The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Monthly Labor Review
In this issue:
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
October 1989
Profile of working poor
Historical development of statistics
Provisions for parental leave
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
U.S. Department of Labor
Elizabeth Dole, 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, DC 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year—$20 domestic; $25 foreign.
Single copy, $5 domestic; $6.25 foreign.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-1818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402.
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Second-class postage paid at
Washington, DC and at additional mailing addresses.
Regional Offices and Commissioners
Region 1
Anthony J. Ferrara
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Kennedy Federal Building
Suite 1603
Boston, MA 02203
Region II
Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
Phone: (617) 565-2327
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Room 808
201 Varick Street
New York, NY 10014
Phone: (212) 337-2400
Region III
Alvin R. Margulis
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
3535 Market Street
P O. Box 13309
Philadelphia, PA 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154
Region IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
Donald M. Cruse
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30367
Phone: (404) 347-4416
Region V
Lois L. Orr
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
9th Floor
Federal Office Building
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Region VI
Bryan Richey
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Room 221
Federal Building
525 Griffin Street
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6970
October cover:
Migrant Mother, Nipomo, California
a 1936 gelatin silver print
by Dorothea Lange,
from the exhibition
“ On the Art of Fixing a Shadow:
150 Years of Photography.’’
Photograph courtesy of
National Gallery of Art,
Washington, DC.
Cover design by Richard L. Mathews
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Region VII
Region VIII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Gunnar Engen
911 Walnut Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone: (816) 426-2481
Region IX
Region X
Sam M. Hirabayashi
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the
Pacific Islands
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
71 Stevenson Street
P O. Box 3766
San Francisco, CA 94119
Phone: (415) 744-6600
RESEARCH LIB!
Federa!
jpßO O ' V ^
of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
Volume 112, Number 10
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor
Articles
3
A profile of the working poor
More than 6 million persons who spent at least half of 1987 in the labor force
were poor; unmarried women with children had the highest poverty rates
Bruce W. Klein and Philip L. Rones
14
Developing statistics to meet society’s needs
Three illustrations show how Government agencies developed new concepts
and methods to meet changing economic and social needs
Janet L. Norwood and Deborah P. Klein
20
Employer provisions for parental leave
A little more than one-third of full-time employees in medium-sized
and large private firms were covered by maternity or paternity leave
Joseph R. Meisenheimer II
25
Employer-sponsored life insurance: a new look
For the first time, the Bureau derives average amounts of such coverage
for full-time employees in medium-sized and large firms in private industry
Adam Z. Bellet
Reports
34
United Auto Workers 29th constitutional convention
Henry P. Guzda
37
Disabling injuries in longshore operations
Amy Lettman
Departm ents
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2
29
34
37
41
42
45
47
Labor month in review
Conference papers
Convention reports
Research summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics
Labor
month
in review
STATISTICAL NEEDS. At the request
of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on
Government Information and Regulation,
the Congressional Office of Technology
Assessment examined the Nation’s
statistical system and pointed to ways
better data can improve economic policy
analysis. The o t a report examines eight
“ basic questions” about the structure and
operation of the economy which, it
argues, should be documented by
statistical data, and evaluates the
capability of the Nation’s statistical
system to provide such data. Some
excerpts from the report:
Measurement difficulty. U.S. national
statistics are acknowledged to be among
the best in the world. But the U.S.
economy is changing in ways that make
documenting economic performance
much more difficult. Business success
today rests heavily on efficient
management of new technologies and a
grasp of the international marketplace.
Competitiveness relies on quality,
timeliness, and sensitivity to diverse
markets. The most important inputs
purchased by a business may be research
and engineering information and the skills
and education of its employees. Many of
these factors are difficult to measure.
The new dimensions of growth and
change have also challenged traditional
approaches to economc growth policy.
Policies that may have effectively
encouraged growth in an era of little
international trade may be ineffective or
even counterproductive in today’s global
economy. Economic policy will require
the best possible measurement of the
factors critical for growth and awareness
of areas where uncertainty prevails.
Serving the new needs of policymakers
in a time of change will require a
coordinated response of the Nation’s
statistical agencies. The present
management of the statistical agencies
2
Monthly Labor Review October 1989
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
liiPSiiP"
iSMSSaH
makes such a response difficult.
The fault does not lie primarily in the
management of individual statistical
agencies. These organizations are
painfully aware of the problems. The
greatest problem appears to be the
absence o f any central place in
government where basic questions about
priorities in statistics are being asked, and
the lack of effective coordinating among
statistical agencies.
Coordination needed. Greater effort
needs to be made in coordinating
statistical work describing changes in the
goods and services available to individual
households with the rest of national
economic accounting. The Bureau of
Economic Analysis does a heroic job in
collecting and coordinating statistics from
the many agencies with data relevant to
the standard national accounting
framework. But no group is asked to
coordinate statistics in a way that provides
an integrated look at the way economic
change affects different types of
households. Many statistics are available
on changes in the quality of health care,
access to transportation, and quality in
education. The statistical system lacks an
organization which is charged with
ensuring that a complete and balanced
picture is available from this data and that
links can be drawn between changes in
aggregate levels of spending, changes in
household spending, and changes in the
quality of such things as health care,
education, and transportation available to
households. Without such a coordinated
effort, it proves very difficult to provide
a balanced view of the way economic
change has, and may, affect the welfare
of different American households.
Resource
management. B etter
management of existing resources could
undoubtedly improve the quality of and
usefulness of U.S. statistics. But there is
a limit to the efficiency gains p o ssibleeven with improvements in technology;
data collection and compilation is an
extremely labor-intensive task. Given the
challenges presented by the transforma
tion underway in the Nation’s economy,
more resources may well be needed
simply to maintain the quality of existing
statistical series. Saving money by
reducing statistical budgets can be
shortsighted if inadequate data lead to
poor management of public programs or
private investments. Important opportu
nities for growth may be missed and
important dangers overlooked. The cost
of a poorly run government program may
be many times higher than the cost of
improvements to statistical agencies.
