6

37.2
41.7

36.8

41.9

37.5
41.9

37.9

Chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts .............................

41.6

41.3

41.2

40.7

40.9

Petroleum and coal products

43.6

43.8

43.6

44.7

44.1

44.8

43.5

36.2

39.7

39.4

41.1

42.3

42.3

42.8

42.3
40.0

Printing and publishing .........................................
.............................

37.6

38.1

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products

40.9

40.5

40.0

40.5

40.5

40.3

40.7

40.3

39.9

39.0

39.3

38.8

37.1

36.5

36.6

36.8

36.5

36.8

37.3

36.7

36.8

40.0
36.4

39.7

Leather and leather products

36.7

37.0

37.4

36.1

36.8

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S

40.0

39.9

40.3

39.9

40.0

40.2

40.0

39.5

39.4

39.5

39.5

39.3

39.6

39.9

40.1

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

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E

32.9

32.6

332

32.6

32.4

32.4

32.9

31.9

31.9

32.0

31.8

31.9

32.3

32.5

32.6

W HO LESA LE TRADE

38.8

38.8

39.0

38.8

38.9

38.9

39.1

38.5

38.4

38.4

38.4

38.5

38.2

38.2

38.2

R E T A IL T R A D E

31.0

30.6

31.4

30.6

30.4

30.4

31.0

29.8

29.8

299

29.7

29.9

30.4

30.7

30.8

36.4

36.2

36.1

36.1

36,2

36.3

36.4

36.2

36.3

36.3

36.2

36.1

36.4

36.2

36.4

32.8

32.7

33.2

32.7

32.6

32.6

32.8

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.4

32.3

32.8

33.0

33.0

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L
ESTATE

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

S E R V IC E S

78


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

16.

Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1980

1979
I n d u s t r y d iv is i o n a n d g r o u p

T O T A L P R IV A T E

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

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly P

A u g .P

35.7

35.6

35.6

35.6

35.7

35.6

35.5

35.4

35.3

35.1

35.0

34.9

35.1

43.1

43.4

43.7

43.6

43.9

43.4

43.2

43.4

42.8

42.7

43.2

41.6

41.4

37.3

37.5

36.8

37.0

37.2

37.3

37.1

36.6

36.7

36.8

37.1

36.8

36.4

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

40.1

40.1

40.1

40.1

40.2

40.3

40.1

39.8

39.8

39.3

39.1

391

39.6

Overtime h o u rs .....................................................

3.3

3.2

3.2

3.3

3.2

3.2

3.0

3.1

3.0

2.6

2.4

2.5

2.8
40.1

M IN I N G

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

C O N S T R U C T IO N

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

40.7

40.7

40.7

40.6

40.7

40.8

40.6

40.3

40.3

39.7

39.5

39.4

Overtime h o u rs .....................................................

3.4

3.3

3.3

3.3

3.2

3.3

3.1

3.2

3.0

2.5

2.4

2.4

2.8

Lumber and wood products ......................................

39.6

39.6

39.2

38.9

39.0

39.4

39.1

38.7

37.3

37.5

37.6

38.0

39.2

Furniture and fix tu re s ...................................................

38.6

38.7

38.8

38.9

38.9

39.2

39.0

Stone, clay, and glass products ...............................

41.4

41.5

41.3

41.4

41.5

41.4

41.2

40.9

40.6

40.3

40.4

40.2

40.1

Primary metal in d u strie s..............................................

41.0

41.1

41.1

40.8

40.7

40.8

40.8

40.7

40.6

39.2

38.8

38.6

39.8

Fabricated metal products .........................................

40.6

40.7

40.8

40.7

40.9

40.9

40.8

40.7

40.8

39.9

39.7

39.6

40.1

41.6

41.5

41.3

41.5

41.0

40.7

40.6

40.9

D u r a b le g o o d s

38.5

38.5

37.6

37.0

36.9

37.9

Machinery, except e le c tric a l......................................

41.6

41.7

41.5

39.9

40.3

40.3

41.5
40.4

41.5

Electric and electronic e q u ip m e n t.............................

40.5

40.5

40.3

40.0

39.9

39.5

39.2

39.2

39.7

Transportation e q u ip m e n t...........................................

41.5

40.6

41.0

40.5

40.9

40.9

40.8

40.4

40.5

39.7

39.5

39.5

41.1

Instruments and related products .............................

40.6

40.7

40.7

41.0

41.0

41.4

40.9

40.4

40.7

40.3

40.4

38.9

39.0

38.9

38.9

39.0

39.2

39.1

38.6

38.5

38.3

38.2

40.0
38.4

40.6

Miscellaneous manufacturing ....................................

39.3

39.3

39.3

39.4

39.4

39.5

39.4

39.0

39.1

38.9

38.6

38.6

38.8

N o n d u ra b le g o o d s

38.6

Overtime h o u rs .....................................................

3.1

3.1

3.1

3.2

3.1

3.1

2.9

3.0

3.0

2.6

2.5

2.6

2.7

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts .........................................

39.8

39.9

39.9

39.9

39.8

39.7

39.3

39.6

39.9

39.6

39.8

39.9

38.3

37.8

38.5

38.5

37.9

37.7

382

38.2

37.3

38.8

37.7

40.8

41.0

41.0

41.5

41.1

40.8

40.3

39.7

39.1

39.1

39.1

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

38.1

40.0
38.4

Textile mill p ro d u c ts .....................................................

40.3

40.7

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

35.3

35.2

35.4

35.3

35.6

36.0

35.9

35.3

35.8

35.3

35.2

35.1

35.2

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

42.6

42.5

42.6

42.7

42.8

43.0

42.9

42.6

42.5

41.7

41.4

41.5

41.8

37.2

37.1

Tobacco manufactures

Apparel and other textile products
Paper and allied products

Printing and p u b lis h in g ................................................

37.8

37.5

37.4

37.5

37.4

37.8

37.4

37.2

36.8

36.9

37.0

Chemicals and allied products ..................................

41.9

41.8

41.7

42.0

41.8

42.0

41.9

41.8

41.5

41.3

41.1

40.8

41.0

Petroleum and coal products ....................................

43.6

44.0

43.5

44.4

43.4

369

40.7

39.7

41.1

42.5

42,3

42.3

42.3

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ..........

40.2

40.3

40.2

40.0

40.0

40.7

40.0

39.9

40.1

39.3

39.2

39.2

40.2

Leather and leather products ....................................

36.5

36.8

36.5

36.6

37.0

37.2

37.2

36.9

37.3

36.7

36.7

35.8

36.7

40.3

39.9

40.0

40.2

40.0

39.5

39.4

39.5

39.5

39.3

39.6

39.9

40.1

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S

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

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E .........................................

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.4

32.3

32.0

32.1

31.9

31.8

31.9

W HO LESA LE TR A D E

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

38.8

38.8

38.8

38.9

38.9

38.9

38.8

38.5

38.5

38.6

38.0

38.0

38.0

R E T A IL T R A D E .........................................................................................

30.6

30.6

30.6

30.6

30.6

30.6

30.4

30.3

30.0

30.1

30.0

29.8

30.0

F IN A N C E , I N S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L
ESTATE

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

36.1

36.1

36.2

36.3

36.4

36.2

36.3

36.3

36.2

36.1

36.4

36.2

36.4

S E R V IC E S

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

32.7

32.7

32.6

32.7

32.8

32.7

32.7

32.7

32.6

32.5

32.6

32.5

32.5


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

79

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data
17.

Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
A nnual a v erag e

1979

1980

I n d u s t r y d i v is i o n a n d g r o u p
1978

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly p

A u g .p

T O T A L P R I V A T E ...............................................................................

$5.69

$6.16

$6.18

$6.30

$6.31

$6.34

$6.38

$6,42

$6.46

$6.51

$6.53

$6.57

$6.61

$6.64

$6 66

M I N I N G ...............................................................................................................

7.67

8.50

8.50

8.59

8.59

8.73

8.75

8.88

8.90

8.95

9.10

9.08

9.16

9.12

9.15

C O N S T R U C T I O N .........................................................................................

8.66

9.27

9.34

9.52

9.50

9.52

9.58

9.49

9.61

9.68

9.69

9.77

9.81

9.92

10.01

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

6.17

6.69

6.70

6.80

6.82

6.87

6.97

6.96

7.00

7.06

7.09

7.13

7.20

7.29

7.31

6.58

7.13

7.13

7.24

7.25

7.29

7.42

7.39

7.46

7.54

7.56

7.60

7.69

1.76

780

Lumber and wood products ..................................

5.60

6.08

6.22

6.30

6.23

6.22

6.24

6.21

6.33

6.35

6.28

6.40

6.56

6.68

6.72

Furniture and fix tu re s .............................................

4.68

5.06

5.09

5.18

5.19

5.21

5.26

5.27

5.32

5.37

5.39

5.42

5.49

5.52

5.56

7.27

7.34

7.45

7.53

7.59

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

D u r a b le g o o d s

Stone, clay, and glass products

■

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

6.33

6.85

6.90

6.99

7.01

7.08

7.11

7.06

7.14

Primary metal in d u strie s.........................................

8.20

8.97

9.10

9.16

9.11

9.26

9.28

9.30

9.44

9.45

9.53

9.61

9.65

9.81

9.86

Fabricated metal products ....................................

6.35

684

6.85

6.95

6.98

7.01

7.14

7.09

7.14

7.24

7.27

7.32

7.42

7.43

7.50

7.35

7.48

7.44

763

7.76

7.81

7.91

7.97

8.04

808

7.61

Machinery, except e le c tric a l..................................

6.78

7.32

7.66

7.69

Electric and electronic equipment ........................
Transportation e q u ip m e n t......................................

5.82

6.32

6.37

6.47

6.49

6.52

6.64

6.67

6.71

6.78

6.79

6.78

6.87

6.96

7.91

8.54

8.45

8.59

8.70

8.72

8.93

8.81

8.86

9.04

9.04

9.06

9.24

9.34

9.39

Instruments and related products ........................

5.71

6.17

6.15

6.21

632

6.39

6.50

6.57

6.59

6.63

6.63

6.72

6.80

6.87

7.50

7.Ò1

4.69

5.03

5.02

5.06

5.10

5.13

5.20

5.28

5.30

5.34

5.37

5.40

5.42

5.47

6.91
5.49

5.53

6.00

6.04

6.11

6.14

6.21

6.26

6.28

6.27

6.30

636

6.42

6.48

6.60

6.62

Food and kindred p ro d u c ts ....................................

5.80

6.27

6.28

6.32

6.35

6.50

6.55

6.61

6.64

6.68

6.75

6.82

6.84

6.90

Tobacco m anufactures...........................................

6.13

6.65

6.51

6.43

6.33

6.97

6.98

7.08

7.36

7.57

7.97

8.11

7.80

4.30
3.94

4.66
4.23

4.77
4.21

4.82
4.27

4.83
4.31

4.86
4.32

4.87
4.38

4.90
4.44

4.90
4.45

4.92
4.49

7.79
4.91

7.64

Textile mill p ro d u c ts ................................................
Apparel and other textile products ......................

4.46

4.90
4.45

5.05
4.49

5.18
4.60

798

7.98

Miscellaneous manufacturing ...............................
N o n d u ra b le g o o d s

6.89

Paper and allied p ro d u c ts......................................

6.52

7.13

7.24

7.33

7.36

7.43

7.50

7.49

7.52

7.55

7.63

7.65

4.93
4.51
7.79

Printing and p u b lis h in g ...........................................

6.51

6,95

6.98

7.08

7.10

7.13

7.21

7.24

7.29

7.34

7.34

7.44

7.46

7.54

7.63

Chemicals and allied products

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

7.02

7.60

7.66

7.74

7.83

7.88

7.92

7.97

8.01

8.05

8.12

8.17

8.24

835

8.39

Petroleum and coal products ...............................

8.63

9.36

9.34

9.50

9.48

9.56

9.48

9.46

9.37

9.29

983

10.07

10.22

10.32

10.32

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products . . .

5.52

5.96

5.94

6.03

6.12

6.14

6.21

6.25

6.25

6.27

6.30

6.34

6.56

3.89

4.22

4.21

4.29

4.31

4.33

4.35

4.45

4.47

4.51

4.52

4.53

6.39
4,54

6.50

Leather and leather products ...............................

4.56

4.56

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T I L IT IE S

7.57

8.17

8.31

8,44

8.43

8.51

8.54

8.55

8.58

8.62

8.71

8.72

8.75

8.83

886

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E

4.67

5.06

5.06

5.13

5.15

5.18

5.18

5.34

5.36

5.40

5.40

5.42

5.43

5.46

5.46

W HO LESA LE TR AD E

5.88

6.39

6.42

6.52

6.52

6.58

6.69

6.72

6.77

6.83

6.87

6.89

6.95

6.98

6.98

R E T A IL T R A D E ............................................................................................

4.20

4.53

4.52

4.57

459

4.62

4.61

4.78

4.78

4.81

4.80

4,82

4,83

4.86

4.86

4.89

5.27

5.28

5.37

5.35

5.41

5.48

5.53

5.60

5.68

5.68

5.70

5.77

5.77

5.77

4.99

5.36

5.31

5.45

5.48

5.55

5.61

5.65

5.70

5.75

5.75

5.79

581

5.80

5.81

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E , A N D R E A L
ESTATE

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

S E R V IC E S

18.

Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry division

[Seasonally adjusted data: 1967=100]
1979

1980
J u ly 1 9 8 0

In d u s t r y
Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

232.3

234.3

235 0

237.3

239.4

240.3

242.4

245.2

246.2

248.3

250.9

M in in g ..................................................

264.7

265 6

2677

272.0

274.6

277.0

278.5

280.9

283.7

284.2

286.3

Construction

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

2232

2245

224.7

226.5

228 1

225.8

229.8

232.2

235.3

238.6

2399

241.9

244.1

245.2

258 3

255 1

2558

258.7

260.1

260.8

247.8
262.4

255.0

Transportation and public utilities . ..

237.0
252.4

233.0
252.4

234.2

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

265.9

267.2

268.7

270.6

Wholesale and retail trade

225.5

227.2

227.6

2297

231.4

234.2

235.2

237.8

238.0

2390

241.8

T O T A L P R IV A T E (in c u r r e n t d o lla r s )

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

to

A u g . 1980

A ug. 1980

251.7

253.1

0.6

9.0

286 1

288.4

8

9.0

236.8

237,9

.5

6.6

260.4

262.1
270.2

.7

10.6

270.5
242.9

244.2

p

-.1
.5

7.1
8.3

Finance, insurance, and real estate

211.4

244.0

212.9

215.7

217.9

218.4

221.1

225.7

224 9

226.3

230.8

.9

9.2

228.7

231.6

232.3

234.9

237.8

237.7

2397

242.7

243.0

245.7

230.2
248.4

228.8

Services ..............................................

248.0

249.8

.7

9.2

105.1

104.9

104.1

104.1

103.8

102.7

102.2

102.0

101.4

101.4

101.5

101.8

( 2)

(2)

( 2)

T O T A L P R I V A T E ( in c o n s t a n t d o lla r s )

80

250.2

A ug. 1979

to
A u g .p

J u ly


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

19.

Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1980

1979

A nnual a v erag e
In d u s t r y d i v is i o n a n d g r o u p
1978

T O T A L P R I V A T E ......................................................

M IN IN G

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly »

A u g .p

$203,70

$219.30

$222.48

$225.54

$225.27

$225.70

$229.04

$225.34

$226.75

$229 15

$228.55

$229.95

$233.33

$234.39

$236.43

332.88

365.50

366.35

372.81

375.38

38063

384.13

385.39

384.48

388.43

389.48

387.72

395.71

379.39

378.81

C O N S T R U C T IO N

318.69

342.99

355.85

361.76

358.15

348.43

356.38

335.00

343.08

350.42

355.62

360.51

371.80

373.98

372.37

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

249.27

268.94

268.00

274.04

274.16

27686

285.07

277.01

278.60

28099

279.35

280.21

283.68

283.58

28875

295.39

301.64

301.72

270.44

290.90

288.05

295.80

297.43

308.67

297.82

300.64

303.86

306.06

303.42

Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ...............................

222.88

239.55

248.18

252.63

247.95

241.34

244.61

236 60

243.71

243.21

232.99

240.64

251.90

254.51

311 22
265.44

Furniture and fixtures

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

183.92

195.82

197,49

202.02

203.97

204.75

209.87

202.37

204.29

206.75

204.28

202.17

204.78

201.48

211.84

Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ........................

263.33

284.28

288.42

291.48

292.32

295.24

297.20

283.11

286.31

295.89

296.54

302.47

308.73

305.88

Primary metal industries ....................................

342.76

371.36

371.28

378.31

372.60

376.88

379.55

378.51

384.21

384.62

386.92

377.67

377.32

378.67

390.46

278.39

277.43

283.56

285.48

287.41

299.17

287.85

288.46

293.94

292.25

292.07

297.54

291.26

300.00

D u r a b le g o o d s

308.21

Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ..................................

260.35

Machinery except e le c tric a l...............................

285.44

305.98

302.82

312.66

308.76

313.50

325.80

317.89

319.14

322.04

320.21

322.73

325.18

321.60

327.24

Electric and electronic e q u ip m e n t......................

234.55

254.70

252.89

262.04

261.55

266.02

274.23

268.13

269.74

271.20

268.88

266.45

270.68

269.35

276.90

381.31

352.40

357.94

365.22

359.79

361.49

368.68

368.00

377.48

271.05

269.37

268.87

269.18

267.85

270.82

275.40

271.37

279.16

Transportation equipment ..................................

333.80

350.99

342.23

349.61

359.31

355 78

Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ......................

233.54

251.74

248,46

252.75

257.86

264.55

Miscellaneous m a n u fa ctu ring.............................

181.97

195.16

194.78

198.35

199.41

202.12

205.40

204.86

204.58

207.19

206.21

206.28

207.59

207.31

211.37

237.98

241.96

241.92

245.92

249.77

244.92

243.90

245.07

246.13

248.45

251.42

254.76

257.52

217.88

235.80

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

230.26

250.17

253.08

256.59

254.00

261.30

264.62

261.10

259.62

260.52

262.58

270.75

270.86

276.00

278.36

Tobacco manufactures ......................................

233.55

252.70

244.78

252.06

246.24

270.44

275.01

264.08

271.58

285.39

297.58

295.67

305.25

297.64

290.16

197.06

200.72

N o n d u ra b le g o o d s

Food and kindred products
Textile mill products

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

173.72

188.26

192.23

196.66

202.11

20041

199.92

201.23

195.91

195.02

195.23

195.44

202.54

Apparel and other textile products ...................

140.26

149.32

149.88

150.73

153.01

153.79

157.24

156.29

157.53

158.95

157.44

157.09

160.56

158.50

163.30

Paper and allied products ..................................

279.71

303.74

308.42

312.99

314.27

318.75

326.25

319.82

318 85

320.12

321.99

318.24

324.84

331.17

333.56

268.33

Printing and p u blishing.........................................

244.78

260.63

264.54

266.25

270.23

274.70

269.33

269.73

273.05

270.11

274.54

273.78

277.47

283.07

Chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts ..........................

294.14

318.44

320.19

323.53

326.51

332.54

334.22

332.35

333.22

335.69

337.79

337.42

339.49

339.85

343.15

Petroleum and coal p ro d u c ts .............................

376.27

409.97

407.22

424.65

418.07

428.29

412.38

342.45

371.99

366.03

404.01

425.96

432.31

441.70

436.54

plastics p ro d u c ts ..............................................

22577

241.38

237.60

244.22

247 86

247.44

252.75

251.88

249.38

250.80

250.11

247.26

251.13

252.20

262 40

Leather and leather p ro d u c ts .............................

144.32

154.03

154.09

157.87

157.32

159.34

162.26

163.32

164.50

16416

165.88

167.61

169.80

164.62

167.81

Rubber and miscellaneous

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D P U B L IC U T I L IT IE S

302 80

325.98

334.89

336.76

337.20

342.10

341.60

337.73

338.05

340.49

344.05

342.70

346.50

352.32

355.29

W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL T R A D E

153.64

164.96

167.99

167.24

166.86

167.83

170.42

170.35

170.98

172.80

171.72

172.90

175.39

177.45

178.00

W HO LESA LE TRADE

228.14

247.93

250.38

25298

253.63

255.96

261.58

258.72

259.97

262.27

263.81

265.27

265.49

26664

266.64

R E T A IL T R A D E

130.20

138.62

141.93

139.84

139.54

140.45

142.91

142.44

142.44

143.82

142.56

144.12

146.83

149.20

149.69

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

178.00

190.77

190.61

193.86

193.67

196.38

199.47

20019

203.28

206.18

205.62

205.77

210.03

208.87

210.03

S E R V IC E S

163.67

175.27

176.29

178.22

178.65

180.93

184.01

183.63

185.25

186.88

186.30

187.02

190.57

191.40

191.73


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

81

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data

20.

Gross and spendable weekly earnings, in current and 1967 dollars, 1960 to date

[Averages for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
P r i v a t e n o n a g r ic u lt u r a l w o r k e r s

M a n u f a c t u r in g w o r k e r s

S p e n d a b l e a v e r a g e w e e k l y e a r n in g s

S p e n d a b l e a v e r a g e w e e k l y e a r n in g s

G ro s s a v e ra g e
Y e a r a n d m o n th

w e e k l y e a r n in g s

G ro s s a v e ra g e
W o r k e r w it h n o

M a r r i e d w o r k e r w it h

d e p e n d e n ts

3 d e p e n d e n ts

W o r k e r w it h n o

M a r r i e d w o r k e r w it h

d e p e n d e n ts

3 d e p e n d e n ts

C u rre n t

1967

C u rre n t

1967

C u rre n t

1967

C u rre n t

1967

C u rre n t

1967

C u rre n t

1967

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

d o lla r s

$73.95

$72.96

$82.25

$89.72

$101.15

$72.57

$81.82

$80.11

$90.32

83.26

82.18

91.72

1960 ..................................................

$80.67

$90.95

$65.59

1961 ..................................................

82.60

92.19

67.08

74.87

74.48

83.13

92.34

103.06

74,60

1962 ..................................................

85.91

94.82

69.56

76.78

76.99

84.98

96.56

106.58

77.86

85.94

85.53

1963 ..................................................

88.46

96.47

71.05

77.48

78.56

85.67

99.23

108.21

79.51

86.71

87.25

95.15

1964 ..................................................

91.33

98.31

75.04

80.78

82.57

88.88

102.97

110.84

84.40

90.85

92.18

99.22

1965 ..................................................

95.45

101.01

79.32

83.94

86.63

91.67

107.53

113.79

89.08

94.26

96.78

102.41

1966 ..................................................

98.82

101.67

81.29

83.63

88.66

91.21

112.19

115.42

91.45

94.08

99.33

102.19

1967 ..................................................

101.84

101.84

83.38

83.38

90.86

90.86

114.49

114.49

92.97

92.97

100.93

100.93

1968 ..................................................

107.73

103.39

86.71

83.21

94.40

95.28

91.44

122.51

117.57

97.70

93.76

1969 ..................................................

114.61

104.38

90.96

8284

99.99

91.07

129.51

117.95

101.90

92.81

106.75
111.44

101.49

1970 ..................................................

119.83

103.04

96.21

82.73

104.90

90.20

133.33

114.64

106.32

91.42

115.58

99.38

1971 ..................................................

127.31

102.45

104.95

103.80

85.57

112.43

92 69

142.44

114.97

94.78

124.24

102 42

1972 ..................................................

136.90

109.26

112.19

89.54

121.68

97.11

154.71

123.47

125.34

100.03

135.57

108.20

1973 ..................................................

145.39

109.23

117,51

88.29

127.38

95.70

166.46

125.06

132.57

99.60

143.50

107.81

1974 ..................................................

154.76

104.78

124.37

84.20

134.61

91.14

176.80

119.70

140.19

94.92

151.56

102.61

1975 ..................................................

163.53

101.45

132.49

82.19

145.65

90.35

190.79

118.36

151.61

94.05

166.29

103.16

1976 ...................................................

175.45

102.90

84.05

155.87

91.42

209.32

122.77

167.83

98.43

181.32

106.35

189.00

104.13

155.19

85.50

169.93

93.63

228.90

126.12

183.80

101.27

200.06

110.23

1978 ..................................................
1979 ..................................................

203.70

104.30

165.39

84.69

180.71

92.53

101.08

100.73

177.55

81.56

194.35

89.27

127.63
123.54

197.40

219.30

249.27
268.94

212.43

97.58

214.87
232.07

106.60

1979: August

222.48
225.54

100.44

179.87

81.21

196.83

88.86

268.00

120.99

211.79

95.62

231.36

104.45

100.82

182.10

81.40

199.15

89.03

274.04

122.50

215.89

96.51

235.94

105.47

O c to b e r..................................

225.27

88.18

22570
229.04

99.85
99.17

198.94

N o v e m b e r.............................

182.22

80.06

199.27

87.55

276.86

121.64

217.80

95.69

238.08

104.60

D e c e m b e r.............................

9.58

184.59

80.26

201.80

87.74

285.07

123.94

223.38

97.12

244.31

106.22

1980: J a n u a ry ..................................

225.34

96.59

181.96

77.99

199.00

85.30

277.01

118.74

217.91

93.40

238.20

102.10

F e b ru a ry ...............................

226.75

95.88

182.98

77.37

200.07

84.60

278.60

117.80

218.99

92.60

239.40

101.23

M a r c h ....................................

229.15

95.52

184.67

76.98

201 89

84.16

280.99

117.13

220.61

91.96

241.22

100.55

Apri. ......................................

228.55

94.21

184.25

75.95

201.43

83.03

279.35

115.15

219.49

90.47

239.97

98.92

May

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

229.95

93.82

185.23

75.57

202.49

82.62

280.21

114.32

220.08

89.79

240.63

98.18

June ......................................

233.33

94.16

187.59

75.70

205.06

82.75

283.68

114.48

222.43

89.76

243.26

98.17

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

234.39

94.51

188.33

75.94

205.86

83.01

283.58

114.35

222.37

89.67

243.18

98.06

A ug.0 ....................................

23643

(’ )

189.75

(’ )

207.41

( ')

288.75

(’ )

225.87

(’ )

247.10

(’ )

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

J u ly p

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

143.30

117.43

1977 ...................................................