Unlike other government purchases that
can be postponed, statistics cannot be
turned off and on—once a gap is created,
it cannot be easily eliminated.
The 40-page OTA study, Statistical Needs
fo r a Changing U.S. Economy, is
available for $2.50 from the Superinten
dent of Documents, Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325.□
Three new tables
Three new tables appear in the Current
Labor Statistics section of this issue of
the Review. Table 24 presents changes in
employer costs for employee benefits in
the private sector, as developed by the
Bureau’s Employment Cost Index pro
gram; Table 36 contains Producer Price
Indexes by Standard Industrial Classifi
cation (sic); and Table 47 presents an
nual productivity indexes for selected in
dustries. For descriptions of the series in
the new tables, see “ Notes on Current
Labor Statistics,” pp. 48-57. The tables
were extracted by Mary K. Rieg of the
Review staff, using Bureau-developed
Table Producing Language and Print
Control Language.
A profile
of the working poor
More than 6 million persons who spent
at least half of 1987 in the labor force
were poor; among families with workers,
those headed by unmarried women with children
have the highest poverty rates
Bruce W. Klein
and
Philip L. Rones
Bruce W. Klein and Philip
L. Rones are economists
in the Division of Labor
Force Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
olicymakers and researchers have been in
terested for a long time in the link between
the labor market problems of workers and
the economic status of their families. When
workers are either unemployed or limited to
part-time work, or when they have to work at
very low wages, their personal finances suffer.
But the impact on their families varies. In many
cases, it may not be severe. At the extreme,
however, several million families live below the
official poverty level, even when some of their
members are active in the work force. This situ
ation is most common when only one family
member works and earns low wages.
This article focuses on persons who are labor
force participants but live in poor families. The
labor market experiences and family circum
stances of these persons are contrasted with
those of persons in the work force who are not
poor. Some general findings are as follows:
P
• The working poor made up about one-third of
all persons age 16 and over who were in
poverty. These are the more than 6 million
persons whose family income was below the
official poverty level in 1987, even though
they worked or looked for work at least half of
the year.
• Labor market problems such as unemploy
ment or the inability to find full-time work are
most likely to cause poverty when they occur
in conjunction with low wages. Two-thirds of
the working poor who usually work full time
have weekly earnings that are below a “lowearnings” threshold used in this analysis.
• The presence of more than one worker in a
family dramatically lowers the probability of
poverty. In particular, poverty is rare in
husband-and-wife families where both are
employed.
• Unmarried women maintaining families are
the workers with the greatest risk of living in
poverty. Their earnings are rarely supple
mented by those of other family members,
and their wages, like those of women in gen
eral, are substantially lower than m en’s. Al
most one-fourth of single-earner families
maintained by women are poor.
• Because education has a strong influence on
earnings, individuals with low levels of
schooling are overrepresented among the
working poor. Most at risk are black workers
and women, because, at every level of educa
tion, they have lower earnings than white
men.
Background and definitions
A number of substantial efforts have been made
to study issues which have been broadly labeled
“economic hardship.” 1 The Bureau of Labor
Statistics issued annual reports between 1982
and 1987 entitled Linking Employment Prob
lems to Economic Status. In these reports, CurMonthly Labor Review
October 1989
3
Profile o f the Working Poor
Blacks and
women are at
higher risk o f
poverty because
they have lower
earnings than
white men at all
levels o f
education.
rent Population Survey ( c p s ) data were used to
provide estimates of the number of workers who
had encountered any of a list of labor market
problems during a given year, however slight
they might have been. The number of such per
sons totaled 33 million in 1985.2
This article focuses on a much smaller uni
verse. It first identifies fam ilies living in poverty
and then examines the labor market characteris
tics and problems of the workers in these
families.3 The approach emphasizes the “work
ing poor,” a term often used, although with a
wide range of meanings. Here, the working
poor are defined as persons who have devoted at
least half the year to labor market efforts, being
either employed or in search o f a job during that
period, but who still lived in poor families.
While the 6-month cutoff is somewhat arbitrary,
it is meant to exclude not only nonparticipants in
the labor force, but also marginal participants.
Such persons may also live in poverty, but their
economic problems are not likely to have
stemmed primarily from their failures in the
workplace, or the failure of the workplace to
provide jobs. Among those falling into this cat
egory are students who look for work for 1 or 2
weeks before finding summer employment and
persons who are ill or disabled most of the year.
The most complicated aspect of the analysis
presented here is that the working poor, as a
group, owe their poverty status to two sets
of circumstances: (1) low earnings, resulting
from a range of labor market problems, includ
ing unemployment, inability to find full-time
work, and low wage rates; and (2) a family
structure that is conducive to poverty, such as
the presence of dependent children and only one
earner. Because the poverty threshold— that is,
the amount of money needed to stay out of
poverty— is a function of family size, it is actu
ally possible for a “poor” worker to have earned
much more than a worker who, because of dif
ferent family circumstances, is classified as
nonpoor. The following are some hypothetical
examples of persons whose employment and
family characteristics leave them in poverty:
• Bob is married, is the father of two children,
worked as a construction laborer, and earned
$5.25 an hour. His wife did not work. Bob
usually worked full time, but because of bad
weather and temporary layoffs, he lost sev
eral weeks of work. He earned $9,555 in
1987, before taxes.
• Barbara is a single mother with two children,
worked in a cleaning store, and earned $3.35
an hour, the minimum wage. She worked all
year, except for 2 weeks when the children
were sick, and earned $6,700.
• Jane lives alone, worked in a cafeteria 4 hours
a day, and earned $3.75 an hour. She would
4
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
have preferred to work full time, but was un
able to find another job. In 1987, she earned
$3,750 before taxes.
Families of four, like Bob’s, required at least
$11,611 in 1987 to be considered above poverty
by the Federal Government’s definition. Fam
ilies of three, like Barbara’s, required at least
$9,056 to be considered out of poverty, while a
person living alone, such as Jane, needed an
annual income of $5,909 or more. Thus, assum
ing that their families had no other sources of
income, Bob, Barbara, and Jane would each
have been a member of the “working poor.”