September

181.90

80.63

274.16

121.52

215.97

'N o t available.

culation,”

NOTE: The earnings expressed in 1967 dollars have been adjusted for changes in price level

6 - 1 3 . See also “ Spendable Earnings Formulas, 1 9 7 8 -8 0 ,”
pp. 1 0 -1 1 .

as measured by the Bureau’s Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers.
These series are described in "The Spendable Earnings Series: A Technical Note on its Cal­

82

w e e k ly e a r n in g s


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

95.73

236.04

E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n in g s a n d M o n t h l y R e p o r t o n t h e L a b o r F o r c e ,

110.02

104.63

February 1969, pp.

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

March 1980,

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DATA

U n e m p l o y m e n t i n s u r a n c e d a t a are compiled monthly by
the Employment and Training Administration of the U.S. De­
partment of Labor from records of State and Federal unem­
ployment insurance claims filed and benefits paid. Railroad
unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S. Rail­
road Retirement Board.

ployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about onethird of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet
earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. Ini­
tial claims are notices filed by persons in unemployment insurance
programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiv­
ing compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a
full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The
rate of insured unemployment expresses the number of insured unem­
ployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a
12-month period.

Definitions
Data for all programs represent an unduplicated count of insured
unemployment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation
for Ex-Servicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal
Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act.

An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the be­
ginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no ap­
plication is required for subsequent periods in the same year. Num­
ber of payments are payments made in 14-day registration periods.
The average amount of benefit payment is an average for all com­
pensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or set­
tlement of underpayments. However, total benefits paid have been
adjusted.

Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs
for civilian employees, insured workers must report the completion of
at least 1 week of unemployment before they are defined as unem­

21.

Unemployment Insurance and employment service operations

[All items except average benefits amounts are in thousands]
1980

1979
It e m
N ov.

O c t.

S e p t.

Aug.

J u ly

Jan.

Dec.

M ar.

Feb.

M ay

A p r.

June

J u ly

All programs:
3,790

4,140

3,343

3,456

3,692

3.9

4.0

4.3

45

58

20

26

2,429

2,377

2,164

2,236

2,559

3,047

3,740

3,730

3,652

3,627

3,680

1,978

1,545

1,219

1,641

1,827

2,263

2,837

1,818

1,705

2,192

p 2,249

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

2,300

2,245

2,384

2,864

3,356

3,278

2.7

2.4

2.8

3.4

3,537
4.1

3,518

2.8

2,024
2.4

2,057

Rate of insured unemployment ............

4.1

3.9

3.8

7,889

8,830

6,993

7,638

8,107

9,171

13,792

12,801

13,170

12,689

o 12,302

$96.41

$98.39

$99.15

$99.52

p $99.74

$1,232,173

$1,196,836

Insured u n e m p lo y m e n t..........................
State unemployment insurance
program:'
Initial claims2 ...........................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)

Weeks of unemployment
compensated ......................................
Average weekly benefit amount
for total u n e m p lo y m e n t.....................

$86.40

$88.56

$89.07

$90.59

$92.39

$94.54

Total benefits paid ..................................

$665,687

$767,025

$606,095

$673,965

$728,370

$843,869

$1,283,946

$1,229,877

$1,218,231

28

28

23

26

24

24

25

21

21

21

p 20

63

52

50

Unemployment compensation for exservicemen: 3
Initial claim s' ...........................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)

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

51

54

56

60

58

52

52

52

211
$19,634

236

232

233

299

255

249

246

p 220

$23,325

$23,093

$23,093

$29,635

$25,308

$24,928

$24,518

$22,025

p 12

Weeks of unemployment
compensated ......................................

216

234

Total benefits paid ..................................

$20,965

$23,861

Unemployment compensation for
Federal civilian em ployees:4
Initial c la im s ..............................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)

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

16

13

13

18

15

15

19

11

12

11

2.5

25

25

28

29

31

34

32

30

25

22
p 88

Weeks of unemployment
compensated ......................................

96

107

91

109

118

118

150

129

123

108

Total benefits paid ..................................

$8,802

$9,829

$8,453

$10,093

$11,063

$11,047

$14,118

$12,226

$11,901

$10,323

$8,280

15

8

13

11

10

11

22

7

5

4

6

40

39

30

27

23

27

80

71

68

62

54

55

Railroad unemployment insurance:
A p p lic a tio n s.............................................
Insured unemployment (average

24

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

11

12

21

18

20

Number of payments .............................

20

26

32

51

36

19
41

$190.10

$195.61

$189.08

$189.61

$183.38

$197.22

$199.01

$208.73

$210.79

$201.87

$193.44

$199.06

$3,699

$3,767

$5,747

$8,003

$6,462

$8,085

$14,967

$14,573

$13,884

$13,002

$9,953

$10,140

13,186

14,479

15,525

1,855

3,183

4,378

5,980

7,285

8,708

10,021

11,319

3,482

3,935

4,349

458

768

1,044

1,314

1,561

1,853

2,143

2,383

weekly volume)

Average amount of benefit
p a y m e n t......................................
Total benefits paid ..................................
Employment service:5
New applications and re n e w a ls ............
Nonfarm placements

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

’ Initial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican
sugarcane workers.
2 Includes interstate claims for the Virgin Islands. Excludes transition claims under State programs.
3 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs.


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

4 Includes the Virgin islands. Exludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs.
5 Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1 - ps,6 September 30).

NOTE: Date for Puerto Rico included. Dashes indicate data not available.

83

PRICE DATA

P r i c e d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
from retail and primary markets in the United States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100,
unless otherwise noted).

Definitions
The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure of the
average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and ser­
vices. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics began publishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. One
index, a new CPI for All Urban Consumers, covers 80 percent of the
total noninstitutional population; and the other index, a revised CPI
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covers about half the
new index population. The All Urban Consumers index includes, in
addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, manageri­
al, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the
unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force.
The CPI is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs,
transportation fares, doctor’s and dentist’s fees, and other goods and
services that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quali­
ty of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revi­
sions so that only price changes will be measured. Prices are collected
from over 18,000 tenants, 24,000 retail establishments, and 18,000
housing units for property taxes in 85 urban areas across the country.
All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are
included in the index. Because the CPI’s are based on the expendi­
tures of two population groups in 1972-73, they may not accurately
reflect the experience of individual families and single persons with
different buying habits.
Though the CPI is often called the “Cost-of-Living Index,” it mea­
sures only price change, which is just one of several important factors
affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the
level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in
prices for each area since the base period.
Producer Price Indexes measure average changes in prices received
in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodities
in all stages of processing. The sample used for calculating these in­
dexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations
per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all com­
modities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing,
mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe
includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial
transactions in primary markets in the United States.
Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or
by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products
by degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or
semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure
organizes products by similarity of end-use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price In­
dexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the Unit­
ed States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data
are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire.

84


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

Most prices are obtained directly from producing companies on a vol­
untary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the
Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month.
In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the vari­
ous commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights
representing their importance in the total net selling value of all com­
modities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain in­
dexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, dura­
bility of product groupings, and a number of special composite
groupings.
Price indexes for the output of selected SIC industries measure av­
erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries,
as defined in the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la ssifica tio n M a n u a l 1 9 7 2
(Washington, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1972). These
indexes are derived from several price series, combined to match the
economic activity of the specified industry and weighted by the value
of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive in­
dustrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Notes on the data
Beginning with the May 1978 issue of the R ev ie w , regional CPI’s
cross classified by population size, were introduced. These indexes will
enable users in local areas for which an index is not published to get a
better approximation of the CPI for their area by using the appropri­
ate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified
indexes will be published bimonthly. (See table 24.)
For further details about the new and the revised indexes and a
comparison of various aspects of these indexes with the old unrevised
CPI, see F a cts A b o u t th e R e v is e d C o n s u m e r P ric e In d e x , a pamphlet in
the Consumer Price Index Revision 1978 series. See also The
C o n s u m e r P ric e I n d e x : C o n c ep ts a n d C o n te n t O v e r th e Years. Report
517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978).
For interarea comparisons of living costs at three hypothetical stan­
dards of living, see the family budget data published in the H a n d b o o k
o f L a b o r S ta tistic s, 1977, Bulletin 1966 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1977), tables 122-133. Additional data and analysis on price changes
are provided in the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P rices a n d P rice
I n d e x es, both monthly publications of the Bureau.
As of January 1976, the Wholesale Price Index (as it was then
called) incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 val­
ues of shipments. From January 1967 through December 1975, 1963
values of shipments were used as weights.
For a discussion of the general method of computing consumer,
producer, and industry price indexes, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s
f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1976), chapters 13-15. See also John F. Early, “Improving the mea­
surement of producer price change,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , April
1978, pp. 7-15. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “In­
dustry and Sector Price Indexes,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , August
1965, pp. 974-82.

22.

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-79

[1 967 = 100]
F o o d and

A ll i t e m s

A p p a re l an d

H o u s in g

T ra n s p o rta tio n

O th e r g o o d s

E n te r ta in m e n t

M e d ic a l c a r e

a n d s e r v ic e s

upkeep

b e v e ra g e s
Year
P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t
In d e x

change

In d e x

change

change

100.0

100.0

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t
In d e x

In d e x

change

In d e x

change

In d e x

change

In d e x

change

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

change

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t

P e rc e n t
In d e x

1967 ......................

100.0

1968 ......................

104,2

4.2

103.6

3.6

104,0

4.0

105.4

5.4

103.2

3.2

106.1

6.1

105.7

5.7

1969 ......................

109.8

5.4

108.8

5.0

110.4

6.2

111.5

5.8

107.2

3.9

113.4

6.9

111.0

5.0

110.4

4.9

5.1

116.8

5.8

5.4

118.2

7.1

4.1

116.1

1970 ......................

116,3

5.9

114.7

1971 ......................

121.3

4.3

118.3

3.1

123.4

4.4

119.8

1972 ......................

125.3

3.3

123.2

4.1

128.1

3,8

122.3

120.6

6.3

116.7

105.2

5.2

112.7

5.1

3.2

118.6

5.2

128.4

6.5

5.3

122.4

2.1

119.9

1.1

132.5

3.2

126.5

2.9

127.5

4.2

2.8

132.5

3.9

122.9

4.8

1973 ......................
1974 .....................

133.1

6.2

139.5

13.2

3.7

123.8

3.3

3.9

130.0

147.7

11.0

158.7

13,8

148.8

11.3

136.2

7.4

137.7

11.2

150.5

9.3

139.8

7.5

142.0

7.2

1975 ......................

161.2

9.1

172.1

8.4

164.5

10,6

142.3

4.5

150.6

9.4

168.6

12.0

152.2

8.9

153.9

8.4

133.7

4.4

126.8

137.7

1976 .....................

170.5

5.8

177.4

3,1

174.6

6.1

147.6

3.7

165.5

9.9

184.7

9.5

159.8

5.0

162.7

5.7

1977 ......................

181.5

6.5

188.0

6.0

186.5

6.8

154.2

4.5

177.2

7.1

202.4

9.6

167.7

4.9

172.2

5.8

1978 .....................

195.3

7.6

2062

9,7

202.6

8.6

159.5

3.4

185.8

4.9

219.4

8.4

176.2

5.1

183.2

6.4

1979 ......................

217.7

11.5

228.7

10.9

2275

12.3

166.4

4.3

212.8

14.5

240.1

9.4

187.6

6.5

196.3

7.2

23. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers and revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers,
U.S. city average general summary and groups, subgroups, and selected items
[1 967 = 100 u n less o th e rw is e specified]
U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

1980

1979

1980

1979

M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

218.9

236.4

239.8

242.5

244.9

247.6

247.8

219.4

236.5

239.9

242.6

245.1

247.8

248.0

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

2307

238 6

241.0

242.8

244.1

245.7

248.3

230.9

2 390

241.2

243.2

244.7

246.4

249.1

H o u sin g ..........................................................................................................

228.4

250.5

254.5

257.9

261.7

266.7

265.1

250.5

254,4

Apparel and u p k e e p ....................................................................................

164.3

171.9

176.0

177.3

177.5

177.2

176.2

164.5

171.5

175.1

176.1

176.8

176.0

175.4

240.2

244.3

247.7

249.9

250.6

251.9

258.7

260.9

263.1

264.9

265.9

267.8
204.4

A ll i t e m s

Food and beverages

228.4

Transportation ..............................................................................................

216.6

239.6

243.7

246.8

249.0

249.7

251.0

217.8

Medical care ................................................................................................

239.9

257.9

260.2

262.0

263.4

264.7

266.6

240.5

Entertainment

257.8

261.7

266.9

265.1

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

189.1

197.8

200.6

202.5

204.0

205.3

206.6

188.6

196.2

199.5

201.3

202.4

204.0

Other goods and s e rv ic e s ..........................................................................

195.2

208.1

208.9

209.8

211.2

212.5

213.5

195.1

207.7

208.3

209.2

210.6

212.1

212.9

C o m m o d itie s ................................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ...........................................

210.5

225.2

228.0

2299

231.4

232.8

234.1

211.0

225.3

228.1

230.1

231.7

233.0

234.4

198.4

215.5

218.4

2204

222.0

223.2

224.0

198.8

215.7

218.7

220.6

2223

223.4

224.2

Nondurables less food and b e v e ra g e s .........................................

204.2

231.8

237.5

239.5

240.3

241.1

241.4

205.6

234.1

239.8

241.7

242.6

243.2

243.5

Durables ...........................................................................................

192.6

202.1

203.0

204.9

207.1

208.6

209.8

192.2

200.3

201.2

203.3

205.4

206.8

208.0

Services .......................................................................................................
Rent, re s id e n tia l...............................................................................

234.7
175.9

256.8
185.6

261.3
186.6

269.2
188.9

274.2
191.1

272.4
192.1

235.1
175.8

265.8
186.9

269.9
188.7

275.1
190.8

273.1
191.8

Household services less rent .......................................................
Transportation s e rv ic e s ...................................................................

300.2

319.6
241.5

213.3

229.3

309.6
232.7

322.2

238.1

323.3
243.8

315.8

229.6

328.8
242.6

269.8

212.6

307.3
233.4

257.3
185.5
302.4

261.7
186.4

268.6

2653
187.0
313.4

238.0

241.5

331.9
242.7

243.9

Medical care s e rv ic e s ......................................................................

258.5

279.0

281.5

283.4

284.7

285.9

2880

258.8

279.8

282.2

284.5

286.3

287.3

289.3

Other s e rv ic e s .................................................................................

199.3

211.1

212.9

214.5

215.9

216.9

218.1

200.1

211.4

213.5

214.6

216.5

217.9

218.6

All items less food ......................................................................................

214.2

233.5

237.1

239.9

242.6

245.5

245.1

214 6

233.7

237.3

245.7

245.3

213.0

227,1

229.8

231.8

2337

235.4

236.8

213.7

227.6

230.2

240.2
232.4

242.9

All Items less mortgage interest costs .....................................................

234.2

235.7

237.2

197.4

214.0

325.9

S p e c ia l in d e x e s :

220.2

222.2

216.9

218.9

220.5

221.6

222.4

213.8

216.7

201.1

227.3

232.6

2346

235.5

236.3

236.6

202.5

2294

234.8

236.7

237.7

238.3

238.7

222.8

258.2

264.1

266.5

2679

269.3

270.3

223.9

260.1

266.3

2687

270.0

271.4

272.2

Nondurables ................................................................................................

218.3

236.3

240.3

242.2

245.9

219.2

237.4

241.4

243.3

244.6

245.7

247.2

245.6

275.4

280.0

243.2
284.4

244.5

Services less rent

290.0

287.6

246.1

270.8

275.9

2808

285.4

291.2

288.6
269.4
238.4

Commodities less f o o d ...............................................................................

218.6

221.4

197.0

Nondurables less food ...............................................................................
Nondurables less food and a p p a re l..........................................................

Services less medical c a r e ........................................................................

230.6

270.2
252.7

257.4

261 5

265.7

271.0

268.9

231.0

253 1

257.7

261.9

266.3

271.8

Domestically produced farm foods

225.9

229.1

231.2

2327

233.6

234.8

238.5

225.8

229.2

231.0

232.4

233.4

234.7

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

270.3

272.3

269.5

267.5

267.1

271.2

Selected beef c u t s ......................................................................................

267.8

2672

270.2

2680

265.6

264.8

269.2

270.1

Energy

287.1

344.6

355.0

3588

363.2

367.8

370.4

289.2

348.7

359.6

363.3

367.3

371 8

373.9

230.0

232,7

235.1

237.6

237 6

230.0
198 6

232.7

232.1

199.8

200 6

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

213.8

228.0

230.8

233.4

235.7

238.3

238.3

213.9

227.3

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

207.3

222.8

225.7

228.5

231.0

233.7

233.1

224.6

227.5

185.6

194.9

196.5

198.2

199 9

202.0

196.9

300.8

385 0

398.5

402.3

403.0

404.8

301.9

193.5
386.4

195.1

Energy commodities ...................................................................

201.2
404.1

207.2
185.4

221.8

Commodities less food and e n e rg y ...........................................

4003

404,0

404.7

405.6

406.1

Services less e n e rg y ...................................................................

232.4

255.2

259.6

263.5

267.0

271.5

269.1

232.7

255.7

260 0

264.2

267.8

272.5

269 8

$0,462

$0,423

$0,417

$0,412

$0,408

$0,404

$0,404

$0,456

$0,423

$0,417

$0,412

$0,408

$0,404

$0,403

All items less energy

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

All items less food and energy

Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 = $1


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

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

85

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
23.

Continued — Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1979
J u ly

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1980
Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

1979
M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

1980
Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

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

230.7

238.6

241.0

242.8

244.1

245.7

248.3

230.9

239.0

241.2

243.2

244.7

246.4

249.1

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

236.9

244.9

247.3

249.1

250.4

252.0

254.8

237.1

245.2

247.5

249.5

251.0

252.7

255.5

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

235.5

241.3

243.6

245.3

246.5

248.0

251.5

235.0

241.1

243.1

245.0

246.1

247.7

251.1

Cereals and bakery p ro d u c ts ......................................................................

220.1

236.8

238.6

242.0

244.5

245.9

247.8

221.1

237.4

239.3

242.2

244.4

245.7

248.0

Cereals and cereal products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................

116.6

125.8

126.6

129.4

131.5

133.1

135.0

117.0

127.2

127.7

130.1

132.4

133.9

135.5

FOOD AND BEVERAGES

Food

Food at home

Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................

119.4

125.7

126.6

127.8

129.0

131.1

132.9

120.3

127.3

127.5

128.9

129.9

131.4

132.8

Cereal (12/77 = 100) .................................................................

117.0

124.9

126.0

129.4

131.5

133.0

135.5

117.4

125.5

126.6

129.7

132.0

133.3

135.5

Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 = 100) ...............................

113.6
116.4

127.4

136.2

113.4

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

125.1

126.1

127.6

128.7

129.1

129.8

117.0

125.1

126.2

127.5

128.3

128.8

129.8

White b r e a d ....................................................................................

194.2

210.7

212.0

215.1

216.7

216.9

218.4

194.3

209.7

212.1

215.1

216.0

215.4

217.5

Other breads (12/77 = 100)

116.2

124.6

125.6

127.0

128.3

128.1

129.4

118.5

127.5

129.3

129.3

130.6

130.8

132.3

127.9

128.1

Bakery products (12/77 = 100)

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

Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................

116.1

126.2

127.6

130.8

133.8

135.2

129.2

129,4

131.9

135.2

137.0

137.9

127.0

126.9

127.8

129.5

129.2

115.8

124.3

124.9

125.3

126.4

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

114.8

122.8

124.4

126.5

127.4

127.6

127.9

115.9

122.2

123.2

125.4

126.5

126.9

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

114.8

122.8

124.4

125.3

126.1

126.3

127.1

117.2

124.0

125.6

126.3

126.8

126.9

128.3

..

112.7

119.9

120.2

122.0

122.2

123.6

125.5

112.9

121.0

121.8

122.2

123.0

124.5

125.7

Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts (12/77 = 100) . . .

116.0

123.8

125.0

126.6

128.4

129.1

129.5

117.8

125.4

126.2

128.0

129.2

130.0

130.0

119.8

127.2

127.9

129.7

131.0

131.2

131.5

116.5

123.8

124.0

125.3

126.0

127.2

129.6

235.1
241.1

236.7

238.3

230.4

236.1

243.8

238.2

237.9

243.4

244.2

242.8

243.0

240.2

237.2

237.1

242.8

245.7
269.1

242 6
267.0

239.2
264.8

238.1
2638

243.3
267.9

247,4
268.4

244.3
268.9

245 0
270.8

241.3
268.2

238.1
266.3

237.5
265.6

242.8
269.6

Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 = 100)
Cookies (12/77 = 100)

Crackers and bread and cracker products (12/77 = 100)

127.3

Frozen and refrigerated bakery products
and fresh pies, tarts, and turnovers (12/77 = 100) ............
Meats, poultry, fish, and e g g s .....................................................................

239.0

236.2

Meats, poultry, and f i s h ........................................................................

245.0

Meats .............................................................................................
Beef and v e a l .............................................................................

248.0
266.4

242.6
244.1

Ground beef other than canned

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

2733

275.3

269.4

231.2

236.4

237.1

234.3

230.7

266.9

266.6

277.7

286.2

277.9

273.0

268.6

277.7

288.7

278.7
293.4

269.0

280.5

276.2
288.7

270.6

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

286.1

280.0

275.0

285.3

239.1

244.5

244.2

242.7

243.4

240.9

243.2

242.7

245.8

244.5

242.1

245.5

243.8

246.2

248.1

252.3

254.2

253.5

250.6

247.4

253.2

246.4

250.5

251.1

249.6

250.2

247.3

253.6

Sirloin steak

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

260.7

251.1

254.3

256.1

256.2

264.8

270.2

260.7

253.0

256.0

257.8

257.5

268.3

274.2

Other beef and veal (12/77 = 100) ..................................
P o r k ..............................................................................................

151.8

152.2

153.8

153.3

152.4

155.9

152.8

152.8

153.7

152.4

155.2

202.8

202.6

197.1

191.8

200.3

214.9

204.1

203.0

153.1
196.7

152.2

215.1

152.5
190.4

191.8

190,5

200.7

Bacon ......................................................................................

272.9

231.5

Round roast ..........................................................................
Round steak ..........................................................................

Chuck roast

274.7

274.7

268.7

200.0

190.1

187.6

182.1

177.4

173.1

186.3

201.6

193,8

189.4

183.9

177.7

175.6

189.1

Pork chops .............................................................................

207.7

189.7

190.7

187.0

182.4

182.7

193.1

209.2

191.0

190.5

184.7

180.9

180.6

193.3

Ham other than canned (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).............................

97.2

95.7

95.8

90.6

87.4

87.8

92.1

96.1

95.2

94.7

88.7

85.4

86.1

90.5

Sausage .................................................................................

270.4

255.1

257.6

255.1

250.2

246.2

249.2

269.5

257.0

259.8

258.0

253.9

249.6

252.0

Canned h a m ..........................................................................

224.4

222.3

218.9

217.4

214.5

213.0

210.1

207.6

219.5

219.3

213.5

210.0

208.1

208.6

Other pork (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................

124.2

114.3

113.6

110.7

107.1

106.3

115.1

123.2

114.6

113.7

110.0

106.5

105.9

114.9

Other m e a ts ...............................................................................

245.1

244.7

2458

243.9

240.2

239.4

239.1

241.0

240.9

241.5

239.0

235.6

235.9

236.5

240.6

2348

230.9

229.1

231.0

231.5

Frankfurters

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

243.2

2427

244.6

243.0

242.1

242.8

239.3

234.0

Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 = 100) ..............

135.4

135.6

135.5

134.9

133.5

133.4

135.1

132.3

132.3

132.2

131.1

129.5

130.7

Other lunchmeats (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................

122.0

120.7

121.8

121.9

121.4

121.0

120.6

119.4

118.6

118.8

118.4

117,6

118.1

118.8

Lamb and organ meats (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .............................
Poultry ......................................................................................

141.0

142.4

142.3

140.1

136.3

137.6

137.2

141.1

143.4

144.3

141.3

138.4

139.3

138.2

186.2

182.6

131.4

180,7

177.2

176.5

177.9

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

184.1

183.6

179.5

174.7

193.6

179.6

178.9

172.5

170.6

168.0

170.7

189.1

119.4

116.8

114.5

172.9
114.4

176.3

Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 = 100) ..............

115.7

120.9

119.1

117.0

116.3

114.7

112.7

115.6

120.8

Fresh whole chicken

187.9

184.0

118.1

177.4

176.0

173.8

175.7

186.0

Other poultry (12/77 = 100) .............................................

123.6

118.8

116.8
118.2

117.3

117.4

115.9

117.0

123.2

119.4

117.7

118.1

117.7

116.1

116.6

Fish and seafood ..........................................................................

304.3

320.4

322.6

325.3

324.5

329.1

330.1

298.3

317.9

320.2

325.1

323.0

324.9

326.4

Canned fish and seafood (12/77 = 1 0 0 )..........................

111.4

120.3

120.4

122.9

125.4

127.3

129.2

110.2

119.7

119.5

121.8

124,0

125.7

127.3

Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .........

118.6

123.0

124.3

124.5

123.7

115.7

122.0

123.5

125.1

122.4

122.6

122.5

1658

157.2

164.5

161.2

122.5
148.4

124.2

E g g s .........................................................................................

147.9

154.2

165.4

156.7

164.3

161.5

148.9

147.2

153.5

Dairy products ......................................................................................

206.3

219.5

226.2

227.2

228.6

206.7

219.8

221.1

223.1

2269

227.8

229.2

123.7

220.3
124.1

222.4

116.1

124.7

127.0

127.1

127.7

116.3

123.6

124.2

124.9

127.4

128.0

190.0

203.2

204.0

204.9

208.5

208.6

209.4

190.3

202.7

203.8

208.7

209.8

116.3

122.7

122.7

204.8
124.1

127.2
2084

Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) ....................................
Fresh whole m ilk .......................................................
Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100)

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

123.5

125.9

Processed dairy products (12/77 = 1 0 0 )..................................
B u tte r.........................................................................................