The working poor
O f the 112 million persons who spent at least
half a year in the labor force in 1987, 6.4 mil
lion were members of poor families. Thus, the
poverty rate among workers was 5.6 percent.
Exhibit 1 profiles poor and nonpoor workers,
comparing their personal traits, labor market
performances, and family situations. Table 1
provides additional detail on the demographic
and personal characteristics of workers who are
poor and those who are not.
While persons from every age, race, sex, and
educational group are found among the working
poor, the key variables that relate to poverty
among workers are family relationship and edu
cation. Family structure largely determines the
number of potential wage earners, and educa
tion is the best predictor of earnings.
Despite the fact that m en’s earnings are gen
erally much higher than women’s, a working
husband had a higher probability of his family’s
being poor in 1987 (4.2 percent) than did a work
ing wife (2.5 percent). The reason is that hus
bands are more likely than wives to be the sole
support of their families. Black workers have
very high poverty rates (13.2 percent, compared
to 4.7 percent for whites), largely because they
tend to live in family arrangements that are most
conducive to poverty. Black men are dispropor
tionately in the group of unrelated individuals
(those not living with other relatives), and black
women are far more likely than women of other
racial or ethnic groups to maintain families
themselves. Women who maintain families had
the highest poverty rates of any of the major
groups shown in table 1— nearly 18 percent.
The poverty situation for black workers is exac
erbated by their relatively low levels of educa
tional attainment (employed blacks are almost 50
percent more likely than whites not to have com
pleted high school) and the resultant low earnings.
Nonagricultural wage and salary workers
made up the bulk of the working poor, although
10 percent had been employed in agriculture, an
industry with a poverty rate four times that of
the nonagricultural sector. Twelve percent were
self-employed, possibly reflecting work in some
very small-scale enterprises.4
The labor market problems that poor workers
experience are quite different from those of non
poor workers. Nearly half of the working poor
experienced unemployment at some time during
1987, while only 1 in 8 of the nonpoor did so.
(See table 2.) And the median number of weeks
of unemployment was much higher for the poor
than the nonpoor workers— 26 versus 13 weeks.
Also, relative to nonpoor workers, poor workers
were nearly four times as likely to have been
limited, for at least part of the year, to working
part time when they would have preferred full
time work.
Nevertheless, these labor market problems,
by themselves, generally did not make workers
poor. Among both the unemployed and invol
untary part-time workers, nonpoor persons out
numbered poor persons by 4 \ to 1. In fact, the
nonpoor even predominate among those unem
ployed for half a year or more.
Aside from experiencing unemployment or
being limited to involuntary part-time work, the
working poor have a strong tendency to work in
jobs that pay low wages. Previous research sup
ports the contention that low pay may be the
primary cause of poverty among workers. In a
1976 study, Frank Levy addressed the effect of
unemployment, measured in terms of workhour losses, on the earning levels and poverty
status of workers.5 Levy found that merely in
creasing the number of hours for which poor
workers were paid (at their usual wage rate)
would have removed few of their families from
poverty status. Many of the workers who had
lost work due to unemployment or were unable
to get full-time work were in poverty primarily
because their jobs paid low wage rates.
The situation reflects the workings of low-wage
labor markets. Unemployment and involuntary
part-time work do not occur randomly across
the earnings spectrum. Unemployment, particu
larly, is most common among workers who
have low-wage jobs, as is evident from data on
the rates of joblessness in individual occupations.
The significance of low earnings
Determining the prevalence of low earnings
among poor and nonpoor workers involves
defining exactly what is meant by low earnings,
establishing a cutoff line, and then applying the
cutoff to the available data on earnings. Infor
mation is collected in the March c p s supplement
on annual earnings in the prior calendar year,
along with weeks worked and usual hours
worked. Using these data, past b l s analyses on
labor market hardship have focused on the eam
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1.
Characteristics of poor and nonpoor workers,
1987
[Numbers in thousands]
Poor workers
Characteristic
Nonpoor workers
Poverty
rate1
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Total, 16 years and o v e r.................
16 to 19 years .............................
20 to 24 years .............................
25 to 54 years .............................
55 years and over .......................
6,400
494
1,175
4,163
568
100.0
7.7
18.4
65.0
8.9
107,089
4,275
11,837
76,490
14,487
100.0
4.0
11.1
71.4
13.5
5.6
10.4
9.0
5.2
3.8
Men ............................................
W omen........................................
3,346
3,054
52.3
47.7
60,022
47,067
56.0
44.0
5.3
6.1
White ..........................................
Black............................................
4,647
1,567
72.6
24.5
93,649
10,269
87.4
9.6
4.7
13.2
1,669
685
1,091
158
860
1,937
26.1
10.7
17.0
2.5
13.4
30.3
38,088
27,114
5,074
1,857
17,071
17,886
35.6
25.3
4.7
1.7
15.9
16.7
4.2
2.5
17.7
7.8
4.8
9.8
2,466
2,620
867
447
38.5
40.9
13.5
7.0
16,051
43,355
22,215
25,468
15.0
40.5
20.7
23.8
13.3
5.7
3.8
1.7
Age, sex, and race
Family relationship
Husbands ........................................
W ive s..............................................
Women who maintain families ........
Men who maintain fam ilies.............
Others in families ...........................
Unrelated individuals.......................
Education
Fewer than 4 years of high school ..
4 years of high school.....................
1 to 3 years of college ...................
4 years of college or more .............
1 The number of poor workers as a percent of all workers who spent 27 weeks or more in the labor
force in 1987.
Note : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.
ings of full-time, year-round workers, identify
ing them as “low-wage” workers if their yearly
earnings fell below the Federal minimum hourly
wage multiplied by 2,000.
The methodology was changed for this article
for two reasons. First, we wanted to examine
the earnings of workers who worked less than
year round, particularly because so many of the
working poor experienced unemployment. Sec
ond, the number of workers employed at the
Federal minimum wage, set at $3.35 since 1981,
has been gradually declining as nominal wages
have increased. The resulting drop in the num
ber and proportion of minimum-wage workers
does not necessarily mean that low earnings are
any less of an issue as an employment problem.
The major goal in defining a more relevant
low-earnings level was to choose a method that
accepted the minimum wage as an important
indicator of society’s view of low wages, but
also allowed analytically meaningful compari
sons to be made over time. There is no one
method which lends itself to this end, and, cer
tainly, the choice of methodologies largely de
termines the number of low earners that the
analysis will identify. (See the appendix for a
discussion of the sensitivity of the number of
low earners to several low-wage options.)
Monthly Labor Review October 1989
5
Profile o f the Working Poor
The low-wage level chosen for this analysis is
an average of the minimum-wage levels in ef
fect from 1967 to 1987, calculated from each
year’s value, expressed in 1987 dollars.6 The
average minimum-wage value for the entire 21year period, in 1987 dollars, was $4.18 per
hour. Assuming a 40-hour week, this would
translate to weekly earnings of $167.20. This
figure was then compared with the weekly earn
ings for each full-time wage and salary worker
to determine whether actual 1987 earnings were
above or below the “low-earnings” threshold.
About 2.1 million poor full-time wage and
salary workers who were in the labor force at
least half the year earned the low-earnings level
of $167.20 per week or less. To place this meas
ure in perspective, 1.6 million earned the pre
vailing minimum wage of $3.35 or less, while
2.6 million earned 150 percent of the minimum
Exhibit 1.
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Comparing poor with nonpoor workers
Poor workers
Nonpoor workers
D efinition
P ersons who w orked or sought
work for 27 weeks or more during
the year and lived below the pover
ty level
Those who worked or sought work
for 27 weeks or more during the
year and lived at or above the pov
erty level
Industry an d
class o f w orker
About 10 percent were agricultural
workers; 12 percent were nonagricultural self-employed; and 78 per
cent were nonagricultural wage and
salary workers
Only 3 percent worked in agricul
ture; 9 percent were nonagricultural
self-employed; and 88 percent were
nonagricultural wage and salary
workers
W ork schedules
O f the 6.4 million working poor,
1.9 million (29 percent) worked full
time, year round
Of the 107 million nonpoor work
ers, 75 million (70 percent) worked
full time, year round
Location
Three in 10 lived in nonmetropoli
tan areas
Two in 10 lived in nonmetropolitan
areas
F am ily
relationship
26 percent were husbands; 11 per
cent were wives; 17 percent were
women who maintained families;
and 30 percent were persons living
outside of families
36 percent were husbands; 25 per
cent were wives; 5 percent were
women who maintained families;
and 17 percent were persons living
outside of families
R ace
73 percent were white; 24 percent
were black
87 percent were white; 10 percent
were black
E ducation
About 40 percent were dropouts; 40
percent had completed high school;
only 20 percent had attended college
15 percent were dropouts; 40 per
cent were high school graduates; 45
percent had attended college
Dimension
6
or less ($5.03). (See the appendix for details on
determining the low-earnings figure.)
The data for 1987 indicate that fully twothirds of the poor who usually worked in full
time wage and salary jobs had earnings at or
below the low-earnings threshold. Threequarters of these low earners had average
weekly earnings of $134 or less, which would
be the equivalent of earning the minimum wage
of $3.35 for a 40-hour week.
Analysis shows that there is considerable
evidence that a strong relationship exists between
low earnings and poverty status. Two-thirds of
poor full-time workers experienced low earnings.
Furthermore, even among the poor full-time wage
and salary workers who also experienced either
unemployment or involuntary part-time work,
most had low earnings. (See table 3.) By contrast,
the poverty rate was quite low— only 7 percent—
October 1989
among those who had been unemployed but did
not also experience low earnings. For those un
employed persons who also had low earnings,
the rate was dramatically higher— 37 percent.
Similarly, those who were forced to work part
time at least some of the year even though they
would have preferred full-time work had only
about a 2-percent chance of being poor if they
experienced no other labor market problem.
Those who also had low earnings, though, had
a poverty rate of 26 percent. Thus, among full
time workers, low earnings alone are an impor
tant contributor to poverty, and they greatly
increase the probability of poverty among those
with other labor market problems.
While low weekly earnings (stemming from
low hourly wage rates) were the most common
problem for those working poor who usually
worked full time, it should be noted that, as with
the unemployed, most low-wage earners were
not in poverty. In fact, for each low-wage
worker in a poor family, three were in families
that were not poor. The poor families were most
often those in which no one other than the low
earner had worked.
As an illustration, table 4 indicates that,
among persons earning low wages, husbands in
married-couple families, persons who maintain
families without a spouse, and unrelated indi
viduals had the highest probability of being poor.
These individuals are more likely than others to
be the sole support of their families or house
holds. In contrast, when wives or other persons
related to a householder work for low pay, their
earnings are generally supplemented by others.
Hence, their poverty rates are relatively low.
Overall, a full-time wage and salary worker
with low earnings had a 25-percent probability
of being poor. By comparison, full-time work
ers who earned more than the low-earnings level
had only a 2-percent chance of being below the
poverty level.
Low-earning levels were only estimated for
full-time workers because past research has
found that weekly earnings calculated from
annual data for part-time workers are quite unre
liable.7 Although part-time workers work fewer
hours, the hourly wages of poor part-time
workers, could, in theory, be higher than those
earned by full-time workers. Still, given the rel
atively low wages paid part-time workers in
general, it is reasonable to infer that a large
proportion of poor part-time workers also earned
wage rates below the $4.18 “low-wage” level.
The group most affected by low wages was
women heading families containing children
(not shown in table 4). Three-fourths of these
women who worked full time at low wages were
living below the poverty level. More will be
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 2.
Incidence of labor market problems among poor
and nonpoor workers in the labor force
27 weeks or more in 1987
[Numbers in thousands]
Poor workers
Nonpoor workers
Labor market problem
Number
Percent1
Number
Percent
Poverty
rate2
Total ...................................