117.3

124.5

125.1

130.4

131.4

117.6

125.1

126.2

128.0

129.9

130.7

131.9

218.3

218.3

127.0
219.9

129.1

200.6

222.2

225.0

226.9

2 026

220.9

220.9

222.7

225.3

227.2

229.7

126.0

126.9

124.4

125.5

126.8

128.5

116.5

123.0

123.1

126.8

127.2

127.5

Cheese (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............................................................

117.7

124.2

124.9

126.2

127.8

128.8

130.0

117.4

129.0

130.1

Ice cream and related products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................

117.0

124.6

1251

128.6

131.9

133.7

134.6

118.4

125.6

127.2

130.4

132.9

133.8

135.5

Other dairy products (12/77 = 100)

114.5

120.9

121.6

124.0

126.1

127.3

127.5

114.3

121.3

121.9

1236

125.7

127.4

127.7

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

Fruits and vegetables ..........................................................................
Fresh fruits and v e g e ta b le s.........................................................
Fresh f r u it s .................................................................

238 1

228.3

232.4

240.9

246.6

236.6

225.9

249.4

223.1

229.9

245.2

255.1

260.0

265.8

248.1

2 206

227.4

244.8

254.4

261.4

265.2

278.2

2358

245.4

257.0

264.7

273.9

250.1

282.7

253.9

278.2
248.4

234.7

245.4

255.6

263.8

274.9

230.1

239.8

245.5

250.2

253.0

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

250.2

2 396

2502

265.5

276.3

293.3

316.6

237.6

249.0

264.4

277.3

297.4

2823
318.7

Bananas .................................................................................

221.0

2385

243.9

2428

249.7

237.7

2287

240.6

243.9

273.9

240.9

234.3

237.6

251.0

Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 100)

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

151.3

121.4

238.1
127.4

234.6
2284

244.5

231.1

218.5
306.1

243.5

313.5

242.6
264,4

240.8

Oranges .................................................................................

136.5

140.8

143.7

147.5

154.2

121.3

126.9

135.7

140.9

146.5

148.7

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

2224

211.2

215.5

2342

246.2

247.0

250.1

221.0

207.9

211.3

235.2

246.0

249.4

249.8

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

225.7

203.3

L e ttu c e ....................................................................................

200.0

Tomatoes ...............................................................................

185.8

198.7
184,9

Apples

Fresh vegetables
Potatoes

Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 100) .............................
Processed fruits and vegetables

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

Processed fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................

203.3

201.7

246,3

310.5

227.9

199.8

200.3

198 2

205.6

208.3

271.9

279.9

238.8

2059

195.9

191.7

203.8

281.9

201.2

230.8

2 306

209.2

189.4

184.3

197.7

288.6
2284

134.6

140.1

140.2

137.1

130.2

123.9

197.2
123.0

135.3

238.4

239.4

241.4

243.0

225.8

233.9

2 350

236.2

132.1

125.1

201.4
125.4

227.8

236.2

237.2

210.1

232.6

244.4

261.5

309.4

241.7

200 6
210.8

139.7

228.6
143.4

237.6

239.7

241.5
126.8

138.0

118.5

123.4

123 9

125.0

125.4

126 4

126,6

118.1

123 6

123.9

124.9

125,7

126.7

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

114.3

117 6

117.7

119.3

118.1

120.1

118.5

1136

117.8

116.5

118.4

117.5

118.9

Fruit juices and other than frozen (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............

117.0

1260

127.2

128 3

1293

129.5

130.6

117.4

126.3

127.4

128.4

129 8

130.4

130.9

Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .............................

123 8

1255

125.5

126.3

1275

128.3

129,0

122.7

125.3

125.9

126.4

127.8

128.9

129.5

117.6
118.4

109.3

112.2

113.0

113.2

113.9

115.0

116.6

109.7

111.7

111.9

113.0

114.6

116.3

118.2

Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 100)

Processed vegetables (12/77 = 100)
Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100)

86

274.5

266.2

237.8


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

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

110.4

114.0

114.6

114.5

115.2

116.2

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

109.6

113.0

112.6

113.3

114.7

116.4

117.8

23.

Continued— Consumer Price Index — U.S. city average

[1 9 6 7 = 100 u nless o th e rw ise specified]
U rb a n W a g e E a rn e rs a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s (re v is e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

1980

1979

1980

1979

M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

F O O D A N D B E V E R A G E S -C o n tin u e d

F o o d — C o n t in u e d

Food at hom e— Continued
Fruits and vegetables — Continued
...

114.3

115.2

116.0

115.6

116.0

116.6

118.1

102.4

113.4

115.4

114.3

114.2

115.2

117.0

Other canned and dried vegetables ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..............

108.8

113.9

114.8

114.7

115.1

115.9

117.0

107.5

111.9

112.3

112.7

113.3

114.2

115.6

Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12 /7 7 = 1 0 0 )

Other foods at h o m e ....................................................................................

269.5

288.0

292.0

295.1

298.1

301.8

304.3

268.7

287.3

290.9

294.6

298.0

301.4

303.7

Sugar and s w e e ts .........................................................................................

279.4

297.5

313.5

319.5

326.8

342.0

353.1

278.3

297.1

314.1

320.8

328.0

342.9

354.6

123.9

126.5

129.0

130.8

132.0

153.8

158.6

163.3

180.7

194.5

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

118.5

122.4

123.8

126.3

128.9

130.5

131.6

118.1

122.2

Sugar and artificial sweeteners ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..........................

115.4

131.5

153.0

156.9

161.4

180.3

194.2

115.4

131.6

Candy and chewing gum (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )

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

113.8

119.5

120.4

121.3

123.6

125.8

127.2

112.6

118.5

119.3

120.0

122.2

124.6

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

227.4

235.9

236.8

238.3

239.5

240.0

239.3

227.6

236.5

236.8

238.3

240.6

247.0

247.9

248.3

248.3

240.1
248.4

240.5

239.7

249.4

248.6

Other sweets (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )
Fats and oils (12/77 -1 0 0 )

247.9

248.8

247.9

246.1

249.0

126.5

Margarine .......................................................................................
Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (1 2/77= 100) ............

240.2
113.7

116.4

117.9

119.8

121.4

123.1

123.6

113.6

117.2

118.5

120.0

121.6

123.5

124.0

Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) .................

118.3

123.6

123.7

124.8

125.8

124.9

124.6

118.5

123.8

123.4

124.4

125.5

124.9

125.0

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

354.6

384.5

387.1

390.3

393.0

3959

397.4

353.6

383.0

384,4

389.2

392.3

395.1

396.2

Cola drinks, excluding diet c o l a ..................................................

238.3

255.9

259.3

261.7

265.4

267.8

268.4

236.5

253.6

255.4

260.1

263.2

267.1

265.6

Carbonated drinks, including diet cola (1 2 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ..............

115.6

122.3

123.5

125.6

126.2

128.3

129.2

113.0

120.2

121.1

123.4

124.8

125.2

127.4

Roasted coffee

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

376.5

439.6

437.6

434.0

433.5

432.4

435.3

375.1

436.8

432.3

430.4

430.0

429.2

432.3

Freeze dried and instant c o ffe e ..................................................

335.6

382.2

381.7

380.2

381.9

380.2

381.0

336.2

380.4

380.3

379.2

380.4

378.7

Nonalcoholic beverages

379.2

Other noncarbonated drinks ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................

113.1

118.3

118.6

120.7

120.7

121.8

122.1

112.2

117.5

118.1

119.6

120.0

120.8

121.1

Other prepared foods ..........................................................................

209.1

221.8

224.1

226 6

229.1

230.9

232.3

208.8

221.7

224.0

226.6

229.6

230.8

232.1

Canned and packaged soup ( 1 2 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................

113.2

118.1

118.0

120.5

122.0

122.9

123.3

113.1

117.9

117.6

120.6

122.5

123.7

123.5

Frozen prepared foods ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) .........................................

121.4

126.6

128.2

130.4

131.3

132.0

132.4

119.5

125.5

127.1

. 128.8

131.0

130.8

131.3

126.1

127.2

128.3

114.8

124.7

125.3

126.0

127.3

127.9

128.5
127.3

Snacks ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ...................................................................

114.0

123.4

124.1

124.8

Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..............

115.0

123.6

124.9

125.2

125.4

127.5

128.0

114.2

123.1

124.0

124.5

125.5

127.3

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

114.3

123.7

126.0

127.1

127.9

128 8

130.2

115.2

124.6

126.6

128.1

129.2

129.9

115.3

120.7

122.2

124.4

127.6

128.6

129.3

115.2

120.5

122.2

123.7

127.0

128.3

128.9

125.2

126.0

115.3

120.3

122.0

123.3

124.3

124.1

125.4

2666

267.8

246.5

260.1

262.7

265.3

267.6

Other condiments (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )

Miscellaneous prepared foods (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )

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

Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12 /7 7 = 1 0 0 ) . .

115.8

121.2

122.2

123.1

124.6

Food away from h o m e .........................................................................................

244.9

258.3

260.9

263.0

264.6

131.6

269 9

271.2

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

119.6

125.9

1270

127.9

128.5

129.3

130.0

120.4

126.7

127.6

128.9

129.9

130.7

131.1

Dinner (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) ....................................................................................

118.9

125.8

127.0

127.9

128.7

129.5

130.1

119.7

126.8

128.1

129.1

130.5

131.0

132.0

Other meals and snacks ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................

117.3

123.2

124.9

126.4

127.4

129.0

129.3

118.2

124.4

126.2

127.7

128.6

131.1

131.6

172.7

180.4

181.7

183.9

185.4

186.4

187.2

173.3

181.1

182.8

185.0

186.9

188.0

189.2

122.0

122.7

Lunch (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )

A lc o h o lic b e v e r a g e s

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

Alcoholic beverages at home ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) .....................................................

112.2

117.4

118.2

119.9

120.9

121.4

122.1

113.3

118.3

119.3

120.8

123.6

Beer and a l e ..................................................................................................

170.3

179.9

182.0

185.9

187.7

188.2

189.2

170.5

179.9

181.7

185.1

187.5

188.8

189.7

Whisxey ..........................................................................................................

127.4

132.6

132.8

133.4

133.9

134.7

135.2

129.2

133.8

134.4

134.6

135.1

135.4

136.6

W in e .................................................................................................................

194.1

202.5

204.1

206.6

208.5

211.5

212.6

197.8

206.1

208.4

209.8

212.0

213.7

217.4

Other alcoholic beverages ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................
Alcoholic beverages away from home ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................

105.2
114.5

107.3
119.2

107.4

108.2

109.6

122.3

122.5

105.0
112.3

106.7

120.5

109.0
121.5

108.7

120.0

107.2
119.1

107.8
120.5

108.7
121.7

108.9
122.5

122.9

117.6

109.6

H O U S I N G .................................................................................................................................................

228.4

250.5

254.5

257.9

261.7

266.7

265.1

228.4

250.5

254.4

257.8

261.7

266.9

265.1

S h e l t e r ........................................................................................................................................................

240.1

267.2

271.6

276.0

280.2

286.3

2829

240.7

268.3

272.7

277.2

281.6

288.0

284.3

Rent, re s id e n tia l.....................................................................................................

175.9

185.6

186.6

187.0

188.9

191.1

192.1

175.8

185.5

186.4

186.9

188.7

190.8

191.8

Other rental costs

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

236.0

255.7

2586

260.7

261.9

264.2

265.7

235.2

255.6

258.6

260.5

261.7

263.9

265.5
282.3

Lodging while out of to w n .............................................................................

248.8

272.8

276.8

279.3

279.9

2821

283.8

246.7

271.6

275.7

278.0

278.6

280.8

Tenants’ insurance (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) ..............................................................

110.9

117.8

118.6

119.9

121.2

122.6

123.1

111.5

118.5

119.3

120.1

121.4

122.7

123.3

H om eow nership.....................................................................................................

263.0

296.3

302.0

307.7

312.9

320.4

315.4

264.2

298.4

304.0

310.0

315.4

323.4

317.9

244.0

246.5

249.7

252.6

253.0

254.3

249.8

3086

367.7

379.9

3906

399.7

416.1

399.6

310.6

371.6

243.8
384.1

246.5

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

422.0

405.0

312.6

333.7

335.7

344.9

351.8

355.5

312.1

335.2

337.4

395,3
340.4

404.9

Property insurance ...............................................................................

346.4

352.7

357.2

189.9
484.1

189.4

190.0

500.9

515.6

541.5

514.6

194.8

199.8

202.8

210.8

199.6

278.2

281.7

283.4

283.8

285.1

Home p u rc h a s e ..............................................................................................
Financing, taxes, and insurance

224.0

243.0

253.9

224.0

243.0

Properly taxes ......................................................................................

181.8

188.2

188.2

3389
188.4

187.6

187.7

188.3

183.3

189.9

Contracted mortgage interest c o s t .....................................................

375.6

464.0

483.0

499.4

513.6
202.4

538.9

512.2

375.8

465.0

210.3

199.0

164.9
259.1

187.8
274.4

190.1

189.3

Mortgage interest ra te s .................................................................

164.9

187.5

194.4

199.4

Maintenance and repairs .............................................................................

257.9

273.7

278.8

282.9

284.9

285.9

287.6

Maintenance and repair services .......................................................

280.0

297 1

3101

310.6

312.1

282.8

299.3

303.5

307.7

309.1

308.5

309.0

206.1

218.9

303.2
221.4

307.9

Maintenance and repair commodities ................................................

224.3

225.8

228.0

230.3

206.5

219.5

222.3

224.3

226.5

228.8

231.3

Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and
equipment (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 ) ..........................................................

112.5

123.5

125.0

126.6

128.7

131.3

133.4

112.8

122.3

123.6

126.0

128.7

130.9

132.2

Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry ( 1 2 / 7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ..............

113.7

115.8

117.6

118.8

118.0

118.9

119.1

114.4

119.3

119.9

119.7

118.4

118.5

119.3

110.1

115.3

116.4

119.1

119.3

119.9

121.1

110.2

117.9

119.3

120.0

122.0

123.8

125.9

110.3

116.4

117.0

118.2

118.7

119.1

120.1

109.5

114.5

118.2

119.4

120.1

120.7

122.5

285.5

244.1

2644

268.7

271.0

276.4

283.0

286.1

333.9

Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling
supplies ( 1 2 /7 7 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................................................
Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (1 2 /7 7 -1 0 0 )

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

F u e l a n d o t h e r u t i l i t i e s ..................................................................................................................

243.5

263.8

268.0

270.5

275.9

282.2

Fuels ......................................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g a s ......................................................................

293.8

327.1

337.8

346.4

355.8

327.0

355.8

556.4

556.0

558.7

413.5

540.3

554.1

337.6
557.1

346.0

539.1

360.8
560.4

293.9

412.9

333.9
553.4

557.1

559.8

561.9

561.9

577.9

580.7

580.4

583.2

585.1

430.0

562.5

577.9

580.7

580.5

583.3

585.6

360.3

Fuel o i l .....................................................................................................
Other fuels (6 /7 8 - 100) ...................................................................

429.5
106.2

136.6

138.3

139.6

139.4

140.1

140.4

106.5

137.9

139.5

140.8

141.3

Gas (piped) and electricity ...........................................................................

264.5

278.8

284.0

288.0

298.2

308.8

314.3

264.6

278.5

283.9

287.6

297.5

308.5

313.5

248,0

262.3

267.6

362.3

364.9

368.6

E le c tric ity ................................................................................................

227.4

233.8

237.9

241.5

Utility (piped) gas ..................................................................................

307.7

336.8

343.9

347.9


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

248.1
364.6

261.9

267.4

228.0

233.9

238.1

366.7

371.8

306.5

335.4

342.6

241.5
346.4

141.9

142.1

87

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
23.

Continued — Consumer Price Index — U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1979
J u ly

H O U S IN G

U rb a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s (re v is e d )

1980
Feb.

M ar.

A p r.

1979
M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

1980
Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

161.9

162.3

June

J u ly

C o n t in u e d

F u e l a n d o th e r u tilit ie s — C o n tin u e d

Other utilities and public services

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

Telephone services ............................................................
Local charges (12/77 = 100) ..........................................................
Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ..................................................
Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ...........................................
Water and sewerage maintenance ................................................
H o u s e h o l d f u r n is h in g s a n d o p e r a t i o n s

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

Housefurnishings .............................................................................
Household linens (12/77 = 100) .....................................................
Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) .
Furniture and bedding ..................................................................................
.......................................................

161.3

161.9

162.3

163.1

163.1

164.9

165.9

132.8

133.2

133.4

134.0

135.5

136.3

132.2

132.8

133.1

133.2

133.9

135.4

136.1

100.1

102.7

103.3

103.5

104.3

105.3

105.4

100.2

102.7

103.2

103.3

104.0

105.1

164.9

105.2
101.6

165.9

159.4

161.4

98.4

97.4

97.4

97.3

97.3

99.5

101.6

98.5

97.5

97.5

97.4

97,4

99.5

101.3

98.8

98.7

99.0

99.4

99.6

99.5

101.2

98.7

98.6

98.9

99.3

99.5

99.3

244.0

252.3

253.9

255.2

256.5

259.3

261.3

244.0

253.0

254.7

256.2

257.6

260.5

262.4

190.4

199.0

201.3

203.0

204.2

205.5

206.2

189.0

196.8

199.2

200.7

201.9

202.9

203.5

162.9

Textile housefurnishings.................................................................

Bedroom furniture (12/77 = 100)

159.4
132.1

169.3

171.5

172.7

173.4

162.5

167.9

170.4

173.6

182.9

187.2

189.4

188.2

171.6

186.3

186.1

189.6

188.7

113.9

114.4

116.0

114.6

103.1

181.2
109.8

185.3

110.1

188.2
114.8

187.3

104.3

113.2

113.8

113.4

116.2

114.8

174.6

174.7

171.5

172.2

172.9

172.9

112.4

118.2

119.7

119.9

119.3

120.1

120.2

111.4

116.6

118.2

118.9

119.0

120.5

121.0

176.8

185.2

189.2

190.9

191.9

193.6

192.8

177.2

184.3

187.9

189.4

190.1

190.8

189.7

113.2

120.5

122.5

124.3

125.0

126.2

125.4

112.1

117.5

119.2

120.9

121,7

123.1

122.6

Sofas (12/77 = 100) .........................................................

106.2

108.5

110.9

111.6

111.4

113.0

112.2

108.7

110.3

112.7

111.8

112.0

112.7

111.7

Living room chairs and tables (12/77 = 100) ....................................

104.5

110.0

110.8

110.9

110.8

110.6

110.7

106.2

111.2

111.9

112.6

112.6

111.7

111.3

Other furniture (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................

113.3

118.3

122.6

124.0

125.6

127.1

126.6

112.5

117.5

121.3

123.1

123.5

123 9

123.0

Appliances including TV and sound e q u ip m e n t...........................................

135.4

138.3

138.8

139.3

139.9

140.2

140.5

135.0

137.8

139.0

139.7

140.2

140.1

140.1

Television and sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ...............................
Television .......................................................

103.9
102.6

105.4
103.7

105.7
104.0

105.7
104.0

105.7
104.1

105.6
104.2

105.8
104.4

103.3
101.6

104.9
102.3

105.5
102.9

105.4
102.8

105.4
102 8

105.2
103.1

105.0
102.7

Sound equipment (12/77 = 100)

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

106,1

108.1

108.3

108.3

108.3

107.9

108.2

155.1

159.4

160.2

161.4

162.6

163.4

163.7

154.9

158.8

160.7

162.3

108.7
163.4

Refrigerators and home fre e z e r.....................................................

152.9

156.5

157.9

160.6

162.7

163.2

163.6

157.3

159.7

161.4

163.5

166.0

Laundry equipment (12/77 = 100) ..............................................

110.7

115.0

116.8

117.5

118.2

119.1

119.6

110.1

114.7

116,6

117.8

Other household appliances (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................

108.7

111.3

111.2

111.5

112.1

112.7

112.6

107.1

109.5

110.7

111.6

109.0

110.8

110.9

110.0

110.3

111.2

111.6

107.6

110.5

111.1

111.6

Household a p p lia n c e s ......................................................................

105.8

108.2

108.7

108.6

108.0

108.0

163.6

163.8
166.4

118.5

166.8
118.9

111.8

111.7

112.1

111.9

111.4

112.8

118.7

Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing
machines (12/77 = 100) .......................................................
Office machines, small electric appliances,
and air conditioners (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................

108.5

112.0

111.6

114.4

113.8

106.5

108.4

110.2

111.6

111.7

112.0

111.3

115.9

117.3

113.1
118.4

114.2

110.3

119.0

120.2

121.3

110.4

114.4

116.0

117.0

117.8

118.5

119.7

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

109.1

114.5

116.4

118.2

117.6

120.2

120.8

104.6

109.4

110.8

113.1

114.7

107.5

112.7

114.9

115.6

117.6

118.8

119.0

107.2

109.8

112.3

112.6

113.2
114.4

114.3

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

115.9

116.6

Other household equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ).........................................
Floor and window coverings, Infants' laundry
cleaning and outdoor equipment (12/77 = 100)
Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 = 100)

Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric
kitchenware (12/77 = 100) ..............................................................

114.4

121.4

122.6

123.4

124.1

125.4

126.4

114.1

118.9

120.8

121.4

121.7

122.2

124.0

Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 = 100) .

107.6

111.7

112.2

113.5

114.0

113.7

115.9

111.0

114.2

115.0

115.9

117.4

117.6

118.7

Housekeeping s u p p lie s ...................................................................

222.3

235.0

238.0

240.7

243.6

245.4

247.3

220.7

232.8

235.5

238.1

241.2

243.0

245.2

Soaps and detergents ........................................................................

210.9

228.9

232 1

233.2

235.0

234.9

237.2

210,5

226.5

230.0

231.1

232.1

232.3

234.4

Other laundry and cleaning products (12/77 = 100) ..........................

111.3

117.2

117.0

117.6

119.8

122.3

111.3

117.1

116.9

118.1

119.5

Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins (12/77 = 100) . .

116.5

123.9

126.2

128.6

131.5

132,7

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

108.9

113.8

115.6

116.3

116.9

128.1
114.9

130.8

Stationery, stationery supplies, and gift wrap (12/77 = 100)

121.2
112.7

121.1
129.4

116,0

116.5

117,9

Miscellaneous household products (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ....................................

112.3

119.4

120.9

122.0

123.0

Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................

113.0

119.4

121.4

1238

125.2

Housekeeping s e rv ic e s ........................................................................
Postage ................................................................................................

120.8

122.3

130.2

116.9

123.4

125.8

107.5

112.3

113.6

124.4

117.6
125.4

110.5

116.6

118.3

119.2

120.9

122.1

123.5

126.8

127.6

110.4

113.3

114.0

116.5

118.9

121.0

120.7

249.7

261.6

263.6

266.0

267.6

269.1

270.4

248.6

261.1

262.7

264.3

265.6

267.0

268.1

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.2

257.2

257.2

257.3

257.3

257.3

257.3

Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and
drycleaning services (12/77 = 100)

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

116.3

124.2

125.4

128.3

129.4

130.5

131.0

126.1

127.8

128.5

114.7

115,8

116.5

117.2

117.7

118,7

116.5
109.4

124,6

109.5

115.5

116.0

116.2

116.7

129.2
117.4

117.8

A P P A R E L A N D U P K E E P .........................................................................

164.3

171.9

176.0

177.3

177.5

177.2

176.2

164.5

171.5

175.1

176.1

176.8

176.0

175.4

A p p a r e l c o m m o d itie s

158.6

165.1

169.2

170.2

170.1

169.7

168.5

159.1

165.2

168.7

169.5

169.8

168.8

168.0

155.6

161.8

166.2

167.2

166.9

166.4

165.0

156.0

161.9

165.7

166.3

166.4

165.3

164 4

Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 = 100) ...........................................

Apparel commodities less fo o tw e a r................................................
Men's and boys' ........................................................................

129.7

159.2

162.7

165.6

166.9

168.0

166.8

165.9

160.6

167.3

168.9

168.1

167.2

102.3

104.3

105.0

105.7

103.9

101.3

104.4

105.2

104.7

98.2

99.9

101.1

101.2

97.1

95.8

94.4

96.4

97.3

106.3
97.1

105.5

968

104.8
99.7

162,9
102.4

166.0

100.0

Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) ..........................

95.4

93.2

Coats and jackets (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................

94.4

93.6

96.9

96.5

97.3

96.3

97.6

97.0

97.1

112.7

115 0

116.6

117.9

118.2

106.6

113.2

114.2

97.2
116.4

97.1

108.4

922
111.1

96.9

Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 = 100) ........................

96.0
118.4

115.4

115.7

Shirts (12/77 = 100) .....................................................................

100.9

109.3

111.9

111.5

112.2

110.8

110.7

104.1

109.4

112.0

111.7

113.7

112.9

Dungarees, jeans, and trousers (12/77 = 100) ........................
B o y s '(12/77 = 100) ..........................................................................

99.0

97.7

98.7

99.4

100.2

99.5

99.2

101.5

102.2

102,7

105.0

104.8

106.3

107.5

108.9
104,4

109.7

109.5
104.6

110.0

103.5

105.9

107.5

104.2
108.7

105.2

104.2

109.6

109.8

110.0

Men's (12/77 = 100) ..............................................................

111.2

Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 = 100) .................

101.7

99.9

102.5

101.9

105.0

107.2

107.7

107.8

107.4

Furnishings (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................

108.0

110.9

112.0

113.3

114.3

114.6

114.7

107.1

109.5

110.7

111.6

112.7

113.3

113.3

104.8

109.5

109.8

110.7

111.3
154.1

111.3

112.6

103.9

107.7

108.2

108.8

109.9
154.1

110.1

110.9

151.2

149.9

Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100)

.........

Women's and girls’ ..............................................................
W omen’s (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .....................................................
Coats and jackets

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

Dresses .............................................................................

147.8

151.1

155.5

155.9

105.2

153.0

104.4

150.6

101.3

98.4

100.8

103 8

103.9

102.4

101.7

99.8

147.5
98.7

101.4

103.7

103.3

162.1

163.1

167.6

168.3

162.0

158.1

158.8

166.8

162.4

151.3

167.0

154.9

157.2

169.3

167.8

163.9

163 3

153.9

151.2

157.5

167.8
154.1

99.2

101.0

154.7

103.0
162.4

100.8
155.2

157.5

154.5

152.5

146.2

99.6

Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................