6,400
Unemployment .............................
1 to 26 weeks ...........................
27 weeks or more .....................
2,861
1,539
1,322
44.7
24.0
20.7
12,743
10,425
2,318
11.9
9.7
2.2
18.3
12.9
36.3
Involuntary part-time work ............
1 to 26 weeks ...........................
27 weeks or more .....................
1,795
1,228
567
28.0
19.2
8.9
8,393
6,302
2,091
7.8
5.9
2.0
17.6
16.3
21.3
Full-time wage and salary
workers......................................
Low earnings3 .......................
3,161
2,127
67.3
83,428
6,550
7.9
24.5
107,089
5.6
1 1ndividuals can have more than one labor market problem. The percent shown for low earners
applies only to those persons who usually worked in full-time wage and salary jobs.
2 Percent of workers with each labor market problem who are poor. Percent poor among those
with low earnings uses full-time wage and salary workers as the denominator.
3 Low earnings are equal to or less than $167.20 per full-time workweek. See “Appendix: Meas
urement of low earnings.”
said about these workers later.
Of all readily observable personal character
istics, researchers have repeatedly found educa
tion to have the most consistently powerful
effect on earnings. Aside from education, only
one’s family background seems to influence
earnings and poverty to a large extent, and it
does so primarily indirectly, through its influ
ence on education. Other factors, such as years
of work experience and test scores, have been
found to have less impact in and of themselves.8
The following tabulation demonstrates the
marked difference in the poverty profiles of
workers in 1987 in terms of their levels of
education:
Total, in the labor force
27 weeks or more ........ ..
Fewer than 4 years
of high school ..........
4 years of high
school only ..............
1-3 years of college ..
4 years of college
or more ....................
Numbers
(in millions)
Percent
poor
113.5
5.6
18.5
13.3
46.0
5.7
23.1
3.8
25.9
1.7
Numerous explanations are available for the
relatively low earnings profiles of blacks and
women. To begin with, blacks have lower
educational levels than whites. This, by itself,
tends to lower blacks’ earnings (relative to
white m en’s) and, hence, raise their poverty
rates. In addition, both blacks and women have
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
7
Profile o f the Working Poor
lower earnings than white men at all levels of
educational attainment, which also contributes
to the relatively high poverty rates of blacks, as
shown in table 5. (W omen’s rates are not af
fected as much as blacks’ because women’s earn
ings are so often supplemented by those of a
working husband.) The earning differentials be
tween white men and blacks and women have
often been attributed to discrimination, and a vari
ety of theories have been proposed by economists
and sociologists which seek to explain the effect
of discrimination on differences in earnings.9
One factor explaining why blacks and women
have lower earnings is that they tend to be in
jobs that provide less on-the-job training. Saul
Hoffman, in a 1981 article entitled “On-the-job
training: difference by race and sex,” suggests
that this is one reason why blacks and women
have lower earnings than white men even when
educational levels are sim ilar.10 Hoffman found
that blacks and women were seldom in jobs in
which they were currently receiving training.
Similarly, jobs held by blacks and women re
quired a relatively short period before workers
felt that they were “fully trained and qualified,”
the assumption being that such time is spent
acquiring skills. By virtue of their increased
skills over time, which are generally associated
with job or career advancement, the earnings of
T a b le 3 .
Number of full-time wage and salary workers
with selected labor market problems living
below the poverty level, 1987
[Numbers in thousands]
Labor market problems
Number
poor
Percent
distribution
Poverty
rate1
Total, 16 years and over .................................
23,161
3.7
With at least one labor market problem.........................
2,727
Low earnings, total ....................................................
Low earnings only ..................................................
Low earnings and unemployment o n ly ...................
Low earnings and involuntary part time3 only ........
All three problems ..................................................
2,126
961
683
206
276
100.0
45.2
32.1
9.7
13.0
24.5
18.1
36.5
26.3
38.9
Unemployment, total ..................................................
Unemployment o n ly ................................................
Unemployment and low earnings only ...................
Unemployment and involuntary part time o n ly ........
All three problems ..................................................
1,527
440
683
128
276
100.0
28.8
44.7
8.4
18.1
14.2
6.5
36.5
8.9
38.9
Involuntary part time, to ta l..........................................
Involuntary part time only ......................................
Involuntary part time and low earnings o n ly ...........
Involuntary part time and unemployment o n ly ........
All three problems ..................................................
642
32
206
128
276
100.0
5.0
32.1
19.9
43.0
12.7
1.5
26.3
8.9
38.9
14.4
t Percent of workers with each set of labor market problems who are poor.
2 Includes 434,000 poor full-time wage and salary workers who did not experience any of the three
labor market problems listed.
3 Persons who usually work full time are included in the category of working part time for economic
reasons (involuntary part-time workers) if they worked less than 35 hours at least one week when
they would have preferred full-time work.
8 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
white men tend to rise at a faster rate than the
earnings of blacks and women. Hence, Hoff
man concludes that white men are less likely to
be trapped at very low wages.
Meeting family needs with earnings
As noted earlier, poverty is a condition closely
tied to one’s family situation, that is, to the
amount of family resources and to the number of
people who need to share those resources. For
example, the family of a worker with minimumwage earnings and extensive unemployment
will not be poor if another member earns enough
to keep the family’s income above the poverty
threshold. Indeed, most individuals who experi
enced the labor market problems identified in
this analysis were not members of poor families
in 1987.
Researchers have also noted how closely a
family’s economic status is linked to the size or
composition of the family. Divorce, the death of
a spouse, marriage, birth, or the departure of a
child from the home can radically alter both
family composition and earnings and thus have
as profound an effect on poverty status as unem
ployment or a decline in wage rates.11
Families o f the working poor. Of the 7 mil
lion families that were in poverty in 1987, 3.4
million were there despite the fact that at least
one member was in the labor force most of the
year. This represents about 6 percent of all
families with a working member. The median
income of these families that were below the
poverty level was $6,805, compared with
$36,716 for nonpoor families with workers. The
fact that 83 percent of the families of the work
ing poor had children, compared with only 55
percent of nonpoor families, shows the strong
impact of family composition on poverty.
The most dramatic difference between poor
and nonpoor families is the percent with only
one earner. As shown in the following tabula
tion, 76 percent of poor families had only one
working member, while the majority of nonpoor
families had two or more earners.
Nonpoor
families
Poor
families
All families with a member
in the labor force 27 weeks
or more (thousands) ........ ..
50,012
3,382
Percent with:
One member in the labor
force 27 weeks or more ..
39.3
75.9
Two or more members in
the labor force 27 weeks
or more ........................ . .
60.7
24.1
Almost 40 percent of poor families were
maintained by women, compared with just 12
percent of nonpoor families. The fact that so
many poor families are maintained by women
reflects several of the influences on poverty al
ready discussed: these women’s relatively low
level of education and their resultant low wages;
less career advancement among both women
and blacks (female family heads are dispropor
tionately black); the lack of other earners in
those families; and the interrelationship between
family size and the poverty threshold. As the
next tabulation shows, when only the family
head worked, the poverty rate in such families
was 24 percent. Among married-couple fam
ilies, in contrast, even when only one spouse
worked, the poverty rate was only 8 percent.
This is because, in the latter case, the one earner
is most often a man, and few married men earn
the low wages that result in poverty.
Percent
below the
poverty level
All families with at least one
person in the labor force 27 weeks
or more ................................................
Table 4.
Poverty rates and percent distribution of poor
full-time wage and salary workers who earn less
than the low-earnings level, by family type and
relationship, 1987
Full-time wage and
salary workers earning
less than lowearnings level
Family type and relationship
Number
(thousands)
Poverty
rate1
Percent
distribution
of poor lowwage earners
Total, 16 years and over .........................
28,676
24.5
100.0
In married-couple families...................................
Husbands ........................................................
Wives .............................................................
Other .............................................................
4,914
1,116
2,193
1,604
13.6
35.5
8.8
4.9
31.5
18.6
9.1
3.7
In families maintained by w om en.......................
Householder....................................................
Other .............................................................
1,517
699
818
36.3
58.9
16.9
25.9
19.4
6.5
In families maintained by men ...........................
Householder....................................................
Other .............................................................
388
115
274
17.8
38.3
9.1
3.2
2.1
1.2
Unrelated individuals..........................................
1,758
44.4
36.7
1 Percent of workers in each category who are poor.
6.3
2 Total includes 99,000 persons who are members of unrelated subfamilies which are not shown
elsewhere in the table.
Note : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.
Married-couple families, total ..............
Only one member in the labor
force 27 weeks or more ....................
Two or more members in the
labor force 27 weeks or m o re............
Families maintained by
women, total ........................................
Householder is the only person
in the labor force 27 weeks
or more ............................................
Families maintained by men, to ta l........
Householder is the only person
in the labor force 27 weeks
or more ..............................................
4.4
8.2
2.3
17.2
24.2
7.8
11.6
When a woman maintains a family and her
earning potential is at or near the minimum
wage, she generally cannot keep out of poverty.
Researchers have found that, to many in this
circumstance, welfare, generally in the form
of Aid to Families with Dependent Children
( a f d c ) , becomes a more attractive alternative.12
Even when the welfare benefit is less than the
potential earnings, receiving welfare may still
be attractive because it does not involve such
employment-related costs as child care, trans
portation, clothing, taxes, and Social Security
withholding.
In the study mentioned earlier, Levy found
that poverty among working women was not
primarily a function of unemployment, or of
voluntarily working less than year-round, full
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
time hours, or even of earning lower wage rates
than other w om en.13 In fact, even if poor female
heads of household earned a “normal” wage—
that is, a wage equal to that of nonpoor women
with similar characteristics, such as age and ed
ucation— for a full-time work year, few would
rise above poverty. This reflects the concentra
tion of women, both poor and nonpoor, at low
wage rates relative to men and underscores the
fact that those women who are the sole earners
in their families often have a difficult time stay
ing out of poverty.
Women who maintain families actually have
median average weekly earnings for full-time
work that are nearly identical to those of married
women. The latter, however, almost always
have a working husband. Another, perhaps
more meaningful, comparison is that families
maintained by women have only half the me
dian earnings of married-couple fam ilies.14 Yet
their financial requirements are not much less,
because their average family size is little differ
ent from that of married-couple fam ilies.15
Families headed by black women are over
represented among the poor, not because black
women’s earnings are that much lower than
white women’s (they are not), but because such
a large proportion of these women are the sole
earners in their families. The proportion of all
black families headed by women (no spouse
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
9
Profile o f the Working Poor
present) has risen dramatically over the past
several decades— from less than 20 percent in
1950 to more than 40 percent in the 1980’s .16
Part of the rise stems from a dramatic increase
over this period in the proportion of nevermarried black women who head families. Also,
black women have much higher separation and
divorce rates than white women, and the differ
ences are exaggerated by the very low remar
riage rates among blacks.17
Much of the literature related to the increase
in the proportion of black female-headed
families focuses on the role of various welfare
programs, particularly a f d c , in encouraging
such a family structure. In particular, William
Julius Wilson and Kathryn M. Neckerman have
suggested that the relatively poor economic
status of young black men, as evidenced by their
low labor force participation rates, has reduced
the pool of “marriageable” black m en.18
Poverty is also relatively common among
workers living alone or with unrelated individu
als. Three out of 10 poor workers fall into this
category. They are younger than most workers,
a large proportion being 16 to 24 years of age.
They generally work at low wages, and, while
they have no family to support, neither can they
depend on the earnings of other family members
to keep them out of poverty. O f course, many
such persons live with others and may share
housing costs and possibly other expenses. If
their household units were treated as families, it
is possible that the combined financial contribu
tions of all members would result in higherthan-poverty incomes. But regardless of living
arrangement, each unrelated individual is held
to a poverty standard for a one-person economic
unit.
Almost 40 percent
o f poor families
were maintained
by women as the
sole earners.