95.0

160.6
97.1

99,8

101.1

100.3

99.5

968

152.8
95.7

99.2

97.1

105.6

110.2

111.0

111.8

112.1

113.2

106.1

110.6

111.5

112,2

87.3
98.1

882

91.6

880

86.5

85.5

87.9

96.8

100.2

98.2

98.9

101.8

102.6

102.7

102.1

102.0

95.5

97.3

100.1

101.1

982
100.5

112.3
91.7

112.8

Suits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )........................................................................
Girls (12/77 = 100) .................................................................

111.5
904

101.6
111.7

101.2

Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................

99.6

100.0

Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 1 0 0 )......................
Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................

98.7

95.7

98.9

99.8

99.4

94.6

92.6

95.7

96.8

100.8

101.4

101.8

99.7

925

98.1

99.8

100.5

95.3
99.9

93.8

98.2

98.1
100.7

98.9

939

98.5

95.6
98.2

104 6

105.6

108.4

109.5

110.0

111.4

111.4

102.0

103.5

107.8

108.9

110 0

110.9

110.4

90.1

Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and
accessories (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .......................................................

88


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

23.

Continued — Consumer Price Index — U.S. city average

[1 967 = 100 unless o th e rw ise specified]
U rb a n W a g e E a rn e rs a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v is e d )

A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s

1680

1979

G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

June

J u ly

242.8

246.8

249.2

197.4

201.0

200.8

106.9

108.6

110.9

108.8

138.1

136.3

138.6

139 4

J u ly

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

240.9

243.0

221.9

232.7

237.3

241.1

205.3

205.5

168.4

191.8

197.8

198.5

110.2

109.3

95.6

105.7

107.2

140.4

142.2

142 8

114.9

132.3

137.3

189.3

189,0

189.5

176.6

M ay

June

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

Infants' and toddlers' ....................................................................................

219,0

2266

231.4

234.3

237.4

Other apparel commodities

167.9

191.4

199.9

201.9

202.7

100) ..................................

101,3

106.3

107.1

107.9

109.1

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

111.7

131.2

138.6

140.1

F o o tw e a r.................................................................................................................

176.6

184.6

187.0

188.3

186.3

188.1

188.9

189.3

113.4

118.3

119.0

119.7

120.0

121.3

121.1

114.5

119.4

120.9

122.4

122.7

123.6

123.2

121.3

121.0

123.5

111.2

118.0

119.5

119.5

121.5

121.3

123.1

APPAREL AND UPKEEP

A p p a r e l c o m m o d itie s -

A p r.

1980

1979

C o n t in u e d

C o n t in u e d

Apparel commodities less footw ear— Continued
........................................................................

Sewing materials and notions (12/77 Jewelry and luggage (12/77 -

Men's (12/77 -

100)

100)

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

183.9

189.3

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

111.0

117.9

119.5

119.5

1 0 0 ) .............................................................................

108.3

112.1

114.2

115.6

115.8

114.6

113.8

106.9

109.5

110.9

112.6

112.9

111.7

111.3

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

Boys’ and girls’ (12/77 Womens’ (12/77 -

100)

205.7

222.9

225.9

230.0

232.2

233.6

234.4

204.9

219.8

223.5

226.0

230.8

231.8

232.6

1 0 0 ) ..............

120.6

130.6

132.5

135.5

136.9

137.5

137.7

120.3

130.6

132.3

134.1

135.6

137.3

137.5

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

111.2

120.7

122.1

123.3

124.5

125.5

126.3

111.2

116.9

119.6

120.4

125.0

123.9

124.7

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N

216.6

239.6

243.7

246.8

249.0

249.7

251.0

217.8

240.2

244.3

247.7

249.9

250.6

251.9

P r i v a t e ........................................................................................................................................................

217.4

2398

244.0

247.0

249.2

249.7

250.5

218.3

240.4

244.6

248.0

250.1

250.8

251.5

166.7

175.3

175.0

177.0

178.9

178.5

179.2

166,6

175.4

Used cars ...............................................................................................................

209.2

195.3

195.2 ■

196.7

199.3

200.7

203.4

209.2

195.3

195.2

196.8

199.3

200.8

203.4

376.3

377.1

377.6

377.8
269.7

A p p a re l s e r v ic e s

Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 Other apparel services (12/77 -

100)

175.4

177.7

179.6

179.4

180.0

Gasoline .................................................................................................................

280.0

357.6

370.9

374.7

375.4

376.2

376.7

281.0

359.0

372.7

Automobile maintenance and r e p a ir .................................................. >,...............

244.0

258.2

260.9

264.1

266.1

267.3

269.0

244.2

259.2

261.7

268.0

126.5

127.3

129.1

130.6

131.4

131.8

117.6

126.1

127.2

264.3
128.4

266.1

117.4

129.7

130.8

131.3

127.8

128.8

129.9

Body work (12/77 -

1 0 0 ) ..........................................................................

Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous
116.7

123.2

117.5

124.8

126.1

127.4

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

115.9

121.3

123.1

124.7

125.9

126.1

127.3

115.3

121.3

122.8

124.2

125.4

126.2

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

114.8

122.5

123.5

124.4

125.1

125.9

126.4

115.2

123.1

124.0

124.6

125.4

126.2

127.2
126.6

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

198.5

217.1

mechanical repair (12/77 -

100) ..........................................................

Maintenance and servicing (12/77 Power plant repair (12/77 Other private transportation

100)

100)

Other private transportation commodities

126.1

126.6

127.5

128.1

212.6

216.5

221.3

224.5

225.0

224.5

199.1

213.6

223.1

226.7

227.3

226.7

173.3

191.2

192.7

194.1

195.3

195.5

197.7

174.4

191.7

193.2

195.8

196.7

196.8

200.1

100) ...................

110.5

123.9

126.4

129.8

132.2

134.1

136.3

109.9

124.0

126.1

129.1

131.5

133.6

135.5

1 0 0 ) .............................

112.3

123.5

124.3

124.8

125.4

125.3

126.6

113.2

123.9

124.7

126.2

126.5

126.3

128.4

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

Motor oil, coolant, and other products (12/77 Automobile parts and equipment (12/77 -

124.1

171.2

172.6

172.3

174.9

155.7

170.6

172.5

174.9

175.6

174.9

178.9

153.7

168.5

170.1

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

1148

127.1

126.5

126.8

126.6

114.3

125.0

124.4

125.1

125.0

125.4

125.7

Other private transportation s e rv ic e s ..........................................................

127.3
220.4

127.2

207.1

225.0

230.6

234.5

235 0

233.8

207.6

221.5

225.7

232.6

236.8

237.6

236.0

Automobile Insurance ...........................................................................
Automobile finance charges (12/77 - 100) ....................................

229.1

2402

244.0

245.2

247.1

248.5

249.1

229.0

239.7

243.8

244.9

246.9

248.2

248.7

116.8

132.1

137.4

148.6

155.0

153.7

149.7

116.4

131.3

135.2

147.8

153.8

153.5

112.2

113.1

114.0

114.7

146.5

146.5

146.5
123.3

T ir e s ................................................................................................
Other parts and equipment (12/77 -

100)

Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) . . .

106.9

109.8

110.8

111.5

112.1

State registration ..........................................................................

144.0

145.2

145.3

146.4

146.4

Drivers’ license (12/77 -

100) ...................................................

Vehicle inspection (12/77 -

100) ..............................................

Other vehicle related fees (12/77 -

100)

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

112.9
146.4

113.3

107.3

110.9

111.6

146.4

143.9

145.3

145.5

149.1

104.5

104.8

104.7

104,7

104.7

104.7

104.9

104.3

104.5

104.4

104.4

104.4

146.5
104.4

114.6

119.0

119.7

119.7

120.4

121.5

122.6

115.5

119.7

120.2

120.3

121.0

122.1

116.9

125.4

127.0

127.8

130.0

132.7

134.6

232.9

234.9

245.8
275.5

114.0

119.6

122.0

122.7

124.0

126.1

126.8

104.6

P u b l i c ...........................................................................................................................................................

197.1

229.5

232.1

235.9

239.5

242.2

250.5

197.6

223.9

2261

229.7

Airline f a r e ...............................................................................................................

198.5

255.4

259.9

264.3

270.0

275.5

276.9

198 4

255.2

259.3

263.9

270.0

275.4

irtercity bus fare ...................................................................................................
Intracity mass transit ...........................................................................................

258.8

2885

290.7

291.5

293.6

294.2

290.2

291.0

293.4

293.6

293.9

199.7

200.8

203.0

204.6

258.5
189.7

288.2

189,8

293.8
204.4

197.6

198.6

200.8

202.0

201.9

221.8

222.6

Taxi fare .................................................................................................................

220.6

244.0

245.6

256.4

259.9

262.0

263.3

226.5

249.3

251.2

261.6

265.7

267.6

Intercity train f a r e ...................................................................................................

216.1

237.2

237.2

237.3

250.0

255.2

255.3

217.1

237.0

237.1

237.2

251.1

255.5

269.2
255.4

M E D IC A L C A R E

239.9

257.9

260.2

262.0

263.4

264.7

266.6

240.5

258.7

260.9

263.1

264.9

265.9

267.8

M e d ic a l c a r e c o m m o d i t i e s

154.1

1621

163.5

164.9

166.4

167.9

169.1

155.3

162.7

164.4

166.0

167.2

168.5

169.7

Prescription drugs

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

141.9

149 8

150.9

152.2

153.5

154.8

155.6

143.0

150.7

152.0

154.6

155.8

156.6

Anti-infective drugs (12/77 - 100) ............................................................
Tranquillizers and sedatives (12/77 - 1 0 0 )..............................................

112.0

117.2

117.9

118.5

118.7

120.5

121.2

119.8

120.1

120.7

122.0

122.3

114.0

121.3

122.2

122.9

124.1

124.9

125.5

113.0
114.4

153.5
120.4

121.0

122.2

122.7

123.5

124.2

124.7

Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 -

108.6

113.4

113.3

114.2

114.6

115.1

115.4

1091

114.2

114.7

115.9

116.8

117.3

117.6

129.6

131.3

132.4

133.7

134.8

1 0 0 ) ................................................

Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and
prescription and supplies (12/77 -

100) ..............................................

Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77 -

100) ....................................

118.9

128 7

130.0

133.2

134.3

135.5

119.3

113.1

119.7

120.5

131.3
121.4

127.8

122.9

124.2

124.5

114.7

120.1

121.3

122.6

124.2

125.5

126.1
120.9

Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and
109.5

113.7

115.5

117.1

118.2

118.6

119.3

111.0

115.2

116.5

118.5

119.5

120.2

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

110.8

116.3

117.3

118.4

119.5

120.6

121.7

111.9

116.6

118.0

119.2

120.1

121.0

122.0

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

108.2

112.9

114.1

115.0

116.5

118.2

118.7

108.5

112.6

114.5

Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs ......................................

182.2

184.4

186.0

187.3

189.1

180.8

183.0

186.9

1 0 0 ) .........

109.7

114.6

115.1

115.3

116.5

117.5

119.1

173.2
110.7

117.3
188.4

117.8

180.4

115.3
185.4

116.3

171.3

115.6

116.1

116.3

117.1

117.5

119.0

M e d ic a l c a r e s e r v ic e s

258.5

279.0

281.5

283.4

284.7

285.9

288.0

258.8

279.8

282.2

2845

286.3

287.3

289.3

Professional services ...........................................................................................

227.6

248.2

250.3

251.8

253.5

229.3

245.5

247.8

251.2

253.5

255.1

264.8

267.5

269.2

270.9

246.8

264.1

266.2

269.7

272.3

273.9

256.1
275.4

237.2

238.8

240.3

241.1

217.1

233.4

235.7

238.9

241.2

243.1

243.0

122.2

122.9

125.0

111.0

117.4

119.3

121.1

121.6

122.2

123.6

327.2

329.7

294.9

322.1

324.4

325.3

326.5

326.5

329.8

respiratory agents (12/77 -

1 0 0 ) ..........................................................

Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 Eyeglasses (12/77 -

100)

100)

Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 -

242.9

245.3

Physicians' s e rv ic e s ......................................................................................

244.7

260.2

Dental s e rv ic e s ..............................................................................................
Other professional services (12/77 - 1 0 0 ) ..............................................

215.2

231.5

262.3
234.1

Other medical care s e rv ic e s ...............................................................................

111.5
2958

118.1
322.7

119.5
325.3

121.7
325.8

326.3

190.1

1 0 0 ) ...............................

117.3

127.8

128.8

129.7

130.4

131.4

133.4

116.6

126.8

127.7

128.6

129.7

130.3

132.6

Hospital r o o m .........................................................................................
Other hospital and medical care services .........................................

369.7

403.4

405.8

408.0

410.1

412.6

418.2

367.5

398.8

401.2

403.6

406.7

408.5

414.9

116.4

126.5

127.8

128.8

129.5

130.6

132.8

115.6

125.9

126.9

128.0

129.1

129 7

132.3

Hospital and other medical services (12/77 -


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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
23.

Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1 967 = 100 u nless o th e rw ise sp e cified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
G e n e ra l s u m m a ry

1979
J u ly

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1980
Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

1979
M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

1980
Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

E N T E R T A IN M E N T

189.1

197.8

200.6

202.5

204.0

205.3

206.6

188.6

196.2

199.5

201.3

202.4

204.0

204.4

E n te r ta in m e n t c o m m o d i t i e s .................................

189.7

200.4

203.4

205.7

207.0

208.3

209.3

188.2

196.9

200.3

202.8

203.4

204.5

204.8

Reading materials (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ......................

110.0

117.4

119.4

120.1

121.5

122.3

123.0

109.5

117.0

119.1

119.7

121.1

121.8

122.5

212.6

227.7

232.4

234.8

237.2

239.0

240.0

212.2

227.3

232.0

234.3

236.4

238 2

239 3

112.0

119.2

120.8

120.8

122.4

123.1

124.1

111.7

118.9

120.7

120.6

122.3

122.8

123.7

110.0

115.9

117.2

118.7

118.5

118.6

119.5

107.0

110.8

1124

114.1

114.0

114.2

114 2

Newspapers .................................
Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 = 100) .

.

Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) .................
Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100)

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

110.8

117.4

118.7

120.6

119.9

119,8

120.7

106.9

109.1

110.8

Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 = 100)
Bicycles ..................................................

113.0

112.5

1126

1125

106.7

108.3

109.5

111.3

112.0

111.1

112.4

104.7

107.8

109.3

110.5

110.3

110.2

110.6

162.2

174.5

177.2

178.6

179.7

180.6

181.6

161.8

174.9

177.8

179.8

Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100)

180.9

181.4

181 4

107.8

112.4

112.9

113.1

113.7

114.6

115.0

106.5

112.6

113.4

114.0

114.6

115.3

116.1

Toys, hobbies, and other entertainment (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ,
Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 100) .
Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 = 100)

,

Pet supplies and expense (12/77 = 100) . . . .

109.4

115.1

116.9

118.4

119.4

120.6

121.0

109.6

114.3

116.4

118.0

118.1

119.0

109.3

114.1

115.7

117.3

118,5

119.6

119.0

109.1

112.3

114.9

116.5

1158

1170

115 9

108.4

114.1

118.2

120.1

120.8

121.8

122.8

107.7

114.2

116.9

118.9

120.5

121 1

122 4

119 1

110.3

117.6

118.2

119.2

120.1

121.7

123.2

111.6

117.9

119.0

120.0

120.9

121.4

122.9

E n te r ta in m e n t s e r v ic e s

188.6

194.5

197.0

198.5

200.1

201.4

203.1

109.1

196.0

199.1

199.9

201.8

204.3

204.8

Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ............

111.9

116.0

117.5

119.0

120.2

122.1

112.1

116.3

Admissions (12/77 = 1 0 0 ) ...................

118.8

119.3

120.5

121.5

121 9

114.3

118.3

119.1

118.7

118.8

120.4

121.3

115.3

119.7

120.0

120.1

121.0

123 2

123 2

109.1

111.4

113.2

114.8

116.4

116.6

117.4

110.5

111.8

113.9

115.1

116.5

118.2

118.8

O T H E R G O O D S A N D S E R V IC E S

195.2

208.1

208.9

209.8

211.2

212.5

213.5

195.1

207.7

208.3

209.2

210.6

212.1

212.9

T o b a c c o p ro d u c ts

186.8

198.1

198.4

198.8

200.4

203.4

203.8

186.9

198.3

198.6

198.9

200.5

203.6

204.0

Other entertainment services (12/77 = 100) .

,

120.9

C ig a re tte s ..............................................

189.2

200.9

201.2

201.4

202.9

206.0

206.4

189.4

201.3

Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 = 100)

203.2

2064

206 8

115.6

116.3

117.6

119.0

120.2

120.7

110.3

114.8

201.6
115.7

201.6

110.8

117.2

118.5

119.5

120.3

P e rs o n a l c a re

196.4

206.5

208.1

209.7

211.6

212.4

214.4

196.0

206.6

207.7

209.5

210.9

211.8

213.1

Toilet goods and personal care app lia n ces........................

188.6

198.6

200.2

201.8

204.1

205.1

207,9

188.1

199.6

Products for the hair, hairpieces and wigs (12/77 = 100)

201.8

203.9

204 5

206 6

109.4

116.1

116.6

117.9

120.0

120.7

121.4

108.5

198.3
114.9

114.9

Dental and shaving products (12/77 = 100) . . . .

117.9

120.0

1197

120 5

113.2

118.6

119.2

120.5

121.0

122.3

124.0

111.0

116.8

118.4

119.3

1188

120 4

122 0

109.5

114.2

115.1

115.7

116.5

116.7

119.1

109.0

114.0

114.8

115.2

116.2

1166

1179

119.1

120.4

Cosmetics, bath and nail preparations, manicure
and eye makeup implements (12/77 = 100) .
Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100)

106.2

112.9

114.7

115.4

117.4

117,6

119.4

108.8

115.6

116.6

117.2

119.0

203.9

214.2

215.7

217.2

218.8

219.6

220.9

204.0

215.0

Beauty parlor services for women . .

215.8

217.2

218.1

219.1

219.8

205.2

216.1

217.9

218.6

220.4

220.6

222.1

205.9

216.6

217.8

218.6

Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100)

219.4

220.2

221 0

114.1

119.3

119.7

121.7

122.2

123.4

123.9

113.6

120.0

120.1

121.5

122.0

122.8

123.0

P e r s o n a l a n d e d u c a tio n a l e x p e n s e s

209.3

228.0

228.3

228.7

229.2

229.5

229.9

209.8

227.8

228.2

228.7

229.4

2298

230.3

School books and s u p p lie s ...................

191.6

206.5

206.9

207.1

207.1

207.1

207.2

194.2

210.4

Personal and educational services . .,

210.7

210.9

210.9

2109

2109

213.8

233.3

233.6

234.0

234.7

235.0

235.5

214.0

232.5

232.9

233.4

234.2

234 8

235 4

108.9

118.5

118.6

118.6

118.6

118.6

118,7

108.8

118.6

118.7

118.7

118.7

118.7

109,2

117.8

117.9

117.9

117.9

117.9

118.0

109.2

117.8

117.9

117.9

117.9

1179

1180

107.5
113.0

120.9

120.9

120.9

120.9

120.9

107.4

120,7

120.7

120.7

120.7

120.7

120 7

1244

125.0

126.1

120.9
127.8

128.7

129.5

113.0

121.4

122.1

123.3

125.1

126.4

127.4

367.2

Personal care s e rv ic e s .................

Tuition and other school fees ,.
College tuition (12/77 = 100)
Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 = 100)
Personal expenses (12/77 = 100) ..

,

1188

S p e c i a l in d e x e s :

90

Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products , . .
Insurance and finance ........................

276.6

352.5

365.5

369.3

370.1

370.9

371.5

277.5

353.8

272 8

316.7

326.3

353.8

316.2

325.6

335.2

342.8

354 0

342 6

227.9

230.9

238.9

244.8

342.3
249.1

272.5

215.3

335.2
233.4

342.6

Utilities and public transportation . . .

215.9

227.2

230.2

Housekeeping and home maintenance services .

232.6

237.9

244 0

248 4

272.5

I 287.6

292.0

295.7

297.6

298.6

300.1

273.7

288.7

292.0

295.1

296.5

296.7

297.5


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

370.8

371.6

372.2

372 5

24. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Cross classification of region and population size class by expenditure
category and commodity and service group
[D e c e m b e r 1977 = 1 0 0 ]
S iz e c la s s A

S iz e c la s s B

S iz e c la s s C

S iz e c la s s D

( 1 . 2 5 m il lio n o r m o r e )

( 3 8 5 , 0 0 0 - 1 .2 5 0 m il lio n )

( 7 5 ,0 0 0 - 3 8 5 ,0 0 0 )

( 7 5 ,0 0 0 o r le s s )

C a te g o ry an d g ro u p

A p r.

June

Feb.

A p r.

1980

1980

1980

1980
Feb.

Feb.

June

A p r.

June

Feb.

A p r.

June

N o r th e a s t

E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

122.1

125.0

127.1

125.6

129.0

131.0

129.1

132.7

135.6

124.2

127.4

122.1

124.5

126.2

124.3

127.1

128.6

126.0

128.8

130.5

123.4

125.2

127.6

122.9

126.1

129.6

126.7

130.0

133.1

135.5

140.2

144.9

124.8

127.9

133.5

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

109.5

112.5

111.5

107.1

111.1

111.3

107.3

112.7

113.2

106.8

113.0

115.0

Tra n sp o rta tio n .................................................................................................................

129.9

133.8

135.3

135.0

140.8

141.7

133.1

136.2

138.2

133.5

138.1

140.2

120.6

122.4

123.0

121.6

122.4

123.2

121.3

122.5

123.5

121.4

122.7

124.4

114.4

116.7

117.7

115.7

117.9

120.2

112.2

115.7

116.5

118.9

121.5

123.8

114.4

114.7

116.1

116.5

117.5

119,0

119.2

119.6

121.9

114.8

116.0

116.8

124.1

126.5

128.4

127.5

130.8

132.1

128.5

131.6

133.8

125.3

127.8

129.7

129.1

132.5

133.8

129.7

132.9

135.4

126.6

129 3

133.3

129.9

134.5

138.5

122.2

126.5

130.2

Apparel ana upkeep

Other goods and services

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

131.0

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Commodities less food and beverages ......................................................................
Services ..................................................................................................................................

119.5

122.9

125.4

122.5

126.3

129.2

125.6

128.0

131.5

N o rth C e n tra l
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

131.9

133.2

134.4

126.4

124.9

126.8

128.1

122.6

124.9

126.7

124.8

1270

128.7

126.9

128.9

129.6

136.7

141.1

147.5

131.5

135.8

141.2

127.6

130.4

135.6

129.1

134.5

107.1

111.2

109.0

110.7

125.9
110.4

105.2

109.2

108.5

127.2

130.9

111.0

131.9

128.7

129.6

Food and beverages .....................................................................................................
Housing ..........................................................................................................................

136.7

128.9

125.8

All items ..................................................................................................................................

111.0

113.6

114.6

Apparel and upkeep .....................................................................................................
T ra n sp o rta tio n .................................................................................................................

133.5

138.1

140.1

133.4

137.6

140.7

135.8

139.3

140.4

132.6

137.4

139.8

Medical c a r e ...................................................................................................................

123.2

125.3

126.1

122.2

125.0

125.8

124.5

125.7

126.6

126.8

127.4

128 9

Entertainment .................................................................................................................

116.9

118.9

120.1

117.1

116.2

118.7

121.3

115.9

116.1

117.3

115.4

116.2

117.9

111.5
119.4

114.0

Other goods and services

121.5

123.2

115.5

116.7

117.5

119.1

119.8

121.6

C o m m o d itie s ...........................................................................................................................

128.1

130.9

132.9

124.5

127.9

129.9

125.9

128.1

129.7

124.3

126.0

Commodities less food and beverages ......................................................................

129.6

132.8

135.2

125.2

129.2

131.2

126.4

128.5

130.1

123.1

124.8

127.3

132.9

138.1

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

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Services ..................................................................................................................................

131.8

136.6

142.3

131.6

135.6

141.7

127.1

130.3

135.5

128.2

128.0

S o u th
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

128.3

131.4

125.9

125.0

126.4

128.5

128.0
124.4

133.1

Food and beverages .....................................................................................................

127.0

127.9

126.0

127.8

129.1

124.0

126.2

128.1

Housing

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

129.1

133.9

131.9

136.7

141.4

131.8

136.6

138.9

127.7

129.7

134.0

Apparel and upkeep .....................................................................................................
Tra n sp o rta tio n .................................................................................................................

112.5

116.4

138.5
116.4

109.6

112.9

112.6

105.5

108.2

107.3

135.7

139.7

140.9

134.7

138.4

140,6

133.7

139.7

133.1

136.5

138.7

127.5

129.0

131.2

1339

All items ..................................................................................................................................

127.1

130.7

133.5

131.7

134.7

127.9

131.3

100.9

104.7

107.2

Medical c a r e ...................................................................................................................

119.7

124.8

137.2
126.4

Entertainment .................................................................................................................

114.5

115.7

116.3

115.4

119.8

122.5

115.9

118.3

120.3

121.6

124.4

128.0

Other goods and services

118.5

119.3

120.9

117.7

118.1

119.5

117.5

118.8

120.2

121.5

121.9

123.9

C o m m o d itie s ...........................................................................................................................

126 7

129.3

130 9

125.9

129.0

130.6

126.4

128.7

129.7

124.7

127.2

129.0

Commodities less food and beverages ......................................................................

127.5

130.6

132.0

126.6

129.8

131.7

126.5

129.1

130.0

125.0

127.7

129.3

135.3

138.4

127.7

129.8

135.1

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

121.9

124.1

121.6

123.3

125.8

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Services ..................................................................................................................................

127.7

132.6

137.2

131.1

135.8

140.9

130.2

W est
E X P E N D IT U R E C A T E G O R Y

133.6

127.1

130.4

134 3

129.6

132.8

136.1

130.6

134.1

136.0

128.1

131.4

Food and beverages .....................................................................................................

124.2

126.5

127.7

126.9

128.8

125.7

127.6

125.7

128.0

129.6

132.9

136.3

142.5

134.6

139.1

130.2
141.4

123.8

Housing ..........................................................................................................................

131.0

134.8

127.1

129.7

135.9

Apparei and upkeep .....................................................................................................
Tra n sp o rta tio n .................................................................................................................

113.6

115.7

All items ..................................................................................................................................

114.5

112.4

115.8

118.4

104.2

107.7

137.9
107.4

114.7

121.8

123.6

137.4

141.2

141.1

135.8

139.2

140.7

137.1

141.2

142.1

134.8

139.6

141.7

129.5

124.8

126.9

127.9

124.6

126.7

129.4

128.9

132.5

127.5

130.3

122.5

124.4

Medical c a r e ...................................................................................................................
Entertainment .................................................................................................................

125.6

128.8

113.5

117.8

119.5

1186

123.1

123.9

117.8

121.0

122.4

126.2
123.6

Other goods and services

119.2

121.2

121.7

120.3

121.5

124.3

116.3

117.7

119.0

119.7

Commodities ..........................................................................................................................

127.0

129.5

130.4

128.8

131.5

132.5

126.7

129.0

130.1

126.7

129.8

131.7

Commodities less food and beverage ........................................................................

128.1

130.8

131.6

129.6

132.7

133.5

127.8

130.4

131.1

127.2

130.6

132.6

140.8

130.0

134.8

138.5

127.6

131.2

138.2

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

C O M M O D I T Y A N D S E R V IC E G R O U P

Services ..................................................................................................................................


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

133.2

137.2

143.6

133.0

137.7

91

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
25.

Consumer Price Index — U.S. city average, and selected areas

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A ll U r b a n C o n s u m e r s
A re a '

1979

U r b a n W a g e E a r n e r s a n d C le r ic a l W o r k e r s ( r e v i s e d )

1980

1979

1980

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

J u ly

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

U.S. city a verage2 ....................................

218,9

236.4

239.8

242.5

244.9

247,6

247,8

219.4

236.5

239.9

242.6

245.1

247.8

248.0

228.4

206.4

Anchorage, Alaska (1 0 /6 7 = 1 0 0 ) ..........................
Atlanta, Ga...........................................................

207.4

Baltimore, Md...................................................

221.0

Boston, Mass..........................................

214.2

Buffalo, N.Y................................................
217.4

Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind...............................................

224.8

Cleveland, O h io ......................................

245.0

232.7

Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex..................................................

Detroit, Mich..........................................

219.5

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

2369
233.7

235.5

240.1

247.8

242.9

220.9

248.2

221.4

240.9

213.7

246,8

216.8

256.7

226.5

248.4

227.4

256.7

243.9

232.5

253.7

219.8

239.8

249.7

243.0

254.5
262.4

248.0

248.9

265.8
255.8

227.5

221.3

228.4

228.0

Houston, Tex....................................................

255.9

260.8

266.5

251.9

257.3

2628

Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas ...................................................

238.7

243.8

247.8

Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif..........................

214.7

Miami, Fla. (1 1 /7 7 = 1 0 0 )

115.7

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

Milwaukee, Wis...................................................

237.6

New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J.....................................
Northeast, Pa. (S c ra n to n ).....................................................

214.0
211.7

228.0

Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J..............................................................

216.1

231.1

Portland, Oreg.-Wash................................................................

231.2
229.0
234.6

250.1

250.3
244.3

235.5
227.4

249.1
129.7

242.7
237.9

Pittsburgh, Pa...............................................................

244.6

127.7

222.7

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis...............................

241.3

233.1

237.4

216.8

133.6

116.9

251.6

225.0

246.4
234.5
232.5

237.2

239.4

242.5

240.9
253.6

236.6
248.7

242,2
243.9

238.9
239.8

214.1
213.4

244.1

216.9

227,7

231.6

253.4

232.4

235.1

237.9

251.5
134.7

255.2
245.7

230.8
231.3

252.1

246.3
252.6
130.9

247.8

235.9
252.7

247.8

128.8
239.6

246.1
257.3

240.0

247.0
259.1

250.5

249.6

242.4

248.0

252.9

259.4
239.9

240.9
234,6

248 4

240.9
239.3

250.8

236.8
233,3

2352

224.8
244.7

247.8

234.2

244.1
261.6

223.1
239.3

227.9

256.4
258.0

248.2

252.4

250.1

251.4
255.2

240.4

243,1
251.6

220,2
233.5

235.4

247.3

241.7
236.5

242.2
249.1

234.2

243.5

Denver-Boulder, Colo........................................

226.5
235.3

227.9

Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind......................

Honolulu, Hawaii

223.5
230.3

255.9
248.4

234.1
235,8
2399

242.2

236.7

238.4
243.2

243.8

245.3

246.8

216.9

238 1

241.8

245.0

227.9
217.4

251.7

St. Louis, Mo.-lll.....................................................................

238.5

242.6

San Diego, Calif...........................................................

245.9

236.1

258.3

269.7

269.9

233.1

255.6

264.8

265.7

San Francisco-Oak and, Calif.....................................................

240.7

243.5

248.0

240.0

255.9

242.8

252.2

247.7

Seatt e-Eve-ett. Wash.............................................

217.5

243.8

249.6

255.1

215.9

241,3

246.8

251.6

Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.....................................................

220.4

238.8

241.2

247.2

221.9

239.2

242.0

248.7

'T he areas listed include not only the central city but the entire portion of the Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated
Area is used for New York and Chicago.

92


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

2 Average of 85 cities.

26.

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

[1 967 = 100]
A nnual
C o m m o d i t y g r o u p in g

1980

1979

averag e
1979

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

224.2

226.3

228.1

232.4

235.7

238.5

240.0

241.0

242.6

246.6

F IN IS H E D G O O D S

Finished g o o d s ..................................................................................

216.1

216.2

217.3

220.7

Finished consumer g o o d s .......................................................

215.7

215.6

217.5

221.7

224.7

227.1

229.1

233.5

237.6

240.8

241.6

242.8

244.5

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

226.3

224.9

223.5

228 1

226.7

230.5

232.1

231.4

231.6

233.1

228.7

230.0

231.0

239.5

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

231.4

224.9

231.7

214.0

215.5

228.1

227.9

226.0

220.1

230.9

222.2

227.7

223.4

230.7

Processed ........................................................................

223.8

222.8

220.7

227.0

225.5

228.6

230.3

229.7

230.4

231.1

227.1

228.1

229.4

238.0

Nondurable goods less foods ...........................................

225.9

227 1

233.4

239.0

243.3

245.5

247.9

254.7

262.7

270.9

276.5

279.1

280.3

282.8

202.7

205.3
240.2

Finished consumer foods
Crude

249.1

Durable g o o d s ......................................................................

181.9

181.6

181.6

182.9

189.0

190.0

191.8

199.1

202.1

200.3

200.3

199.7

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

216.7

217.2

216.5

217.8

222.8

223.9

225.3

229.3

230.5

232.2

235.8

236.0

237.5

242.8

244.6

247.5

251.0

255.0

256.3

258.7

265.9

271.6

273.7

274.5

275.8

277.7

280.3

259.7

261.8

263.9

264.7
262.6

IN T E R M E D I A T E M A T E R I A L S

Intermediate materials, supplies, and com ponents......................
Materials and components for m anufacturing......................

234.1

236.0

238.0

240.7

244.3

245.5

247.8

259.8

259.5

Materials for food m a nufacturing......................................

223.6

226.7

225.1

228.9

225.5

227.8

230.4

226.0

245.6

240.1

238.7

255.4

260.2

Materials for nondurable manufacturing ..........................

220.1

222.5

225.3

227.6

231.4

233.4

235.3

241.1

244.0

247.4

251.8

254.9

256.0

256.9

Materials for durable m anufacturing..................................

271.3

273.3

275.2

278.8

284.7

284.6

287.8

303.7

306.5

301.4

296.2

295.1

298.3

297.9

227.4

228.0

229.6

231.2

Components for manufacturing .........................................
Materials and components for construction

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

255.5

206.8

207.7

209.3

211.3

213.2

214.8

216.3

219.2

223.2

225.3

246.9

247.4

249.2

252.5

254.7

254.0

253.7

257.7

262.1

265.5

265.3

265.3

267.3

269.2

488.3

489.6

504.9
378.4

399.4

410.6

416.5

424.6

481.0

486.7

Manufacturing in d u s trie s .....................................................

298.9

304.0

311.2

317.2

322.5

325.2

332.2

340.5

351.4

356.6

358.4

363.6

368.2

Nonmanufacturing in d u s trie s ..............................................

422.9

425.5

458.8

483.0

500 6

510.0

519.1

550.3

579.9

609.5

619.5

617.0

614.7

635.3

253.8

262.5

263.7

265.3

267.1

Processed fuels and lu b ric a n ts .............................................

360.9

364.8

384.6

444.0

464.0

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

235.3

235.4

237.6

237.9

242.6

243.8

247.1

250.9

251.6

S u p p lie s ....................................................................................

217.6

219.6

219.6

224.9

226.4

229.2

232.5

239.0

240.8

240.7

240.8

242.3

Manufacturing in d u s trie s .....................................................

204.4

204.2

208.6

221.2
2094

212.2

213.7

216.3

220.9

222.5

223.7

226.8

2284

230.2

232.3

247.8

249.8

248.1

247.5

248.8

253.6

Containers

Nonmanufacturing industries ..............................................
Feeds

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

Other supplies

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

246.2

224.7

227.8

225.4

227.5

233.3

236.1

238.7

224.1

241.3

220.8

224.0

228.9

226.9

230.4

224.4

223.3

218.9

207.1

210.6

208.1

223.0

221.5

221.5

223.1

224.9

228.9

231.2

233.9

238.3

249.6

252.9

253.5

251.9

254.1

256.6

282.2

287.1

281.7

288.3

2895

290.8

296.2

296.8

308.4

303.5

296.9

300.7

299.5

316.3

249.7

243.0

252.6

245.9

235.5

242.4

242.5

263.3

231.7

C R U D E M A T E R IA L S

Crude materials for further p ro ce ssin g .........................................
Foodstuffs and fe e d s tu ffs .......................................................

247.2

254 1

243.7

248.7

247.5

246.4

Nonfood m a te ria ls ...................................................................

<’ )

349.3

353.6

363.1

368.9

374.9

384.2

398.9

414.3

412.7

413.5

410.4

407.9

416.8

3046
314.9

311.6
322.5

330.1
342.1

341.7
354.9

339.8
352.5

336.9
349.0

329.2
340.2

324.4
334.6

331.3
342.3
235.3

Nonfood materials except f u e l...........................................
Manufacturing industries ................................................

293.3

2852
294.0

286.1
294.9

293.3
302.8

298.1
307,8

C o n stru c tio n ......................................................................

207.0

207.2

208.6

209.9

212.6

214.8

216.6

226.0

228.7

229.9

232.4

232.9

234.2

Crude f u e l .............................................................................
Manufacturing industries ................................................

568.2

570.7

586.2

604.0

612.9

617.4

634.5

636.3

664.8

664.1

677.4

690.4

695.5

711.0

607.6

610.4

629.2

651.8

662.5

667.8

688.3

725.7

724.5

740.8

756.7

762.6

781.9

548.3

550.7

563.6

577.8

585.5

589.3

603.9

690.3
605.7

628.8

628.8

639.8

650.6

655.1

667.8

( 1)
208.2

211.4

213.2

2162

221.3

222.8

224.6

230.5

234.6

237.8

241.2

242.0

243.8

246.4

Finished consumer goods excluding fo o d s ..........................

2084

212.3

2163

220.6

223.1

225.3

232.3

238.3

242.3

245.5

246.8

248.8

251.4

Nonmanufacturing industries

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

284.5

S P E C IA L G R O U P I N G S

Finished goods excluding f o o d s .....................................................

Intermediate materials less foods and fe e d s ...............................

244.0

245.4

249.0

252.5

256.8

258.1

260.5

268.4

273.7

276.2

277.4

278.0

279.9

282.3

Intermediate foods and feeds .......................................................

223.2

231.0

223.1

226.6

226.0

226.9

229.8

224.8

237.5

232.4

227.5

239.7

242.1

248.7

Crude materials less agricultural products .................................

390.5

391.7

396.9

408.6

417.0

424.1

435.0

452.9

469.3

469.0

469.4

464.6

463.7

470.5

' Not available.


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

93

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
27.

Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Annual
Code

C o m m o d ity g ro u p a n d s u b g ro u p

1979

A ll c o m m o d i t i e s
A ll c o m m o d i t i e s ( 1 9 5 7 - 5 9 =

100)

1979

1980

av erag e
J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

235.6

236.9

238.3

242.0

245.6

247.2

249.7

254.9

260.2

261.9

262.3

263.7

265.2

269.8

250.0

251.4

252.8

256.7

260.6

262.3

267.3

270.2

275.6

277.4

278.3

279.7

282.5

286.3

F a rm p ro d u c ts a n d p ro c e s s e d fo o d s a n d fe e d s

229.8

232.2

227.5

231.8

230.6

232.3

234.6

231.9

237.0

234.9

229.2

233.9

234.2

246.1

In d u s t r ia l c o m m o d i t i e s

236.5

237.5

240.6

244.2

249.0

250.6

253.1

260.6

265.9

268.6

270.7

271.2

273.0

275.6

233.4

253.9

FARM PR O D U C TS A N D PRO CESSED FOODS
A N D FEEDS

01

Farm products ...........................................................................................

241.4

246.8

238.5

241.0

239.6

240.2

242.5

236.4

242.3

239.3

228.9

233.6

0 1 -1

Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables .........................................

229.0

226.7

241.7

208.3

218.0

216.5

210.7

219.0

220.6

218.5

223.0

243.8

233.4

01 - 2

G ra in s ...............................................................................

214.8

247.4

229.1

224.4

229.0

226,6

227.9

214.6

223.3

217.9

2108

219.0

215.3

244.8

01 - 3

Livestock

260.3

256.0

240.2

256.4

251.7

248,3

252.5

247.8

257.2

251.8

230.5

233.3

240.0

260.5

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

247.5

01 - 4

Live p o u ltr y ..............................................................................................

194.3

183.8

173.5

162.0

195.2

184.6

180.1

171.9

171.3

166.6

0 1 -5

Plant and animal fib e rs ..........................................................................

209.9

207.6

207.9

211.3

212.9

215.4

222.0

239.0

269.5

254.9

266.9

272.7

247.0

267.0

01 - 6

Fluid milk

250.1

247.6

250.0

258.5

260.8

262.5

264.0

262.3

263.8

263.1

265.4

265.4

265.5

265.8

0 1 -7

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

171.9

195.5

194.7

227.2

E g g s ..........................................................................................................
Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ..............................................................

198.4

165.6

150,4

184.2

153.3

145.7

146.8

159.3

0 1 -8

244.3

260.1

251.9

240.9

235.6

229.8

230.3

218.1

224.7

215.9

205.1

206.7

207.4

251.4

01 - 9

Other farm products

289.0

311.9

310,8

315.9

313.6

318.3

319.4

301.1

304.7

311.5

304.8

311.0

309.4

292.4

222.5

223.3

220.5

225.8

224.8

227.1

229.3

228.5

233.1

231.6

228.5

233.1

233.8

241.1

02

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

Processed foods and fe e d s ..........................................................

176.5

167.6

166.8

175.4

155.9

178.7

0 2 -1

Cereal and bakery p ro d u c ts .................................................................

212.4

216.0

219.8

222.5

225.4

229.9

0 2 -2

Meats, poultry, and fish ........................................................................

242.0

237.7

225.5

239.9

234.2

239.3

242.8

239.6

239.6

239.2

226.0

224.8

226.6

248.5

0 2 -3

Dairy p ro d u c ts .........................................................................................

211.2

209.0

215.2

218.3

218.1

219.3

219.9

221.0

220.8

223.0

227.8

2289

229.9

230.5

0 2 -4
0 2 -5

Processed fruits and v e g e ta b le s ..........................................................
Sugar and confectionery .....................................................................

221.9
214.7

223.6
215.7

224.6
218.3

225.1
217.2

223.4
218.9

222.4
222.9

222.6
234.4

222.9
235.0

223.3
287.5

223.7
264.1

224.5
274.8

225.2
327.4

227.3
324.7

229.5
313.7

0 2 -6

Beverages and beverage m a te ria ls .....................................................

210.7

214.1

216.5

217.9

218.9

221.2

221.6

224.0

224.8

225.9

227.9

210.3

218.7

223.6

231.8

231.5

233.5

233.1

234.6

231.4

233.6

234.4

0 2 -7

Fats and o i l s ......................................................................................

243.3

253.2

251.7

253.3

246.0

241.9

235.6

225.1

226.4

222.6

214.7

212.1

213.0

221.7

0 2 -8

Miscellaneous processed foods

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

216.5

212.7

217.6

219.0

220.8

222.2

223.1

225.4

223.5

224.7

225.1

223.2

0 2 -9

Manufactured animal feeds

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

219.4

234.9

216.2

219.2

224.0

222.4

224.9

219.7

219.8

216.6

205.4

207.3

223.0
205.4

220.6

175.2

223.6

IN D U S T R IA L C O M M O D I T I E S

03

Textile products and apparel ...................................................................

168.7

169.3

170.5

171.3

172.0

172.8

173.1

0 3 -1

Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 1 0 0 )................................................

119.0

119.5

120.6

123.6

124.7

124.2

124.7

127.0

127.2

129.1

130.7

133.5

134.8

136.3

0 3 -2

Processed yarns and threads (12/75 = 100)

109.2

109.5

110.6

111.7

112.1

112.5

112.7

114.6

118.0

119.3

122.1

123.5

122.4

121.9

0 3 -3
0 3 -4

Gray fabrics (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................

127.1

128.3

128.7

128.7

129.7

130.7

132.3

132.7

132.3

136.8

136.1

135.3

133.7

134.8

Finished fabrics (12/75 = 100)

107.4

108.2

108.9

109.7

109.9

110,5

111.1

113.2

114.5

115.2

115.5

A p p a re l..........................................................................

160.4

160.3

109.0
161.4

109.1

0 3 -8 1

161.6

162.2

163.1

162.6

165.5

166.8

168.0

169.1

169.7

172.0

116.5
174.1

0 3 -8 2

Textile housefurnishm gs......................................

190.4

189.9

190.5

193.9

196.3

196.5

197.1

199.0

199.7

201.3

201.6

202.6

202.7

210.7

04

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

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

Hides, skins, leather, and related products ........................

0 4 -1
0 4 -2

Hides and s k in s ......................................................................
L e a th e r..............................................................

0 4 -3
0 4 -4

Other leather and related p ro d u c ts ....................................

05

Footwear

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

Fuels and related products and p o w e r .....................

176.5

179.3

180.6

181.5

182.4

184.3

252.4

261.9

257.9

251.1

253.9

248.9

249.2

255.7

250.9

246.8

243.6

240.7

241.0

244.9

535.4

566.5

511.9

465.3

478.8

447.6

443.9

468.8

404.8

348.7

328.6

289.7

315.7

356.6

365.9

330.0

356.7

385.2

343.6

319.8

324.8

347.6

340.3

311.0

297.6

290.4

284.4

292.2

218.0

221,8

225.4

226.9

227.5

227.9

227.9

229.1

228.0

231.8

231.9

231.9

232.1

232.9

205.0

212.1

210.9

210.1

209.7

208.4

2080

213.1

214.8

217.8

216.3

217.5

216.0

216.3

408.1

411,8

432.8

454.8

468.5

476.9

487.9

508.0

532.7

553.5

566.3

571.9

574.8

0 5 -1

C o a l...............................................................................

450.9

452.5

454.2

452.5

454.6

455.1

458.6

459.3

459.6

461.7

463.3

464.8

466.9

467.8

0 5 -2

Coke

429.2

430.6

430.6

430.6

431.2

431.2

430.6

430.6

430.6

430.6

430.6

430.6

430.6

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

585.4

0 5 -3
0 5 -4

Gas fu e ls 1 ........................................................................

544.1

548.4

572.4

603.4

619.9

637.0

431.2
662.4

677.5

716.6

716.6

730.2

744.8

750.1

763.3

Electric p o w e r ................................................

270.2

274.8

278.8

280.5

283.5

281.9

287.0

290.5

299.3

305.5

310.4

316.4

320.5

331.4

0 5 -6 1

Crude petroleum 2 .......................................................

376.5

370.6

385.7

422.1

436.7

450.4

470.8

513.6

515.1

522.8

533.9

540.1

549.0

550.9

0 5 -7

Petroleum products, refined3 ..........................

444.8

449,8

482.8

513.7

533.7

545.4

555.2

583.3

620.4

659.0

677.3

680.6

681.1

693.3

06
0 6 -1
0 6 -2 1

Chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts .................................

222.3

225.0

228.5

230.8

234.2

236.0

238.2

246,0

248.7

252.8

258.1

261.1

261.7

262.7

Industrial chem icals4 .............................
Prepared p a in t.........................................................

264,0

270.4

277.1

280.0

285.7

288.4

292.3

302.9

307.9

313.3

316.8

324.8

327.3

327.8

204.4

205,3

205.3

206.0

206.7

209.4

210.7

223.3

223.3

228.7

231.5

236.8

236.8

236.8

241.2

246.7

247.9

252.0

253.6

263.4

267.5

277.0

0 6 -2 2

Paint materials

0 6 -3

Drugs and pharmaceuticals

0 6 -4

Fats and oils, inedible

0 6 -5

Agricultural chemicals and chemical products

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

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

0 6 -6

Plastic resins and materials

0 6 -7

Other chemicals and allied p ro d u c ts ............

07

Rubber and plastic products

.........

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

256.6

256.8

259.9

271.1

272.9

274,0

159.4

159.2

159.6

161.0

162.8

163.0

164.4

166,5

167.6

168.9

172.8

171.8

173.0

376.7

381.6

376.4

379.9

366.9

344.3

327.1

325.6

302.2

299.9

298.2

294.7

255.8

260.0

214.4

211.2

215.3

219.4

224.3

229.5

232.9

241.9

248.0

256.1

258.3

258.3

257.7

258.2

235.9

244,5

250.1

252.0

260.0

261.4

262.5

2704

272.1

274.5

285.6

287.8

287.9

286.2

191.8

191.8

194.4

195.8

197.0

198.8

201.4

209.4

211.3

215.0

2233

225.0

226.3

2 280

175.4

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

194.3

195.5

198.8

200.7

203.0

204.9

205.9

207.8

210.7

212.7

214.6

215.1

217.1

0 7 -1

218.3

Rubber and rubber p ro d u c ts .........................................

214.6

217.1

220.3

223.7

224.3

226.1

231.5

231.5

234.6

235.3

237.6

239.4

Crude rubber

209.2
221.4

209.5

0 7 -1 1

226.1

233.0

232.2

236.5

237.2

240.2

252.7

263.9

255.8

2638

263,0

263.2

0 7 -1 2

Tires and tu b e s .............................................

205.9

211.6

215.0

223.1

225.1

231.6

231.6

231.3

231.8

234.6

237.0

Miscellaneous rubber p ro d u c ts .................................

206.4

209.4

211.9

218.3
214.7

223.1

0 7 -1 3

206.2
205.4

217.1

217.7

215.9

217.8

220.6

2259

227.5

229.7

231.8
121.1

0 7 -2
08
0 8 -1

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

Plastic products (6/78 = 1 0 0 ) .............................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts .............................................
L u m b e r..............................................................

0 8 -2

Millwork

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

0 8 -3
0 8 -4

Other wood p ro d u c ts ..................................................

Plywood ..................................

See footnotes at end of table.

94


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

110.0

111.2

112.2

113.0

114.0

114.3

115.2

116.3

116.7

119.0

119.5

119.6

120.8

300.4

300.1

304.7

309.7

3088

298,9

290.1

290.0

294.7

294.9

275.2

271.6

279.8

262.5

2889

354.3

355.0

365.3

373.9

370.3

355.6

339.5

336.3

341.4

340.6

310.1

301.3

313.0

327.3

254.3

252.5

249.6

250.9

255.6

252.3

250.3

254.1

258.0

262.2

256.6

250.9

253.0

2559

250.5
235.4

249.7

254.3

257.9

254.0

2422

237.9

238.2

243.4

240.0

219.2

2299

241.6

251.1

237.6

237.4

238.0

237.7

2399

240.5

242.2

243.4

243.1

241.7

240.7

238.7

236.9

27.

Continued— Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
1980

1979

A nnual
C o m m o d ity g r o u p a n d s u b g ro u p

1979
IN D U S T R I A L C O M M O D I T I E S -

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O ct

N ov.

D ec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

C o n t in u e d

09
09-1
09-11
09-12
09-13
09-14
09-15
09-2

Pulp, paper, and allied products....................................................
Pulp, paper, and products, excluding building paper and board . . .
Woodpulp................................................................................
Wastepaper ............................................................................
Paper ......................................................................................
Paperboard..............................................................................
Converted paper and paperboard products................................
Building paper and board..........................................................

219.0
220.7
314.3
206.6
229.6
202.1
209.9
182.4

218.3
219.6
320.3
207.9
228.2
201.7
209.0
178.0

222.2
223.6
320.6
206.6
229.5
206.4
214.4
179.1

223.0
224.3
320.6
206.7
230.3
209.6
214.6
182.6

227.5
229.0
337.5
206.7
238.7
211.3
217.3
183.5

229.5
231.1
338.0
220.0
241.8
212.8
219.0
183.6

231.7
233.4
338.0
221.2
242.7
215.4
221.9
184.6

237.4
239.2
356.6
222.9
245.5
221.8
227.7
186.2

239.2
240.8
356.4
223.4
247.2
223.7
229.5
191.7

242.6
244.1
356.8
224.9
250.3
227.4
233.0
198.7

246.5
248.0
386.8
242.5
253.6
230.2
234.6
201.3

248.9
250.3
388.0
226.1
256.5
239.2
236.1
206.8

251.3
252.7
388.0
206.6
258.3
242.7
239.3
208.9

252.4
253.7
388.6
194.0
258.5
237.5
242.4
211.8

10
10-1
10-13
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-5
10-6
10-7
10-8

Metals and metal products ..........................................................
Iron and steel ..........................................................................
Steel mill products....................................................................
Nonferrous metals....................................................................
Metal containers ......................................................................
Hardware ................................................................................
Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings............................................
Heating equipment....................................................................
Fabricated structural metal products..........................................
Miscellaneous metal products....................................................