The dynamics of poverty
The view presented here, which also appears in
many earlier reports on economic hardship, re
lies primarily on cross-sectional data that pro
vide a snapshot of the working poor. This type
of data, however, cannot be used to study the
long-term status of the working poor. Most im
portantly, it cannot be used to determine the
extent to which families with workers are per
sistently poor or the extent to which their
poverty is transitory.
Longitudinal surveys, that is, those which in
terview the same people over a period of years,
are the best source of information on the dynam
ics of poverty. Some research using data from
the Panel Survey of Income Dynamics ( p s i d ) , a
study of 5,000 households which began in
1968, has been conducted on issues related to
labor market problems and poverty. For exam
10 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Table 5.
Poverty rates of workers in
the labor force 27 weeks
or more, by educational
attainment, sex, and race,
1987
Poverty rates
Educational attainment
Men
Women
White
Black
White
Black
Total .................
4.7
10.5
4.8
16.0
Fewer than 4 years of
high school...............
11.7
17.4
11.8
28.7
4 years of high school
o n ly ...........................
4.4
9.6
5.0
17.8
1 to 3 years of
college .....................
3.0
7.4
3.4
8.6
4 years of college
or m ore.....................
1.6
3.5
1.3
3.2
Note : Poverty rates are the percent of persons in the labor
force 27 weeks or more who are poor.
ple, in addition to Levy’s study mentioned ear
lier, Mary Corcoran and Martha S. Hill have
investigated the effect of unemployment on
poverty status.19 These researchers’ findings in
dicate that 10 percent fewer persons would be
living in “poor” families if family householders
had experienced no unemployment. In their
study, they defined poverty as the condition of
having an average income, during the 9-year
period 1967-75, below 125 percent of the aver
age poverty level. Their findings might have
been quite different using cross-sectional data;
perhaps unemployment has a greater influence
on a family’s income and poverty status in any
given year than it does over an extended period
of time. While the Corcoran and Hill study had
a narrow focus— unemployment— it does dem
onstrate the different view that longitudinal data
provide when examining poverty issues.
Research on the entire poverty population
using data from the p s id indicates that poverty is
rarely a permanent state for a family over a long
period of time. Many individuals enter poverty
because of a major change in their circum
stances, such as divorce, the death of a spouse,
illness, or unemployment. The p s id results show
that, while fully a quarter of all U.S. families
(including families with and without workers)
spent at least 1 year in poverty between 1969
and 1978, fewer than 3 percent were “persis
tently poor”— that is, below the poverty level in
at least 8 of the 10 years studied.20 Those who
were poor only temporarily had characteristics
quite similar to those of the general population,
supporting the notion that poverty was the tem-
porary result of sudden changes in family or
economic status. The persistently poor were
even more concentrated in two overlapping
groups— blacks and women who head fam
ilies— than they are found to be in the annual
CPS-derived poverty data. While blacks made up
only 12 percent of the U.S. population, they
were found to constitute 62 percent of the per
sons who were persistently poor, a far larger
proportion than are poor in any one year. Black
women made up a third of the total.
W hether poverty among families with work
ers is in fact mostly transitory is difficult to infer
from these data representing all poor families.
Perhaps poverty is more permanent among
families of the working poor, because this group
is less affected by events such as divorce or
death than are the nonworking poor. On the
other hand, some poor workers may have
enough upward mobility in their jobs or careers
that they are able to earn their way out of
poverty, an option that is unlikely for a poor
disabled person or an elderly woman living
alone. In any event, it is fairly clear that, as in
all poor families, the persistently poor among
families with workers are overrepresented by
blacks and, particularly, black women.
The policy implications of the differences be
tween the persistently poor and the temporarily
poor are important, because measures to deal
with temporary poverty would necessarily be
quite different from those designed to deal with
long-term poverty.
Conclusion
While unfortunate circumstances can leave
many families temporarily below poverty,
among workers poverty is chiefly a feature of
those with a particular profile. This article sug
gests that 6.4 million persons in 3.4 million
poor families were either employed or in search
of a job during at least half of 1987. Poor work
ers tend to have low levels of education and,
often as a result, to be employed at very low
wages. Workers most likely to be poor are those
who have children and are the only earners in
their families. Thus, among workers, women
who head families are in the greatest jeopardy of
living in poverty.
□
Footnotes
1 For studies on labor market-related hardship, see: U .S.
Department o f Labor, Manpower Report of the President,
1967, pp. 74-76; William Spring, Bennett Harrison, and
Thomas Vietorisz, “Crisis o f the Underemployed,” The New
York Times Magazine, Nov. 5, 1972; Herman P. Miller,
“Subemployment in poverty areas of large U .S. cities,”
Monthly Labor Review, October 1973, pp. 10-17; Sar A.
Levitan and Robert Taggart, Employment and Earnings In
adequacy: A New Social Indicator (Baltimore, The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1974); Thomas Vietorisz, Robert
Mier, and John Giblin, “Subemployment: exclusion and
inadequacy indexes,” Monthly Labor Review, May 1975,
pp. 3-12; Francis Horvath and Janet Scholl, “Measurement
o f Labor Market Related Economic Hardship,” unpublished
paper prepared for the National Commission on Employ
ment and Unemployment Statistics, 1977; National Com
mission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics,
Counting the Labor Force (Washington, U .S. Government
Printing Office, 1979), pp. 57-81; Bruce W. Klein, “The
Adequacy o f the Earnings Capacity of the Subemployed and
Its Policy Implications,” Ph.D. diss., The George Washing
ton University, 1981; Robert Taggart, Hardship—The Wel
fare Consequences of Labor Market Problems: A Policy
Discussion Paper (Kalamazoo, mi, The W.E. Upjohn Insti
tute for Employment Research, 1982); and Bruce W. Klein,
“Measuring Labor Market Related Hardship Using sipp
Data,” American Statistical Association: 1986 Proceedings
of the Social Statistics Section (Washington, American
Statistical Association, 1986).