259.3
283.5
280.4
261.7
269.2
218.7
217.1
187.1
248.9
231.4

260.8
286.8
284.6
262.3
267.2
218.5
219.6
186.0
250.5
231.8

261.8
286.1
284.7
263.1
268.4
220.1
222.4
188.1
252.2
235.6

263.7
285.5
284.8
269.3
268.7
221.5
223.0
191.3
253.7
236.7

269.6
289.2
288.3
283.1
279.9
224.0
223.5
192.2
256.3
238.5

271.1
292.0
288.8
284.1
280.9
225.5
225.4
193.1
256.7
238.6

273.6
292.8
289.3
291.9
280.9
226.2
226.5
195.6
257.7
239.1

284.6
297.4
293.6
326.3
283.3
228.2
232.8
199.5
258.9
240.6

288.9
300.3
294.2
337.7
284.4
230.4
236.7
202.6
259.7
241.6

286.8
301.8
295.5
321.4
288.5
231.5
242.4
202.6
265.1
244.2

284.6
307.0
304.1
298.9
301.1
236.9
243.7
204.2
268.2
247.1

281.9
304.7
305.5
289.8
302.7
238.2
247.4
204.0
269.4
247.7

282.4
303.1
305.8
290.6
302.7
239.7
248.5
205.1
270.0
251 4

281.5
300.4
301.0
289.0
303.0
241.9
249.6
2061
271.9
251.8

11
11-1
11-2
11-3
11-4
11-6
11-7
11-9

Machinery and equipment ............................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment........................................
Construction machinery and equipment......................................
Metalworking machinery and equipment ....................................
General purpose machinery and equipment................................
Special industry machinery and equipment ................................
Electrical machinery and equipment ..........................................
Miscellaneous machinery..........................................................

213.9
232.1
256.2
241.3
236.4
247.0
178.9
208.9

214.8
231.2
257.0
241.4
237.1
249.8
179.9
209.7

216.0
233.3
258.5
243.5
238.3
251.0
181.2
209.7

217.7
237.4
258.9
246.4
240.2
251.2
182.5
212.0

220.0
240.0
263.9
249.6
242.8
253.8
184.3
213.6

221.3
243.4
265.4
252.2
244.2
254.9
184.9
214.9

223.4
244.2
268.8
254.6
247.6
256.1
186.6
216.3

227.6
248.4
276.0
258.9
251.0
260.6
190.6
220.3

230.2
249.9
278.3
261.8
253.3
263.2
194.3
221.1

232.5
252.0
279.5
264.1
256.7
265.5
196.5
223.2

235.8
252.8
282.9
269.9
260.0
271.9
198.7
226.8

237.0
254.9
284.2
272.6
262.3
273.1
199.2
226.9

238.8
255.7
286.8
275.4
264.3
274.5
201.2
227.8

241.3
257.3
290.9
278.0
265.8
277.2
203.5
230.7

12
12-1
12-2
12-3
12-4
12-5
12-6

Furniture and household durables ................................................
Household furniture..................................................................
Commercial furniture................................................................
Floor coverings........................................................................
Household appliances ..............................................................
Home electronic equipment ......................................................
Other household durable goods ................................................

171.3
186.3
221.8
147.9
160.9
91.3
228.2

170.7
185.8
222.7
149.1
161.1
90.2
223.7

171.5
186.2
222.7
150.0
162.2
90.2
226.6

172.7
198.5
222.7
150.4
162.7
90.3
231.0

175.1
190.1
223.3
152.1
163.2
90.3
245.6

176.4
193.0
223.3
152.8
164.5
90.3
248.2

177.9
194.8
225.1
152.9
165.3
90.5
254.4

183.4
197.4
226.9
159.0
166.5
91.0
287.4

185.6
198.5
231.4
158.5
168.9
91.2
295.3

185.7
198.9
232.8
160.8
169.9
91.3
288.3

183.1
198.9
233.5
161.7
170.2
88.9
266.8

184.1
200.3
233.8
163.6
172.1
89.1
265.2

185.3
202.0
235.5
162.2
174.7
89.3
266.1

186.7
204.3
237.1
163.2
174.8
89.3
271.1

13
13-11
13-2
13-3
13-4
13-5
13-6
13-7
13-8
13-9

Nonmetallic mineral products........................................................
Flat glass ................................................................................
Concrete ingredients ................................................................
Concrete products....................................................................
Structural clay products excluding refractories............................
Refractories ............................................................................
Asphalt roofing ........................................................................
Gypsum products ....................................................................
Glass containers ......................................................................
Other nonmetallic minerals........................................................

248.6
183.9
244.0
244.1
217.9
236.5
325.3
252:3
261.1
313.7

249.5
184.1
245.1
245.2
220.3
240.8
328.4
251.8
265.2
310.5

249.9
184.1
245.9
246.3
222.3
241.7
325.9
252.3
265.2
309.9

254.6
184.5
246.7
248.7
223.7
242.4
333.0
254.9
265.2
336.0

256.2
184.7
248.3
250.1
221.1
244.6
337.5
255.3
265.2
341.2

257.4
185.4
249.6
250.6
221.8
247.4
347.4
256.2
265.2
342.2

259.6
186.4
251.0
253.2
226.7
248.0
346.5
255.0
274.2
342.2

268.4
191.0
265.0
265.4
229.6
248.5
356.6
255.4
274.3
351.8

274.0
191.0
266.6
266.7
231.0
251.1
372.5
262.2
274.3
381.7

276.5
191.4
267.5
269.1
231.4
253.9
388.8
267.6
274.3
387.0

282.8
191.4
270.5
273.0
234.4
262.6
404.7
264.0
294.6
399.5

282.9
191.4
271.1
275.0
229.5
265.2
398.2
256.5
294.6
399.5

283.2
193.6
271.9
275.9
230.2
266.7
400.7
257.1
294.6
394.5

284.0
194.3
272.5
275.9
230.2
269.6
412.0
253.1
294.6
396.1

14
14-1
14-4

Transportation equipment (12/68 - 100)......................................
Motor vehicles and equipment ..................................................
Railroad equipment ..................................................................

188.1
190.5
277.3

188.4
190.8
280.6

185.9
187.8
280.9

186.6
188.6
281.6

194.2
197.1
286.3

194.8
197.4
288.2

195.6
198.2
289.0

198.7
200.7
297.5

198.2
200.1
299.3

198.8
200.7
302.1

202.6
204.9
303.9

201.1
203.1
304.6

202.2
204.4
306.2

204.9
207.1
316.4

15
15-1
15-2
15-3
15-4
15-51
15-9

Miscellaneous products................................................................
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition............................
Tobacco products ....................................................................
Notions....................................................................................
Photographic equipment and supplies ........................................
Mobile homes (12/74 - 100)....................................................
Other miscellaneous products ..................................................

208.7
176.2
217.8
191.8
153.7
138.1
263.7

207.0
176.9
214.8
192.0
152.0
138.2
261.4

208.9
177.6
221.3
191.9
152.2
139.5
261.4

213.1
179.8
221.9
191.9
154.3
140.7
272.5

218.9
181.1
222.1
195.7
157.4
142.9
288.3

221.4
181.2
222.2
195.8
161.2
144.0
293.3

227.4
183.0
226.6
196.8
164.3
144.1
308.8

242.9
190.9
236.6
203.1
165.9
144.7
351.6

262.9
193.5
237.2
203.2
218.6
146.8
378.3

256.1
194.5
237.3
207.2
219.1
147.1
351.3

252.2
195.3
237.6
216.8
212.6
148.9
339.2

250.9
196.4
244.6
217.0
200.0
149.9
339.1

257.4
197.2
245.1
217.0
203.4
150.6
358.8

261.3
200.3
247.6
221.7
202.0
151.2
369.4

1Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month.
2 Includes only domestic production.


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

3 Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month.
4 Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month.

95

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
28.

Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings

[1 9 6 7 = 1 0 0 u nless o th e rw ise sp e cified]
A nnual
C o m m o d i t y g r o u p in g

1979

1980

a v erag e
J u ly

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

A ll c o m m o d i t i e s — l e s s f a r m p r o d u c t s

234.4

235.4

237.5

241.4

245.3

247.0

249.5

255.7

260.9

262.9

264.3

265.4

267.0

270.3

A ll f o o d s

226.4

225.4

224.7

228.5

226.9

230.0

232.2

231.2

235.8

234.8

231.7

237.4

237.7

245.4

227.2

226.4

224.8

230.8

228.9

231.8

234.2

233.3

238.6

236.9

234.0

239.0

239.9

247.1

Industrial co m m o d itie s le s s fuels ..................................................

218.3

219.0

220.3

222.0

2285

234.7

238.0

238.9

239.9

239.9

241.6

243.3

113.9

114.0

115.1

115.8

225.9
116.4

226.9

Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 100) ......................

117.0

117.2

118.9

119.3

121.3

122.1

123.1

123.5

125.4

Hosiery ..............................................................................................

112.6

114.1

113.0

112.7

113.3

114.6

115.3

119.2

119.4

120.3

120.7

121.5

Underwear and n ig h tw e a r..........................................................

168.9

168.5

170.8

170.8

171.2

171.6

172.9

175.3

177.4

182.1

182.0

182.8

122.2
187.4

1885

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

212.4

215.0

218.6

220.9

224.3

226.3

228.7

236.3

239.2

243.2

248.4

251.6

252.8

253.8

Pharmaceutical p re p a ra tio n s ..........................................................

152.0

151.7

152.0

153.6

155.6

155.4

156.9

159.2

160.3

161.7

165.9

164.7

166.1

167.8

325.0

325.3

333.9

341.0

337.3

323.3

313.9

P ro c e s s e d fo o d s

123.1

Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber
and manmade fibers and yarns

Lumber and wood products, excluding millwork and
other wood products ...................................................................

310.8

308.6

281.7

293 5

306.4

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

234.6

235.5

234.9

236.4

243.4

244.5

246.3

253.7

256.0

255.1

255.6

253.4

254.2

254.9

Fabricated metal p ro d u c ts ..............................................................

236.8

237.4

239.8

241.1

244.0

244.6

245.3

247.2

248.4

252.0

256.0

257.0

258.9

260.0

Special metals and metal products

312.2

284.5

Copper and copper p ro d u c ts ..........................................................

299.3

191.9

197.1

200.5

212.2

213.8

217.1

227.7

260.7

240.9

224.7

212.3

208.7

211.7

Machinery and motive p r o d u c ts .....................................................

207.0

207.7

207.2

208.5

213.4

214.3

215.9

219.7

220.9

222.5

226.1

226.1

227.7

230.2

259.0

260.8

263.2

Machinery and equipment, except electrical ...............................

235.1

236.2

240.8

242.5

249.1

251.1

253.5

257.5

Agricultural machinery, including tractors ....................................

237.4

235 8

238.4

243.6

246.3

250.8

251.5

256.1

257.2

260.0

259.7

261.7

262.5

Metalworking machinery .................................................................

259.1

234.2

260.1

261.7

265.6

269.5

272.7

276.0

281.9

284.4

287.5

294.3

296.8

299.9

303.6

Numerically controlled machine tools (Dec. 1971 = 100)

199.8

202.2

204.2

206.5

208.5

208.8

211.2

213.1

215.4

216.7

223.9
278.4

227.0

228.7

228.7

....

238.2

244.8

264.1

Total tractors ....................................................................................

251.6

266.2

273.0

280.0

281.8

286.1

Agricultural machinery and equipment less p a r ts ........................

232.7

231.4

233.7

238.4

241.0

244,9

245.8

250.0

251.5

254.1

254.2

256.1

256.8

258.9

Farm and garden tractors less parts

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

236.1

233.9

237.6

244.1

247.6

250.5

251.1

257.5

261.5

261.0

262.0

262.7

264.9

Agricultural machinery excluding tractors less p a rts ...................
Industrial valves ...............................................................................

238.7
256.0

237.6
257.0

239.2
258.2

243.5
260.1

245.4
261.8

251.3
263.1

252.0
266.1

256.0
256.4
271.0

257.3
273.5

258.9
280.0

259.0
283.5

261,7
286.6

262.6
288.6

263.7
289.5

Industrial fittings ...............................................................................

261.7

260.8

262.3

264.3

272.6

276.8

276.8

276.8

280.4

282.8

289.9

291.5

295.9

295.9

Abrasive grinding w h e e ls .................................................................

226.2

2228

224.6

224.6

239.0

239.0

239.0

239.0

244.0

244.0

258.4

261.3

251.4

252.3

254.3

256.6

258.5

256.7

255.4

259.3

262.6

265.1

262.1

261.3
261.4

261.3

Construction materials

264.1

266.5

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

247.0
273.4

247.2

246.4

248.3

250.3

274.0

277.3

278.4

285.3

255.2

256.5

29.

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

251.2

253.8

256.0

261.2

262.5

275.1

276.6

Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product

[1 9 6 7 = 1 0 0 ]
A nnual
C o m m o d i t y g r o u p in g

1979

1980

a v erag e
J u ly

1979

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

Total durable goods ......................................................................

226.9

227.6

228.0

230.1

234.6

235.3

237.0

243.8

247.1

Total nondurable g o o d s ..............................................................

241.7

243.7

245.8

251.1

253.7

256.2

259.3

263.2

270.2

Total m a n u fa ctu re s......................................................................

2288

229.8

231.7

240.6

242.6

248.4

259.4

262.5

226.1

226.6

227 2

235.2
229.4

239.0

D u ra b le ....................................................................................

234.0

234.6

236.2

242.9

245.7

245.6

246.2

245.9

248.2

250.1

Nondurable .................................................................

231.1

232.5

235.9

241.0

244.0

246.6

249,0

253.9

260.8

265.2

267.3

270.3

271.3

275.6

270.4

274.3

272.1

276.9

278.7

281.0

285.9

287.6

295.9

295.4

290.4

292.7

293.0

Total raw or slightly processed goods

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

253.2

257.8

307.5

D u ra b le ..............................................................

262.1

265.4

259.8

255.7

259.2

265.8

267.8

2828

305.3

303.4

286.0

262.2

249.9

253.9

Nondurable .................................................................

270.1

274.0

272.0

277.5

279.2

281.2

286.3

286.9

294.2

293.8

289.7

294.0

295.3

310.4

M ay

June

J u ly

30.

Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1 9 6 7 = 1 0 0 unless o th e rw ise sp e cified]
1972
S IC

A nnual
In d u s try d e s c r ip tio n

code

1979

1980

a v erag e
1979

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M IN IN G

1011

Iron ores (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) .........................................................

134.8

136.0

138.8

138.1

140.2

140.2

152.6

152.6

152.6

152.6

Mercury ores (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................

234.4

270.8

245.8

252.1

275.0

252.1

300.0

142.0
308.3

147.3

1092

335.4

330.0

337.5

331.2

Bituminous coal and lignite

451.3

453.1

454.8

452.9

455.1

455.5

458.9

459.2

459.6

461.7

462.9

337.5
464.4

332.9

1211

463.3

467.2

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

142.0

155.8

1311

Crude petroleum and natural g a s ...........................................

459.8

457.5

476,0

508.4

522.1

533.9

551.3

582.7

598.0

600.6

217.6

219.3

220.1

221.0

224.0

224.7

225.6

238.8

243.2

243.9

620.2
249.4

637.8

Construction sand and gravel

612.3
248.4

631.3

1442

250.1

2496

1455

Kaolin and ball clay (6 /7 6 = 1 0 0 ) .................................

125.8

125.5

125.5

125.5

126.7

124.2

129.3

136.6

136.6

136.6

136.6

136.6

136.6

136.6

2011

Meat packing plants .................................................................

247.4

243.8

229.3

247.2

238.9

241.5

243.9

240.8

240.1

2389

225.6

227.4

229.9

2013

Sausages and other prepared meats ....................................

219.6

214.7

203.4

211.7

211.9

213.4

220.0

211.9

207.8

209.4

197.7

194.7

190.6

213.4

2016

Poultry dressing plants .......................................................

187.1

178.4

169.6

171.2

163.1

188.3

188.5

186.1

178.2

173.5

164,5

164.7

164,2

214.2

2021

Creamery b u t t e r ........................................................................

2288

227.5

237.9

240.6

240.1

241.7

243.1

241.8

2428

243.4

2528

253.7

255.7

256.3

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

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

See footnote at end of table.

Digitized96for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

249.1

30.

Continued — Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
A nnual

1972

1980

1979

In d u s try d e s c r ip tio n

S IC

1979

code

M A N U F A C T U R IN G -

J u ly

A ug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

C o n t in u e d

2022
2024
2033
2034
2041
2044
2048
2061
2063
2067

Cheese natural and processed (12/72 = 100) ..............
Ice cream and frozen desserts (12/72 = 100) ..............
Canned fruits and vegetables........................................
Dehydrated food products (12/73 = 100)......................
Flour mills (12/71 =100) ............................................
Rice milling..................................................................
Prepared foods, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100)............................
Raw cane sugar ..........................................................
Beet sugar ..................................................................
Chewing gum ..............................................................

189.2
172.5
2086
174.2
173.1
204.0
120.4
210.3
202.6
245.8

186.3
171.5
209.9
182.0
190.9
206.8
128.1
209.0
202.0
242.9

195.4
175.0
210.5
180.7
176.9
218.7
119.4
216.8
199.4
242.9

200.8
176.1
212.0
170.0
183.5
223.5
120.9
216.7
200.0
242.9

196.8
177.5
212.9
158.2
184.2
227.3
123.6
224.3
204.7
242.9

193.6
179.9
212.2
156.2
184.4
231.8
124.3
223.3
210.6
262.3

193.9
180.1
212.2
157.3
184.1
218.1
125.0
248.4
223.2
262.3

195.4
180.9
213.4
157.6
181.7
217.5
122.0
260.5
224.6
262.3

192.9
181.5
213.6
159.0
183.6
233.0
122.6
374.9
293.2
262.3

195.7
185.0
214.7
156.4
181.6
258.0
121.5
276.0
305.7
281.9

203.6
191.4
216.3
157.5
175.9
260.4
116.8
320.2
295.4
281.9

203.6
192.1
217.4
156.4
183.3
254.5
117.2
456.1
338.0
282.0

204.2
195.2
220.1
156.3
181.8
236.0
116.6
402.4
343.9
282.0

205.1
195.2
222.6
157.7
189.6
225.3
122.6
381.8
343.5
282.4

2074
2075
2077
2083
2085
2091
2092
2095
2098
2111

Cottonseed oil m ills......................................................
Soybean oil m ills..........................................................
Animal and marine fats and oils ....................................
Malt ............................................................................
Distilled liquor, except brandy (12/75 = 100) ................
Canned and cured seafoods (12/73 - 100) ..................
Fresh or frozen packaged fish ......................................
Roasted coffee (12/72 = 100)......................................
Macaroni and spaghetti ................................................
Cigarettes....................................................................

207.4
245.0
338.4
2037
113.7
146.4
381.6
254.5
199.7
225.0

224.5
262.8
352.0
201.4
113.6
148.5
403.7
271.0
203.5
221.5

214.1
250.0
321.4
201.4
115.7
148.2
391.5
279.2
210.4
228.9

217.9
248.6
333.8
214.9
117.1
154.0
389.2
279.2
210.4
229.1

214.9
244.7
333.7
214.9
117.1
154.3
400.1
280.0
210.4
229.2

204.7
242.4
315.2
228.2
118.1
155.6
391.4
287.5
221.5
229.2

205.6
241.9
300.7
228.2
118.1
159.8
388.4
287.5
227.7
234.3

182.4
235.1
298.1
244.1
118.6
160.9
389.7
281.3
227.7
245.8

184.4
230.4
292.6
244.1
118.7
164.0
385.5
273.9
227.7
245.9

170.4
222.3
297.4
244.1
118.7
165.7
391.6
274.0
227.7
246.0

154.8
212.6
274.0
244.1
118.7
170.2
371.5
273.9
230.5
246.1

150.5
212.5
263.0
244.1
118.9
173.2
361.6
273.9
230.5
254.2

155.1
209.1
238.3
244.1
118.9
175.3
362.8
283.1
230.5
254.3

190.1
224.6
274.4
244.1
118.9
175.9
365.2
274.5
230.5
257.2

2121
2131
2211
2221
2251
2254
2257
2261
2262

Cigars ........................................................................
Chewing and smoking tobacco......................................
Weaving mills, cotton (12/72 = 100) ..........k................
Weaving mills, synthetic (12/77 = 100) ........................
Women's hosiery, except socks (12/75 = 100)..............
Knit underwear mills . ................................................
Circular knit fabric mills (6/76 = 100)............................
Finishing plants, cotton (6/76 = 100) ............................
Finishing plants, synthetics, silk (6/76 = 100) ................

147.3
248.4
195.3
115.0
97.5
173.3
95.2
121.8
107.2

149.8
246.4
196.1
116.2
99.6
172.9
96.1
122.5
107.5

150.1
246.4
196.5
116.3
98.1
174.0
96.4
123.2
108.2

150.1
255Ì8
198.7
116.2
97.5
174.0
96.2
124.0
108.3

149.8
2604
201.1
116.8
98.2
174.3
96.9
126.1
109.3

150.4
260.8
201.6
117.3
100.3
174.6
98.4
126.3
109.7

150.4
260.8
201.9
117.2
100.2
178.3
98.6
126.6
109.8

151.2
260.9
204.4
118.1
103.3
182.5
99.3
128.7
110.3

154.2
265.1
206.9
118.3
103.3
184.1
100.4
129.6
109.4

154.4
267.3
209.5
122.7
104.3
186.5
103.4
131.9
110.4

152.7
274.3
210.9
122.4
104.4
186.4
103.6
131.9
111.3

152.7
274.6
211.6
121.8
105.4
187.1
104.1
133.2
112.1

157.1
274.7
211.9
120.4
105.4
190.5
104.7
133.7
111.5

157.2
274.7
217.4
122.3
105.4
192.5
105.1
137.2
173.7

2272
2281
2282
2284
2298
2311
2321
2322
2323
2327

Tufted carpets and rugs................................................
Yarn mills, except wool (12/71 =100) ..........................
Throwing and winding mills (6/76 - 100) ......................
Thread mills (6/76 - 100)............................................
Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100)................................
Men's and boys' suits and coats....................................
Men’s and boys' shirts and nightwear ............................
Men’s and boys' underwear..........................................
Men’s and boys' neckwear (12/75 = 100) ....................
Men’s and boys' separate trousers................................

128.0
176.7
107.4
123.7
107.0
204.2
194.0
188 9
106.5
161.5

127.6
177.5
108.5
120.5
105.4
205.8
194.7
188.7
103.4
162.5

128.6
177.4
109.7
128.1
113.5
206.5
195.9
190.0
110.9
162.7

129.0
179.4
111.2
128.1
115.1
206.5
196.0
190.0
110.9
162.7

129.8
181.2
110.4
128.4
114.9
206.6
196.1
190.0
110.9
162.9

130.1
183.0
109.6
128.4
114.9
206.8
196.6
190.0
110.9
163.4

130.1
183.7
109.2
128.6
114.9
206.7
196.3
194.0
110.9
163.5

134.7
188.0
110.1
128.7
115.0
209.0
197.7
199.8
112.4
164.2

134.5
197.8
110.6
129.2
117.2
208.1
196.2
202.0
112.4
174.2

137.0
199.5
112.0
130.0
118.5
208.3
199.3
204.0
112.4
174.3

135.9
203.8
114.8
133.9
123.6
205.7
202.9
204.2
106.3
174.8

138.7
204.5
116.3
142.2
123.8
207.0
203.5
204.3
106.3
174.9

137.5
202.9
114.8
142.1
125.0
207.4
204.9
208.5
106.3
175.1

137.6
203.0
113.4
143.0
125.0
214.9
205.4
211.1
106.3
175.3

2328
2331
2335
2341
2342
2361
2381
2394
2396
2421

Men's and boys' work clothing ......................................
Women's and misses’ blouses and waists (6/78 = 100) .
Women's and misses' dresses (12/77 = 100)................
Women’s and children’s underwear (12/72 = 100) ........
Brassieres and allied garments (12/75 = 100) ..............
Children’s dresses and blouses (12/77 = 100)..............
Fabric dress and work gloves........................................
Canvas and related products (12/77 = 100)..................
Automotive and apparel trimmings (12/77 = 100)..........
Sawmills and planing mills (12/71 = 100)......................

2086
102.0
107.0
144.3
116.9
104.8
241.4
109.3
111.3
251.0

208.9
102.6
106.4
144.2
117.5
102.4
245.4
108.4
114.3
251.3

210.7
102.7
108.3
145.3
117.8
102.4
245.4
111.0
114.3
259 1

210.9
102.8
108.3
145.3
117.8
103.7
245.4
111.4
114.3
265.6

213.4
103.0
108.7
146.7
117.8
105.7
245.4
112.3
114.3
262.2

219.1
105.9
1088
147.4
117.8
105.7
246.9
112.1
114.3
250.2

219.6
106.8
108,8
147.7
118.8
105.6
246.9
120.1
114.3
237.9

225.1
107.1
112.9
149.4
119.7
105.3
257.7
122.1
114.3
234.8

233.6
106.6
113.8
150.0
122.9
105.3
261.7
122.8
114.3
239.5

235.4
106.7
113.8
153.1
124.9
105.5
265.0
123.4
122.3
239.1

240.9
107.6
113.9
152.4
125.4
106.0
267.5
123.4
122.3
215.7

241.7
107.7
113.9
153.2
125.4
106.0
271.1
123.4
122.3
209.3

242.5
107.8
114.0
155.2
127.0
106.7
271.1
123.4
122.3
218.1

244.8
111.4
114.0
155.4
128.2
112.4
271.1
123.4
122.3
228.8

2436
2439
2448
2451
2492
2511
2512
2515
2521
2611

Softwood veneer and plywood (12/75 = 100)................
Structural wood members, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ............
Wood pallets and skids (12/75 = 100)..........................
Mobile homes (12/74 - 100)........................................
Particleboard (12/75 = 100) ........................................
Wood household furniture (12/71 = 100) ......................
Upholstered household furniture (12/71 = 100)..............
Mattresses and bedsprings............................................
Wood office furniture ....................................................
Pulp mills (12/73 = 100)..............................................

152.3
151.2
166.5
138.2
139.1
165.5
150.0
165.7
215.3
200.6

148.1
150.0
166.9
138.2
134.3
164.5
150.0
164.5
216.8
205.4

153.4
149.9
166.8
139.6
134.7
164.6
150.2
165.8
216.8
205.7

156.0
150.8
167.9
140.7
138.5
168.0
151.6
165.8
216.8
205.8

153.1
158.2
167.9
143.0
139.5
169.3
151.8
168.9
217.6
213.5

142.9
158.2
171.0
144.0
136.8
172.3
153.8
172.3
217.6
213.9

138.9
158.2
170.5
144.1
134.5
174.5
155.7
172.3
221.9
213.9

138.5
158.2
169 8
144.8
136.9
177.5
155.9
169.9
226.2
225.2

143.7
158.2
167.0
146.9
150.7
178.2
158.7
170.5
233.8
225.1

139.8
158.3
166.3
147.2
158.9
178.9
158.7
170.5
233.8
225.5

121.4
158.2
164.6
149.0
161.9
179.7
158.7
171.5
233.9
244.9

129.6
152.1
162.8
150.0
167.3
180.8
1589
174.8
233.9
246.0

140.5
152.1
159 7
150.6
171.7
182.4
160.3
174.8
233.9
246.0

148.7
152.1
157.1
151.2
168.7
183.8
163.3
180.7
236.1
246.6

2621
2631
2647
2654
2655
2812
2821
2822
2824
2873

Paper mills, except building (12/74 - 100)....................
Paperboard mills (12/74 = 100) ..................................
Sanitary paper products................................................
Sanitary food containers ..............................................
fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) ..
Alkalies and chlorine (12/73 = 100)..............................
Plastics materials and resins (6/76 - 100)....................
Synthetic rubber ..........................................................
Organic fiber, noncellulosic............................................
Nitrogenous fertilizers (12/75 - 100) ............................

130.2
119.8
277.7
188.7
134.8
208.8
121.2
210.3
117.6
103.4

130.2
119.7
276.4
189.6
136.6
209.5
124.9
214.2
118.6
102.8

131.0
121.9
285.9
189 6
136.6
212.2
127.8
223.4
119.8
104.1

131.4
123.4
285.4
191.8
136.6
213.1
128.9
223.8
123.5
106.1

135.1
125.4
286.3
195.8
138.5
214.1
132.9
225.7
123.6
108.0

136.5
126.3
288.4
198.2
138.5
216.7
133.8
228.0
123.2
111.7

136.8
127.6
290.9
199.9
142.3
217.3
134.1
230.4
122.6
113.5

139.0
131.3
295.8
202.6
143.2
220.4
138.5
240.9
124.1
114.3

139.8
132.3
3039
204.8
143.2
226.5
139.7
244.2
124.7
119.8

142.5
134.6
311.7
208.9
143.3
233.7
140.8
244.7
126.9
122.1

145.1
137.0
312.2
212.9
145.7
234.0
145.4
255.7
128.8
123.9

146.1
141.5
318.1
216.7
147.8
238.6
147.0
258.2
131.9
124.4

146.6
143.1
321.1
218.3
150.6
245.3
147.1
258.5
133.0
123.4

146.7
140.4
328.4
219.4
155.2
250.4
146.3
258.9
133.6
122.6

2874
2875
2892
2911
2951
2952
3011

Phosphatic fertilizers ....................................................
Fertilizers, mixing only ..................................................
Explosives ..................................................................
Petroleum refining (6/76 - 100) ..................................
Paving mixtures and blocks (12/75 - 100)....................
Asphalt felts and coatings (12/75) = 100) ....................
Tires and inner tubes (12/73 - 100) ............................

193.8
203.8
239.4
163.6
134.3
162.5
176.4

188.9
198.1
240.1
165.5
134.4
143.6
176.8

199.4
205.6
240.7
176.6
134.9
142.7
181.2

204.3
211.1
250.3
188.9
141.6
145.8
184.2

213.2
218.3
2508
196.4
145.6
147.6
186 9

221.6
227.0
251.7
201.0
145.6
152.2
191.2

223.4
227.1
252.5
204.8
145.7
151.9
191.4

229.2
233.2
253.6
213.9
150.0
156.1
193.0

233.2
239.8
255.2
228.4
161.5
162.7
198.7

235.0
242.5
2602
242.3
167.9
169.9
198.8

237.3
247.9
271.3
250.4
172.6
176.5
198.8

236.4
246.0
272.6
253.0
172.6
173.6
199.0

236.8
248.9
273.6
253.2
171.6
175.0
201.4

234.9
248.3
273.6
255.8
173.7
180.1
203.3


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

97

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW October 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
30.

Continued — Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972

A nnual

1979

1980

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

N ov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

3021

Rubber and plastic footwear (12/71 = 100)

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

171.1

171.0

173.4

173,4

173.5

173.5

173.5

173.5

173.6

173.6

173.8

173.8

173.9

181.9

3031

Reclaimed rubber (12/73 = 100) ..............................................................

170.0

169.2

169.2

177.7

178.8

179.2

179.5

179.7

180.0

184,9

183.7

184.3

184.3

184.4

3079

Miscellaneous plastic products (6/78 = 1 0 0 ) ...........................................

112.3

113.1

114.3

Leather tanning and finishing (12/77 = 100)

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

167.5

181.8

172.9

155.2

161.9

150.8

153.5

164.3

160.8

146.7

140.8

137.9

134.6

137.7

House slippers (12/75 = 100) ...................................................................

135.8

135.0

135.0

135.0

135.8

135.9

135.9

143.5

145.4

145.4

146.8

146.8

146.8

152.5

Men's footwear, except athletic (12/75 = 100)

152.7

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

109.9

111.4

3111
3142
3143

114.6

115.6

116.6

117.0

119.1

120.1

120.3

121.6

121.9

155.4

158.2

160.1

160.4

160.3

160.3

160.3

157.9

158.5

158.4

158.4

158.6

158.6

3144

W omen’s footwear, except athletic

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

194.5

198.7

201.5

201.6

202.3

204.0

204.0

205.6

206.3

213.5

213.8

213.8

213.8

214.3

3171

W omen’s handbags and purses (12/75 = 100) ......................................

128.9

131.8

131.8

131.8

131.8

131.8

131.8

131.9

131.9

132.1

132.1

140.8

140.9

140.9

3211

H at glass (12/71 = 1 0 0 ) .............................................................................

151.7

151.9

151.9

152.3

152.6

153.3

153.9

157.6

157.6

157.9

157.9

157.9

158.9

159.5

3221

Glass containers

261.1

265.2

265.2

265.2

265.2

265.2

274.2

274.3

274.3

274.3

294.5

294.5

294.5

294.5

3241

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

283.1

285.4

285.4

285.4

285.4

285.5

286.2

305.7

305.9

306.3

309.8

310.7

310.8

310.5

3251

Brick and structural clay tile ........................................................................

258.6

261.0

263.3

265.9

261.3

261.3

262.7

268.3

270.4

271.9

276.4

278.5

278.5

278.5

3253

Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) ................................................

117.2

120.2

120.2

120.2

120.2

120.2

130.3

130.4

130.4

130.4

130.4

117.6

117.6

117.6

3255

Clay refractories

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

242.1

246.5

246.7

247.1

251.0

252.9

254.0

255.1

259.4

263.7

275.4

277.1

277.5

280.7

3259

Structural clay products, n.e.c.......................................................................

189.2

188.2

192.1

192.1

192.8

192.3

196.5

196.3

198.1

196.4

200.6

201.6

204.9

205.1

Cement, hydraulic

3261

Vitreous plumbing fix tu re s .............................................................................

235.8

237.2

Vitreous china food u te n s ils ..........................................................................

295.2

297.5

297.5

298.0

298.0

305.4

308.2

219.2
308.2

224.6

3262

308.2

308.2

313.4

313.4

318.6

318.2

3263

Fine earthenware food utensils ...................................................................

244.9

238.8

238.8

246.0

246.0

248.4

294.3

294.3

294.3

294.3

294.8

293.6

294.4

294.3

207.4

210.1

212.4

213.1

214.5

215.7

217.3

226.7

227.6

236.1

3269

Pottery products, n.e.c, (12/75 = 100) .....................................................

132.5

131.0

131.0

133.3

133.3

135.5

150.1

150.1

150.1

150.1

151.3

151.4

152.6

152.6

3271

Concrete block and brick .............................................................................

233.0

232.7

235.7

237.8

240.0

240.0

240.2

249.5

250.6

252.3

259.3

259.4

259.4

259.4

3273

Ready-mixed concrete .................................................................................

282.5

248.2

249.6

250.5

252.4

254.0

254.6

257.0

270.8

272.6

275.5

278.9

281.6

282.5

3274

Lime (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................................................................

141.0

141.8

142.9

144.2

144.6

144.3

144.6

149.5

153.5

155.6

156.7

156.9

157.4

3275

Gypsum p ro d u c ts ...........................................................................................

252.8

252.3

252.8

255.4

255.9

256.8

255.6

255.9

262.8

268.1

264.6

257.0

257.5

253.5

3291
3297

Abrasive products (12/71 = 100) ..............................................................
Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 100) ..........................................................

187.8

188.6
149.1

190.4
149.7

195.1
150.1

195.3
152.3

196.5
152.3

199.4

203.9
154.2

210.1
157.4

211.9
159.7

213.5
161.2

215.2
162.8

311.9

313.2

313.4

308.5

159.6

145.6

187,7
148.1

152.6

203.3
153.3

3312

Blast furnaces and steel mills ......................................................................

288.8

292.8

293.0

293.2

296.4

297.1

297.7

302.4

302.9

304.1

3313

Electrometallurgical products (12/75 = 100) ...........................................

111.9

116.5

116.5

116.0

116.2

117.5

117.6

117.8

117.8

118.0

118.7

118.5

118.7

117.0

3316

Cold finishing of steel shapes ......................................................................

265.5

270.6

270.8

270.9

271.7

273.4

273.9

274.1

277.1

277.2

285.9

288.1

288.2

282.2

3317

Steel pipes and tu b e s ....................................................................................

268.6

271.9

271.3

271.3

272.7

273.1

273.2

280.5

281.0

283.2

286.9

286.9

290.5

292.5

3321

Gray iron foundries (12/68 = 100) ............................................................

255.8

253.9

253.8

254.8

267.1

269.6

269.7

273.7

276.9

277.2

278.4

279.0

279.9

280.4

3333

Primary z in c .....................................................................................................

265.7

281.4

265.5

264.2

265.2

257.8

265.7

266.1

272.4

279.6

274.2

268.2

268.6

255.8

3334

Primary aluminum

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

243.1

244.9

247.4

248.2

256.0

263.2

266.6

267.0

267.0

267.8

276.0

287.0

288.6

293.3

3351

Copper rolling and d ra w in g ..........................................................................

213.2

211.2

213.6

216.7

226.3

222.6

225.0

231.0

238.6

230.1

222.9

220.4

223.3

3353
3354

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

148.9

149.6

149.8

150.0

150.7

151.3

151.7

153.2

253.1
153.5

155.5

158.0

158.2

150.3

151.9

157.4

167.6

167.7

168.3

133.1

136.9

139.9

158.9
141.0

160.9

132.7

158.0
140.5

158.8

Aluminum rolling, drawing, n.e.c. (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ......................................

151.9
133.5

155.2

3355

149.3
132.4

157.6
167.7

157.7

Aluminum extruded products (12/75 = 100) ...........................................

141.1

143.8

145.2

146.5

147.2

3411

Aluminum sheet plate and foil (12/75 = 100)

Metal cans

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

264.1

262.2

262.9

163.3

162.8

166.3

167.1

169.5

169.8

173.1

174.6

279.9
176.4

295.1

Hand saws and saw blades (12/72 = 1 0 0 ) ..............................................

263.5
166.4

273.8

3425

177.8

181.3

181.7

183.3

Metal sanitary ware ......................................................................................

224.8

226.4

228.9

229.2

230.1

231.7

232.9

242.1

243.1

245.5

250.9

Automotive stampings (12/75 = 100) .......................................................

128.5

127.8

130.9

131.6

132.4

132.4

132.4

132.4

132.7

133.8

249.7
134.1

249.9

3465

237.8
132.4

138.1

138.1

3482

Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100) .....................................................

132.2

134.0

134.0

134.0

133.2

133.6

143.2

143.2

143.2

142.6

146.3

147.1

150.2

149.8

3493
3494

Steel springs, except w ir e .............................................................................

219,8

221.6

222.1

222.8

223.7

224.1

225.6

226.1

226.6

228.6

228.9

228.9

230.1

230.1

Valves and pipe fittings (12/71 = 100) .....................................................

204.8

205.3

206.2

207.5

210.4

212.5

214.3

216.9

219.6

223.1

227.3

229.1

231.2

231.8

3498

Fabricated pipe and fittin g s ..........................................................................

289.2

294.8

294.8

294.9

297.3

297.4

297.4

301.7

301.8

303.5

306.8

306.9

313.8

317.2

3519

Internal combustion engines, n.e.c.................................................................

243.3

242.3

245.7

251.8

254.2

254.9

254.9

260.5

261.8

266.1

269.2

270.2

270.3

275.1

3531

Construction machinery (12/76 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................

3532

Mining machinery (12/72 = 100)

3533

Oilfield machinery and equipment ..........................................................

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

125.1

125.6

126.3

126.5

274.6

274.7

140.7

3431

276.6

277.3

295.2

294.9

295.6

128.9

129.4

130.9

135.7

136.3

229,4

231.2

231.5

232.7

233.1

235.4

236.4

245.8

247.1

247.8

138.0
254.1

256.2

257.1

259.4

291.6

292.0

293.3

296.8

300.5

302.8

309.1

314.2

316.2

318.9

329.5

332.9

337.4

3426

134.6

138.7

140.0

141.5

3534

Elevators and moving stairways

215.9

215.4

214.6

219.1

219.4

225.6

226.1

234.1

242.5

244.2

242.8

244.6

245.1

247.9

249.8

256.7

266.1

268.1

229.1
269.4

232.6

Machine tools, metal forming types (12/71 = 1 0 0 ).............................

220.6
253.7

220.9

3542

276.1

275.7

279.8

284.9

3546

Power driven hand tools (12/76 = 100)

119.2

120.2

120.4

122.0

122.8

124.4

126.3

126.6

127.4

128.6

130.4

130.6

133.5

3552

Textile machinery (12/69 = 100)

119.3
194.7

195.0

197.5

198.2

199.3

200.6

200.6

202.6

205.2

207.0

185.4

185.9

187.7

190.0

192.6

192.7

192.9

201.2

201.6

205.1

212.5

217.0
214.0

222.1

Woodworking machinery (12/72 = 100) ...........................................

212.5
212.7

213.0

3553

199.5

201.0

204.2

2088

3576

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

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

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

Scales and balances, excluding la b o ra to ry ................................................

194.8

195,4

205.8

206.6

205.1

208.2

208,6

Carburetors, pistons, rings, valves (6/76 = 100)

139.6

139.2

139.6

140.7

142.8

145.1

145.3

147.5

147.8

T ra n s fo rm e rs ......................................................................................

168.1

167.9

167.6

168.4

171.2

170.4

171.6

172.9

176.6

148.6
177.5

152.5

3612

180.0

152.8
181.7

183.2

186.2

3623

Welding apparatus, electric (12/72 = 100)

192.2

193.5

194.1

195.1

196.9

198.6

200.3

201.3

203.3

206.0

207.3

209.8

211.0

212.3

124.4

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

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

194.2

195.4

216.3

3592

195.7

153.2

158.3

3631

Household cooking equipment (12/75 = 100) .........................................

122.2

122.0

123.4

124.3

125.9

126.3

128.7

129.3

129.4

129.6

132.5

133.4

134.7

3632

Household refrigerators, freezers (6/76 = 1 0 0 ) .................................

114.3

115.1

115.1

115.7

119.0

119.0

121.5

149.9

150.6

150,9

152.3

154.0

118.5
156.6

118.6

148.8

116.3
153.5

117.0

Household laundry equipment (12/73 = 100)

113.6
148.8

113.6

3633

158,3

159.0

159.7

162.8

121.7
160.1

141.6
121.8

141.7

141.9
122.2

144.5

144.7

145.8

146.1

149.7

151.3

150.2

149.2

149.6

122.6

122.6

122.6

122 6

129.2

129.2
251.8

128.6

128.6

128.6

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

3635

Household vacuum c le a n e rs ..............................................................

141.7

3636

Sewing machines (12/75 = 100)

121.4

3641

Electric amps

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

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

122.2

151.9
129.4

235.2

240.8

244.3

242.7

244.8

238.7

240.8

248.5

252.4

252.4

252.3

260.0

266.4

3644

Noncurrent-carrying wiring devices (12/72 = 100) ...............................

204.6

203.3

207.7

209.1

210.5

211.9

215.0

212.9

215.2

220.3

222.5

222.3

Commercial lighting fixtures (12/75 = 100) .............................................

126.5

127.9

127.9

130.5

131.4

131.6

131.9

133.4

134.3

215.3
136.2

219.7

3646

138.4

138.9

139.6

139.6

130.5

133.0

133.2

134.6

138.6

139.4

140.4

227.7

229.1

2294

229.7

253.9

254.3

254.8

140.5
255.1

86.4

86.8

88.5

3648

Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) ..................................................

126.0

127.6

128.2

128.5

129.6

3671

Electron tubes receiving type

220.3

226.5

226.6

227.2

227.2

129.8
227.4

3674

Semiconductors and related devices .........................................................

84.8

84.2

84.3

84.7

85.1

85.6

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

89.3

89.7

90.7

91.0

91.6

3675

Electronic capacitors (12/75 = 1 0 0 ) .........................................................

125.2

126.7

129.3

134.1

133.9

135.8

138.0

147.7

149.1

151.3

155.6

156.4

156.2

164.3

3676

Electronic resistors (12/75 = 100) ............................................................

124.4

124.0

124.6

125.2

126.6

126.7

127.3

127.4

128.8

131.8

131.9

132.8

135.0

135.1

3678

Electronic connectors (12/75 = 100)

131.7

133.4

134.1

170.1

172.8

172.8

173.1

174.1

176,5

176.6

Motor vehicles and car bodies (12/75 = 100) .........................................

125.1

172.8
125.1

145.1
174.2

147.3

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

140.7
173.1

146.7

3692
3711

122.1

122.5

130.2

130.1

130.4

132.7

131.6

131.8

176.8
135.0

112.9
186.3

113.0

122.7

125.4

125.6

126.0

126.7

126.7

126.7

186.6

198.7

203.8

204.0

202.6

203.5

204.0

204.4

3942
3944

Primary batteries, dry and wet
Dolls (12/75 = 100)

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

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

137.6

138.9

142,1

146.4

148.8

146.8
176.4

176.4

149.0
176.4

133.2

134.1

136.8

110.8

111.8

112.9

182.7

183.5

112.6
184.4

112.6

Games, toys, and children’s v e h ic le s ..........................................................
Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 = 1 0 0 )......................................

117.1

118.3

185.1
118.7

186.2

118.6

123.1

125.2

125.2

126.2

128.2

128.3

131.5

133.3

3995

Burial caskets (6 /7 6 = 1 0 0 ) ........................................................................

122.5

123.3

123.8

124.8

123.1

124.8

124.8

128.3

128.3

128.3

128.1

130.0

132.2

132.2

3996

Hard surface floor coverings (12/75 = 100)

126.3

128.3

128.3

128.3

131.0

134.1

134.1

138 6

138.7

138.7

143.2

143.3

143.3

146.1

3955

98

1979

In d u s t r y d e s c r i p t i o n

S IC
code


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

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

136.4

136.4

P R O D U C T IV IT Y D A TA

P roductivity data are compiled by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics from establishment data and from estimates of com­
pensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of
Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board.

Definitions
Output is the constant dollar gross domestic product produced in a
given period. Indexes of output per hour of labor input, or labor pro­
ductivity, measure the value of goods and services produced per hour
of labor. Compensation per hour includes wages and salaries of em­
ployees plus employers’ contributions for social insurance and private
benefit plans. The data also include an estimate of wages, salaries, and
supplementary payments for the self-employed, except for nonfinancial corporations, in which there are no self-employed. Real com­
pensation per hour is compensation per hour adjusted by the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Unit labor cost measures the labor compensation cost required to
produce one unit of output and is derived by dividing compensation
by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, in­
terest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by
subtracting compensation of all persons from the current dollar gross
domestic product and dividing by output. In these tables, Unit
nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments
except unit profits. Unit profits include corporate profits and invento­
ry valuation adjustments per unit of output.
The implicit price deflator is derived by dividing the current dollar
estimate of gross product by the constant dollar estimate, making the
deflator, in effect, a price index for gross product of the sector reported.

31.

The use of the term “man-hours” to identify the labor component
of productivity and costs, in tables 31 through 34, has been discontin­
ued. Hours of all persons is now used to describe the labor input of
payroll workers, self-employed persons, and unpaid family workers.
Output per all-employee hour is now used to describe labor productiv­
ity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed.

Notes on the data
In the private business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the
basis for the output measure employed in the computation of output
per hour is Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National
Product. Computation of hours includes estimates of nonfarm and
farm proprietor hours.
Output data are supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly
manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to annual estimates of output (gross product originating)
from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Compensation and hours data
are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Beginning with the September 1976 issue of the R e v ie w , tables 3 1 34 were revised to reflect changeover to the new series— private busi­
ness sector and nonfarm business sector— which differ from the
previously published total private economy and nonfarm sector in
that output imputed for owner-occupied dwellings and the household
and institutions sectors, as well as the statistical discrepancy, are
omitted. For a detailed explanation, see J. R. Norsworthy and L. J.
Fulco, “New sector definitions for productivity series,” M o n th ly L a b o r
R ev ie w , October 1976, pages 40-42.

Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1950-79

[1 967 = 100]

Item

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1972

1973

1974

1975

110.2

112.6

1976

1977

1978

1979

Private business sector:
95.1

104.4

111.5

116.6

118.7

119.3

118.3

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

42.6

56.1

72.2

88.7

151.3

165.2

181.7

197.6

213.3

231.4

253.1

59.2

81.4

93.9

123.3
106.0

139.8

Real compensation per h o u r ..................................

111.6

113.6

111.8

112.7

115.9

117.5

118.4

116.4

91.4

93.3

118.2

125.4

133.2

149.8

161.3

169.5

85.4

95.9

105.8

118.9

124.9

130.3

150.3

157.9

165.5

174.3

184.4

174.8

187.2

203.8

Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per hour

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

61.2

70.6

Unit labor c o s t ..........................................................

69.6

69.9
79.4

Unit nonlabor payments

73.1

80.4

Implicit price deflator

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

70.8

79.8

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

67.2

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

45.6

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

79.0

89.3

94.2

74.6

81.2

96.0

59.0

89.4

113.9

113.6

179.7

194.0

214.0

143.1

157.5

165.5

112.0

108.6

110.7

114.6

116.4

116.9

115.7

149.2

179.3

194.2

209.6

113.9

115.5

227.5
116.4

247.9

111.2
161.9

169.5

180.1

194.6

123.2

130.3

103.2

110.1

121.9

138.4

Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons

Real compensation per h o u r ..................................

63.3

73.6

74.5
841

94.6

1048

110.5

112.1

163.0
110.4

Unit labor c o s t ..........................................................

68.0

79.1

91.7

93.2

118.1

125.7

133.2

150.1

Unit nonlabor payments .........................................

71.4

95.8
94.1

106.0
114.0

117.4

117.8

124.7

145.9

156.0

163.8

169.9

1786

69.1

80.1
79.4

84.4

Implicit price deflator

122.9

127.9

141.4

156.4

164.8

174.5

186.1

202.1

110.6
136.7

112.9

108.7

117.0

161.7

112.2
177.9

115.8

147.6

192.7

208.0

118.0
225.0

117.5
244.9

114.6

115.2

112.7

177.7

190.6

208.4

Compensation per hour

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

89.2

114.0
214.4

Nonfinancial corporations:
........................

(’ )

(’ )

80.6

96.9

103.7

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

(’ )

(’ )

76.0

90.1

121.8

Output per hour of all employees
Compensation per hour

Real compensation per h o u r ..................................
Unit labor c o s t ..........................................................
Unit nonlabor payments
Implicit price deflator

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

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

n
n

C )

85.7

95.3

104.7

109.1

110.9

109.5

110.4

<’ )

94.3

93.0

117.4

123.7

130.7

148.8

158.6

113.0
166.4

148.1
154.9

156.8

164.4

170.6

179.5

163.0

173.0

183.5

198.1

<’ )

(’ )

90.8

100.1

103.5

114.8

116.8

124.8

c i

(’ )

93.1

95.5

112.5

120.5

125.8

140.2

Manufacturing:
65.8

75.0

79.8

98.4

105.0

115.7

118.9

113.0

118.8

124.0

127.7

128.2

129.2

45.6

61.2

78.0

122.3

136.6

146.5

161.7

181.1

196.1

212.7

229.9

250.8

105.1

109.0

110.1

109.5

Unit labor c o s t ..........................................................

63.3
694

91.1
96.4

81.6

97.7

92.6

116.5

118,1

112.3
152.4

158.2

166.6

117.6
179.4

194.1

82.3

88.6

92.3

103.3

96.2

107.4

123.2
106.4

143.1

Unit nonlabor payments .........................................

105.6

128.4

139.6

147.4

152.4

154.4

Implicit price deflator

73.3

83.8

96.1

95.9

110.3

114.8

118.0

131.6

145.1

152.5

1607

171.1

181.9

Output per hour of all persons.................................
Compensation per hour .........................................
Real compensation per h o u r ..................................

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

76.3

88.0

115.0

117.2

115.3

' Not available.


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

99

M O N T H L Y LA B O R REV IEW October 1980 • Current L abor Statistics: Productivity

32.

Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1969-79
A n n u a l ra te
Year

o f change

It e m
1969

1970

Output per hour of all persons .................................

0.2

0.7

3.3

Compensation per h o u r .............................................

6.9

7.2

6.7

1971

1972

1973

1974

3.4

1.9

6.2

8.2

1975

1976

- 3 .0

2.1

3.5

9.2

10.0

8.8

1977

1978

1979

1.8

0.5

- 0 .8

2.5

2.1

8.0

8.5

9.4

5.9

6.9

2.5

♦

1 9 5 0 -7 9

1 9 6 0 -7 9

Private business sector:

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

1.4

1.2

2.3

2.8

1.9

- 1 .6

2.8

1.4

0.8

- 1 .7

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................

6.6

6.4

3.3

2.8

6.2

12.5

7.7

5.0

6.0

8.0

10.3

3.3

4.7

Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts ...........................................

1.0

1.2

6.8

5.3

5.0

4.4

15.3

5.1

4.8

5.3

5.8

3.0

4.2

4.7

4.7

4.4

3.6

5.8

9.8

10.1

5.0

5.6

7.1

8.9

3,2

4.5

Implicit price deflator ...................................................

.8

2.0

Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ..................................

-.2

.2

3.0

3.6

1.7

2.0

3.5

1.5

.5

Compensation per hour .............................................

6.4

6.8

6.7

6.4

7.8

9,2

10.0

8.3

7.9

8.6

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

1.0

.8

2.3

3,0

1.5

- 1 .6

.8

2.4

1.4

.8

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................

6.7

6.5

3.5

2,7

6.0

12.7

7.9

4.7

6.3

8.0

-3 .1

-1 .1
9.0
-2 .1
10.2

2.1

1.9

5.6

6.7

2.2

1.7

3.4

4.7

Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts .............................................

.4

1.6

6.7

3.8

.3

5.9

17.0

6.9

5.0

3.7

5.1

2.9

4.0

Implicit price deflator ..................................................

4.5

4.9

4.5

3.1

4.1

10.5

10.6

5.4

5.9

6.6

8.6

3.3

4.5

Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all e m p lo y e e s .............................

.4

.0

3.3

3.1

2.1

- 3 .7

3.2

3.2

1.1

.9

( 1)

1.9

Compensation per hour ..............................................

6.8

6.8

6.2

5.7

7.9

9.6

10.0

8.3

7.9

8.2

8.9

(')

6.5

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

1.3

.8

1.8

2.4

1.6

- 1 .3

.8

2.4

1.4

.5

- 2 .2

(')

1.6

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................

6.3

6.8

2.7

2.5

5.7

13.8

6.6

4.9

6.8

7.3

9.3

(’ )

4.5

Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts .............................................

0

Implicit price deflator ..................................................

4.1

-.4

.5

7.3

3.3

1.8

6.8

18.7

5.8

4.9

3.8

5.2

(’ )

4.2

2.8

4,4

11.5

10.5

5.2

6.1

6.1

7.9

1

3.6

4.6

( )

4.2

Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons .................................

1.3

- .1

5.2

4.8

2.8

- 5 .0

5.1

4.4

3.0

.4

'0 .8

2.5

2.5

Compensation per hour .............................................

6.6

7.1

6.2

5.2

7.2

10.4

12.0

8.3

8.4

8.1

9.1

5.5

6.4

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

1.2

1.1

1.9

1.8

.9

-.5

2.6

2.4

1.9

.4

- 2 .0

2.1

1.5

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................
Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts ..............................................

5.2
- 4 .4

7.2
- 3 .2

.9
9.2

4
2.3

4.3
-1 .0

16.1
-.7

6.6
21.6

3.8
8.8

5.3
5.5

7.7
3.4

8.2
1.3

2.9
1.9

3.9
2.5

Implicit price deflator ..................................................

2.3

4.2

3.1

1.0

2.8

11.5

10.2

5.1

5.4

6,5

6.3

2.6

3.5

1 Not available.

33.

r = revised.

Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted

[1967 = 100]
Q u a r te r ly in d e x e s

A nnual
It e m

av erag e

1978

1977
1979

IV

1978
1

1979
III

II

IV

I

II

1980
III

IV

I

lie

Private business sector:
Output per hour of all persons .................................

119.3

118.3

119.0

118.5

119.1

119.7

119.8

118.9

118.3

117.8

117.7

117.7

'117.1

Compensation per h o u r .............................................

253.1

218.8

224.6

228.8

233.7

238.4

244.8

250.4

255.7

260.3

267.6

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

r 231.4
118.4

116.4

117.9

118.8

118.3

118.2

117.9

117.9

117.0

115,8

114.2

112.9

275.3
'1 12.4

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................

194.0

214.0

189.4

192.1

195.2

199.0

205.9

211.7

217.0

221.1

227.5

r 235.1

Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts .............................................

174.3

184.4

168.5

164.8

173.9

177.0

181.3

180.8

183.7

185.6

Implicit price deflator ..................................................

187.2

203.8

178,6

180.9

1858

188.9

192.9

197.2

202.0

206.1

188.3
209.7

183.9

Nonfarm business sector:

190.0

'193.1

214.5
-

' 220.6

Output per hour of all persons ..................................
Compensation per hour .............................................

116.9

115.7

116.4

116.2

116.7

117.4

117.6

116.6

115.4

115.0

115.2

114'9

'114,1

227.5

247.9

'2 19.6

221.0

224.9

229.5

234.4

240.2

' 249.9

255.6

262.2

269.0

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

116.4

114.0

'115.5

116.9

116.3

116.1

115.9

115.7

244.9
114.4

113.2

112.1

110.6

Unit labor c o s t..............................................................

194.6

214.4

'180.1

-1.90.2

192.8

195.6

199.3

206.0

212.2

217.3

221.8

228.2

'235.8

Unit nonlabor p a y m e n ts .............................................

169.9

178.6

'1 63.8

161.1

169.1

173.0

'176.1

174.3

177.6

180.5

185.9

'191.1

Implicit price deflator ..................................................

186.1

202.1

'1 74.5

180.2

184.7

187.8

191.4

195.1

2003

204.7

182.5
208.4

213.7

' 220 5
p 116.7

109.9

Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all e m p lo y e e s .............................

118.0

117.5

116.9

116.9

118.0

118.5

118.8

118.1

117.3

117.2

117.1

117,1

Comoensation per hour .............................................

225.0

244.9

213.2

219.0

222.6

226.9

231.3

237.3

242.1

247.1

252.1

258.8

e 265.7

Real compensation per h o u r ......................................

115.2

112.7

114.9

115.8

115.1

114.8

114.4

114.3

113.1

111.9

110.6

109.2

p

Total unit costs ............................................................

193.3

210.4

186.3

190.8

191.6

194.0

196.8

202.3

208.0

218.0

224.3

p 233.2

Unit labor cost .....................................................
Unit nonlabor c o s t s .............................................

108.5

190.6

208.4

182.3

187.3

188.7

191.5

194.8

201.0

206.4

213.2
210.8

215.3

221.1

201.8

216.6

198.7

201.5

200.8

201.6

203.1

206.5

213,2

220.5

226.1

234.4

e 250.7

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

127.2

127.8

122.2

107.1

129.2

132.7

138.7

130.3

129.2

124.0

120.5

p 110.9

Implicit price deflator ..................................................
Manufacturing:

183.5

198.1

176.8

178.3

182.3

184.9

188.2

191.6

196.3

127.5
200.4

204.0

208.9

p 215.0

Output per hour for all p e rs o n s.................................

128.2

129.2

128.3

126.3

127.7

' 129.3

'129.5

' 128.8

129.1

128.4

Compensation per hour .............................................

229.9

'2 50.8

218,3

223.9

227.1

231.7

236.6

'128.3
242.3

258.0

264.6

'1 27.0
'274.1

Real compensation per h o u r......................................

117.6
179.4

115.3
194.1

117.6

118.4

117.2
179.1

117.0
182.7

115.9

114.4

113.2

111.6

' 112.0

177.2

117.5
177.9

116.7

170.1

189.0

192.6

195.0

19918

206.0

'215.9

Unit profits

Unit labor c o s t ..............................................................

' Not available.

100

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

r = revised.

248.0

129.6
252.7

0 227.6

34. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,
seasonally adjusted at annual rate
[1967 = 100]
P e rc e n t c h a n g e fro m s a m e q u a rte r a y e a r a g o

Q u a r te r ly p e r c e n t c h a n g e a t a n n u a l r a te
IV 1 9 7 8

It e m

I 1979

I1 1979

I II 1 9 7 9

IV 1 9 7 9

1 1980

11978

I1 1978

III 1 9 7 8

IV 1 9 7 8

I 1979

II 1 9 7 9

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

to

I 1979

II 1 9 7 9

III 1 9 7 9

IV 1 9 7 9

I 1980»

II 1 9 8 0 »

1 1979

II 1 9 7 9

III 1 9 7 9

IV 1 9 7 9

I 1980»

II 1 9 8 0 »

Private business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ........................
Compensation per hour ....................................

-3 .1

Real compensation per h o u r .............................

-.2

Unit labor c o s t .....................................................

14.6

11.8

Unit nonlabor payments ....................................

- 1 .0
9.3

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

- 3 .3

- 3 .9

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

10.2

Implicit price deflator

11.0

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

- 2 .0

- 1 .4
8.7

- 0 .3

- 0 .3

r - 1 .9

0.3

- 0 .7

7.5

11.7

'11.9

9.0

- 5 .4

- 4 .5

' - 1 .6

- 0 .8

10.3

7.8

12.1

'14.1

8.7

10.2

6.5

4.2

5.9

3.8

'6 .6

9.7

10.1

8.3

7.2

9.4

'11.8

9.0

- 1 .5

0.8

-1 .1

'- 2 . 9

.4

9.5
- 2 .9

-4 .1

9.4

- 1 .6
9.4

- 1 .7

- 1 .0

' -1 .0

9.2

9.3

-3 .2

- 4 .2

-3 .9

11.2

11.1

10.5

'1 1 .0

5.7

4.8

3.9

5.1

'5.1

8.7

9.1

8.7

8.8

'9 .2

- 2 .0

- 2 .0

- 1 .4

' -1 .2

-1 .1

-2 .1

'1 9 .9

Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per hour

Real compensation per h o u r .............................

-.9

Unit labor c o s t .....................................................

14.0

Unit nonlabor payments ....................................

-1 .1

8.1

8.5

9.5

10.7

'10.7

8.7

8.9

8.9

9.1

9.2

- 4 .2

- 4 .4

- 3 .6

- 5 .3

-2 .6

- 1 .0

- 1 .6

- 2 .5

- 3 .3

- 4 .4

-4 .0

12.5

10.1

8.6

12.0

'14.1

8.3

10.1

11.1

11.3

10.8

'11.2

9.8

- 3 .9

7.7

6.6

4.6

7.5

'11.7

8.2

5.0

4.3

3.7

6.6

'7 .6

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

8.1

11.0

9.0

7.4

10.6

'13.3

8.3

8.5

9.0

8.9

9.5

'10.1

Output per hour of all employees ...................
Compensation per hour ....................................

- 2 .3

- 2 .7

- 0 .3

- 0 .4

» - 1 .1

1.0

-.6

- 1 .4

- 0 .9

» -0 .5

10.8

8.3

8.5

8.4

»11.1

8.4

8.7

8.9

9.0

9.0

»9.7

Real compensation per h o u r .............................

-.4

-4 .1

- 4 .3

- 4 .5

» - 2 .3

- 1 .3

- 1 .8

- 2 .6

- 3 .3

- 4 .5

» - 4 .1

Implicit price deflator
Nonfinancial corporations:

11.0
-5 .1

11.8

9.3

12.2

»16.8

8.6

9.9

10.8

10.9

»12.1

13.4

11.2

8.8

8.9

11.1

»12.3

7.3

9.4

10.1

10.6

10.0

»10.3

6.8

13.5

14.6

10.6

15.4

»31.0

2.5

6.2

9.4

11.3

13.5

»17.6

-2 2 .1

- 3 .4

- 5 .3

— 10.4

-1 0 .9

» -2 8 .2

21.7

0

»14.2

7.6

10.2

8.6

7.3

9.9

»12.3

7.5

7.7

-1 0 .6
8.4

- 7 .6

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

- 3 .9
8.4

9.0

»9.5

Output per hour of all persons ........................
Compensation per hour ....................................

- 3 .8

1.7

2.5

- 1 .4

- 2 .2

'- 4 .5

1.5

.9

0.2

- 0 .3

0.1

' —1.4

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

Unit labor costs

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

Unit nonlabor c o s t s .........................................
Unit p r o fits ............................................................
Implicit price deflator

'

6.1

-1 .1

11.7

Total unit costs

10.2

-0 .1

Manufacturing:
10.1

9.6

7.8

8.8

10.5

'15.2

8.2

9.2

9.1

9.1

9.2

'1 0 .5

Real compensation per h o u r .............................

-.9

- 2 .8

- 4 .9

- 4 .2

- 5 .5

'1 .3

- 1 .5

- 1 .3

- 2 .4

- 3 .3

- 4 .4

'- 3 .4

Unit labor c o s t .....................................................

14.5

7.9

5.2

10.3

13.0

'20.7

6.6

8.2

8.9

9.4

9.0

'12.1

r = revised.


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

101

L A B O R -M A N A G E M E N T D A TA

M ajor collective bargaining data are obtained from
contracts on file at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, direct
contact with the parties, and from secondary sources. Addi­
tional detail is published in Current Wage Developments, a
monthly periodical of the Bureau. Data on work stoppages
are based on confidential responses to questionnaires mailed
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to parties involved in work
stoppages. Stoppages initially come to the attention of the
Bureau from reports of Federal and State mediation agencies,
newspapers, and union and industry publications.

the agreement. Changes over the life of the agreement refer to total
agreed upon settlements (exclusive of potential cost-of-living escalator
adjustments) expressed at an average annual rate. Wage-rate changes
are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earnings, while wage
and benefit changes are expressed as a percent of total compensation.
Effective wage-rate adjustments going into effect in major
bargaining units measure changes actually placed into effect during the
reference period, whether the result of a newly negotiated increase, a
deferred increase negotiated in an earlier year, or as a result of a costof-living escalator adjustment. Average adjustments are affected by
workers receiving no adjustment, as well as by those receiving in­
creases or decreases.

Definitions

Work stoppages include all known strikes or lockouts involving six
workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data cover all
workers idle one shift or more in establishments directly involved in a
stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or secondary effect on
other establishments whose employees are idle owing to material or
service shortages.

Data on wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry agree­
ments covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on wage and benefit
changes c o m b in e d apply only to those agreements covering 5,000
workers or more. First-year wage settlements refer to pay changes go­
ing into effect within the first 12 months after the effective date of

35.

Wage and benefit settlements in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to date

[In p e rce n t]
A nnual a v erag e

Q u a rte rly a v e r a g e

S e c to r an d m e a s u re

1978
1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

p

1979
I II

IV

1

II

III

IV

Wage and benefit settlements, all industries:
First-year settlements ...........................................

11.4

8.5

9.6

8.3

9.0

7.2

6.1

2.8

10.5

9.0

8.5

Annual rate over life of contract ..........................

8.1

6.6

6.2

6.3

6.6

5.9

5.2

5.3

7.8

6.1

6.0

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

10.2

8.4

7,8

7.6

7.4

7.5

7.4

5.7

8.9

6.8

Annual rate over life of contract ..........................

7.8

6.4

5.8

6.4

6.0

6.4

5.9

6.6

7.2

5.1

I

II

8.6
6.4

10.1

6.3

7.8

8.7

5.3

6.3

6.8

6.8

Wage rate settlements, all industries:
First-year settlements

Manufacturing:
First-year s e ttle m e n ts......................................

98

8.9

8.4

8.3

6.9

8.4

9.5

8.7

9.7

6.3

5.6

7.0

6.6

Annual rate over life of contract

8.0

6.0

5.5

6.6

5.4

7.2

7.4

7.7

8.1

4.7

4.2

5.6

4.9

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

Nonmanufacturing (excluding construction):
First-year se ttle m e n ts......................................

11.9

8.6

8.0

8.0

7.6

7.4

6.4

3.2

8.5

9.4

7.8

9.1

10.4

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

8.0

7.2

5.9

6.5

6.2

5.9

5.1

5.6

5.8

6.5

7.4

7.1

8.6

First-year se ttle m e n ts......................................

8.0

6.1

6.3

6.5

88

7.0

8.4

9.7

8.7

9.7

7.5

9.6

12.7

Annual rate over life of contract

7.5

6.2

6.3

6.2

8.3

7.2

7.1

8.2

8.3

8.5

7.6

9.3

10.3

Annual rate over life of contract
Construction:

102

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

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

36.

Effective wage adjustments going into effect in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to date

[In p e rce n t]
A v e ra g e annual ch an g es

A v e r a g e q u a r te r ly c h a n g e s

S e c to r an d m e a s u re
1975

1976

1977

1978

1980

p

1979
II

III

IV

I

II

III

IV

I

II

2.6

8.7

8.1

8.0

8.2

9.1

2.6

2.7

1.4

1.4

2.6

3.3

1.6

1.4

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

2.8

3.2

3.0

2.0

3.0

.6

.5

.4

.2

1.1

1.0

.5

.4

.7

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

3.7

3.2

3.2

3.7

3.0

1.4

1.2

.5

.6

1.0

1.0

.4

.5

1.2

Total effective wage rate adjustment, all in d u s trie s .................
Change resulting from —
Current settlement
Prior settlement

1979

1978

Escalator provision .......................................................

2.2

1.6

1.7

2.4

3.1

.6

1.0

.5

.6

.5

1.2

.7

.6

.6

M a n u fa ctu rin g ........................................................................

8.5

8.5

8.4

8.6

9.6

2.2

2.9

1.9

1.5

2.3

3.2

2.4

1.7

2.9

Nonmanufacturing .................................................................

8.9

7.7

7.6

7.9

8.8

2.9

2.5

1.1

1.4

2.8

3.4

1.0

1.2

2.2

NOTE: Because of rounding and compounding, the sums of individual items may not equal totals.

37.

Work stoppages, 1947 to date
N u m b e r o f s to p p a g e s
M o n th a n d y e a r

B e g in n in g in

In e f f e c t

m o n th o r y e a r

d u r in g m o n t h

D a y s id le

W o r k e r s in v o l v e d
B e g in n in g in

In e f f e c t

m o n th o r y e a r

d u r in g m o n t h

(th o u s a n d s )

(th o u s a n d s )

N um ber
(th o u s a n d s )

34,600

e s tim a te d

.30

1947 ..........................................................................................................

3,693

1948 ..........................................................................................................

3,419

1,960

34,100

.28

1949 ..........................................................................................................

3,606

3,030

50,500

.44

4,843

2,410

38,800

.33

4,737

2,220

22,900

.18
.48

1950

.

1951 ..........................................................................................................

2,170

P e rc e n t o f

w o r k i n g t im e

1952 ........................................................................ .................................

5,117

3,540

59,100

1953 ..........................................................................................................

5,091

2,400

28,300

.22

1954 ..........................................................................................................

3,468

1,530

22,600

.18

•955 ..................................

4,320

2,650

28,200

.22

33,100

3,825
3,673

1,390

16,500

.12

3,694

2,060

23,900

.18

3,708

1,880

69,000

.50

I9 6 0 ..........................................................................................................

3,333

1,320

19,100

.14

1961 ..........................................................................................................

3,367

1,450

16,300

.11

1962 ..........................................................................................................

3,614

18,600

.13

3,362

1,230
941

16,100

.11

3,655
3,963

1,640
1,550

22,900
23,300

.15
.15
.15

1963 .

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

.

.

1964
1965 ..........................................................................................................

1,900

.24

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

1958 ..........................................................................................................
1959 . . .

1956
1957 . . .

1966

4,405

1,960

25,400

1967 ..........................................................................................................

4,595

42,100

25

1968 . .

5,045

2,870
2,649

49,018

.28

5,700

2,481

42,869

.24

5,716

3,305

66,414

.37

1971 ..........................................................................................................

5,138

3,280

1969

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

..

1970 ..........................................................................................................

47,589

26

1972 ...........................................................................................

5,010

1,714

27,066

.15

1973 ....................................
1974

5,353
6,074

2,251

27,948

.14

2,778

47,991

.24

1975 ..........................................................................................................

5,031

1,746

31,237

.16

1976 ..........................................................................................................

5,648

2,420

37,859

.19

1977 .................

5,506

2,040

35,822

.17

1978 ..........................................................................................................

4,230

1,623

36,922

.17

471

168

3,001

.16

1979:

1980

J u l y ...........................................................................................

463

119

3,152

.15

464

135

2,319

.13

443

.15

230

2,968

257

91

2,720

.15

134

42

1,976

.11

352

441

207

292

354

590

114

332

3,025

.17

M archp ....................................................................................

396

631

123

310

2,705

.14

A p r il...........................................................................................

425

663

116

2,786

.14

M a y ...........................................................................................

505

139

2,464

June

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

435

752
714

231
214

164

201

2,553

.13

J u l y ...........................................................................................

491

768

270

394

4,030

.21


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

3,142

.16

January 0 ..................................................................................
February0 ...............................................................................

.13

103

How to order BLS publications
PERIODICALS
O r d e r f r o m (a n d m a k e c h e ck s p a y a b le to ) S u ­
p e r in te n d e n t o f D o c u m e n ts, W ash in gton , D. C.
2 0 4 0 2 . F o r fo r e ig n su b scrip tio n s, a d d 2 5 p e rc e n t.

Monthly Labor Review. The oldest and most
authoritative government research journal in
economics and the social sciences. Current
statistics, analysis, developments in industrial
relations, court decisions, book reviews. $18
a year, single copy, $2.50.
Employment and Earnings. A comprehensive
monthly report on employment, hours, earn­
ings, and labor turnover by industry, area,
occupation, et cetera. $22 a year, single copy
$2.75.
Occupational Outlook Quarterly. A popular
periodical designed to help high school stu­
dents and guidance counselors assess career
opportunities. $6 for four issues, single copy
$1.75.
Current Wage Developments. A monthly re­
port about collective bargaining settlements
and unilateral management decisions about
wages and benefits; statistical summaries.
$12 a year, single copy $1.35.
Producer Prices and Price Indexes. A com­
prehensive monthly report on price move­
ments of both farm and industrial commodi­
ties, by industry and stage of processing. $17
a year, single copy $2.25.
CPI Detailed Report. A monthly periodical
featuring detailed data and charts on the
Consumer Price Index. $15 a year, single
copy $2.25.
PRESS RELEASES
The Bureau’s statistical series are made avail­
able to news media through press releases is­
sued in Washington. Many of the releases
also are available to the public upon request.
Write: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washing­
ton, D.C. 20212.
Regional. Each of the Bureau’s eight regional
offices publishes reports and press releases
dealing with regional data. Single copies
available free from the issuing regional office.


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

BULLETINS AND HANDBOOKS
A b o u t 1 4 0 b u lle tin s a n d h a n d b o o k s p u b lis h e d e a ch y e a r a r e f o r s a le b y r eg io n a l
o ffices o f th e B u r e a u o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s (see in s id e f r o n t co ve r) a n d b y th e S u ­
p e r in te n d e n t o f D o c u m e n ts , W a sh in g to n , D .C . 2 0 4 0 2 . M a k e c h e c k s p a y a b le to
th e S u p e r in te n d e n t o f D o c u m e n ts . A m o n g th e b u lle tin s a n d h a n d b o o k s c u r r e n tly
in p r in t a r e th ese:

Occupational Outlook Handbook, 1980-81 Edition. Bulletin 2075. A
useful resource supplying valuable assistance to all persons seeking satis­
fying and productive employment. $8, paperback; $11 cloth cover.
BLS Handbook of Labor Statistics 1978. Bulletin 2000. A 604-page vol­
ume of historical data on the major BLS statistical series. $9.50.
Handbook of Methods. Bulletin 1910. Brief technical account of each
major statistical program of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. $3.50.
BLS Measures of Compensation. Bulletin 1941. An introduction to the
various measures of employee compensation; describes each series, the
manner in which it is developed, its uses and limitations. $2.75.
Occupational Projections and Training Data. Bulletin 2020. Presents
both general and detailed information on the relationship between occu­
pational requirements and training needs. (Updates Bulletin 1918
published in 1976.) $3.25.
Technological Change and its Labor Impact in Five Energy Industries.
Bulletin 2005. A 64-page study appraising major technological change
and discussing the impact of these changes on productivity and occupa­
tions over the next 5 to 10 years. $2.40.
BLS Publications, 1972-77. Bulletin 1990. A numerical listing and sub­
ject index of bulletins and reports issued by the Bureau from 1972
through 1977, supplementing Bulletin 1749, covering 1886-1971. $1.80.
International Comparisons of Unemployment. Bulletin 1979. Brings to­
gether all of the Bureau’s work on international unemployment compari­
sons. Describes the methods of adjusting foreign unemployment rates in
8 countries to U.S. concepts. $3.50.
Productivity Indexes for Selected Industries, 1979 Edition. Bulletin
2054. A 190-page report of indexes of output, employment, and employ­
ee hours in selected industries from 1954 to 1978. This edition contains
measures for three industries previously not covered, as well as compo­
nents of previously published measures in 10 industries. $5.50.
Profiles of Occupational Pay: A Chartbook. Bulletin 2037. A graphic il­
lustration of some of the factors that affect workers’ earnings. This threepart presentation looks at wage variations among and within occupations
and portrays characteristics of high- and low-paying urban areas and
manufacturing industries. $3.50.
REPORTS AND PAMPHLETS
S in g le c o p ies a v a ila b le f r e e f r o m th e B L S r e g io n a l o ffices o r f r o m th e B u r e a u o f
L a b o r S ta tistic s, U.S. D e p a r tm e n t o f L a b o r, W a sh in g to n , D .C . 2 0 2 1 2 .

How the Government Measures Unemployment. Report 505. A concise
report providing a background for appraising developments in the area
of unemployment.
Directory of BLS Studies in Industrial Relations 1960-78. Report 550.
A listing of studies prepared by the Division of Industrial Relations as
part of the Bureau’s regular program of data collection and analysis in
the field of industrial relations.

☆ U .S . G O VERNM ENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980 0 - 341-258/47

m

l/ '

/Iw 1

—

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics

. . . is the oldest, most authoritative
Government journal in its field

nsin

• Articles and reports on employment,
prices, wages, productivity,
job safety, and economic growth

~r


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

• 40 pages of current labor statistics
• Developments in industrial relations
• Significant decisions in labor cases
• Book reviews and notes
• Foreign labor developments

ml/*

TO: Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402
Please enter my subscription to the Monthly Labor Review for
1 year at $18.00. (Foreign subscribers add $4.50.)
□ Remittance is enclosed. (Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.)
□ Charge to GPO Deposit Account No. ___________________________________

Name
Address
City, State, and Zip Code

^

U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington D.C. 20212
Official Business
Penalty for private use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED


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

Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
Lab-441

SECOND CLASS MAIL