2 Updated tables 1-19 from the aforementioned reports
are available upon request from the Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, Office o f Employment and Unemployment Statistics,
Division o f Labor Force Statistics, Washington, DC 20212.
3 Like past bls efforts, this one utilizes the March work
experience and income supplements to the Current Popula
tion Survey. These supplements have questions on individu
als’ work activity during the entire previous calendar year,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
such as weeks worked, weeks spent in search of a job, and
weeks spent out of the labor force, and about income and
earnings over the period. The data reported were collected
in March 1988 and refer to calendar year 1987.
4 Data on the self-employed relate to nonagricultural
workers only. For this article, we did not investigate the
characteristics of the poor self-employed, although an anal
ysis of their detailed occupational characteristics would
probably help to understand the group.
5 See Frank Levy, “How Big Is the American Under
class?” Working Paper 0090-01 (Washington, The Urban
Institute, 1977).
6 This measure is meant for research use only and is in no
way intended as an endorsement for indexing of the mini
mum wage.
7 Shirley J. Smith and Nancy F. Rytina, “Testing a New
Measure of Annual Hours of Work,” presented at the annual
meeting of the American Statistical Association, Toronto,
Canada, August 1983, p. 12.
8 Christopher Jenks and others, Who Gets Ahead? (New
York, Basic Books, Inc., 1979), pp. 229-30; and Greg J.
Duncan and others, Years of Poverty, Years of Plenty (Ann
Arbor, mi, Institute for Social Research, University of
Michigan, 1984), pp. 111-14.
9 See, for example, Glen G. Cain, “The Economic Anal
ysis of Labor Market Discrimination: A Survey,” in Orley
Ashenfelter and Richard Layard, eds., Handbook of Labor
Economics, Volume I (New York, North-Holland, 1986);
and the classic work by Gary S . Becker, The Economics of
Discrimination (Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1957).
10 Saul D. Hoffman, “On-the-job training: difference by
race and sex,” Monthly Labor Review, July 1981, p. 34.
11 Duncan and others, Years of Poverty, Years of Plenty,
p. 10.
12 Rosemary Kern and Jack A. Meyer, “Reforming Wel-
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
11
Profile o f the Working Poor
fare: Basic Tenets and Fundamental Choices,” in Jack A.
Meyer, e d ., Ladders out of Poverty (Washington, American
Horizon Foundation, 1986), p. 15. Aid to Families with
Dependent Children is the cash assistance program for chil
dren with no father, or a disabled or unemployed father, in
their home.
16 William Julius Wilson and Kathryn M. Neckerman,
“Poverty and Family Structure: The Widening Gap between
Evidence and Public Policy Issues,” in Sheldon H. Danziger
and Daniel H. Weinberg, eds., Fighting Poverty: What
Works and What Doesn t (Cambridge, ma, Harvard Univer
sity Press, 1986), p. 235.
13
Levy, “How Big Is the American Underclass?” A l
17 Wilson and Neckerman, in Danziger and Weinberg,
though the earnings of women have increased relative to
eds., Fighting Poverty, p. 237.
men’s since this study was conducted, the basic finding that
full-time low-wage workers cannot escape poverty by in
18Ibid., pp. 244-45 and p. 259.
creasing their hours worked seems to remain valid.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings,
January 1988, p. 214.
19 Mary Corcoran and Martha S. Hill, “Unemployment
and Poverty,” Social Service Review, September 1980 dd
’
15
Household and Family Characteristics: Current Popu407 -1 3 .
lation Reports, Series P -2 0 , No. 419 (Bureau o f the Cen
20 Duncan and others, Years of Poverty, Years of Plenty,
sus, March 1986), p. 13.
p. 41.
APPENDIX:
Measurement of low earnings
Past analyses of economic hardship focused on those
workers whose hourly wage rates were at or below
the Federal minimum wage. However, because, as of
this writing, the legislated minimum wage has not
been changed since 1981, its real value declines
every year, making comparisons over time of limited
analytical value. If the actual minimum is used as
a demarcation line, the number of low-wage work
ers would decline almost every year, as nominal
wages rise. For that reason, we have drawn a “lowearnings” line that controls for changes in the real
value of the Federal minimum wage. Our low-wage
T a b le
A -1 .
N o m in a l,
a v e ra g e
m in im u m
Year
12 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item
Low-earnings
level .................
Hourly
equivalent.........
Estimates derived from
alternative low-earnings
levels
1967-87 average
minimum wage
deflated by:
1987
minimum
wage
150
percent
of
Research Official minimum
wage
CPI
CPI
$134.00
$167.20 $173.20 $201.20
$3.35
$4.18
$4.33
$5.03
Total full-time
workers at or
below lowearnings level
(thousands) ___
4,654
8,676
9,732
13,855
Number poor
(thousands) ..
Percent poor ..
1,606
34.5
2,127
24.5
2,210
22.7
2,580
18.6
r e a l, a n d
v a lu e
o f th e
w a g e ,
1 9 6 7 -8 7
Legislated
m inim um w age
(nom inal dollars)
Real value of
legislated
m inim um w age
(1987 dollars)
1967
1968
1969
1970
.......................
.........................
.........................
.....................
$1.40
1.60
1.60
1.60
$4.43
4.88
4.67
4.45
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
.....................
.......................
.......................
.........................
.......................
1.60
1.60
1.60
2.00
2.10
4.27
4.14
3.90
4.43
4.29
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
.........................
.......................
.........................
.........................
.........................
2.30
2.30
2.65
2.90
3.10
4.45
4.18
4.51
4.51
4.33
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
.........................
.........................
.......................
.........................
.........................
3.35
3.35
3.35
3.35
3.35
4.27
4.03
3.87
3.71
3.58
1986 .......................
1987 .........................
3.35
3.35
3.51
3.35
Average, 1 9 6 7 -8 7 .
2.47
4.18
October 1989
Table A -2.
measure is equivalent to the average minimum wage
during the period 1967-87, expressed in 1987 dol
lars. (See table A -l.) That wage came out to be
$4.18 an hour.
The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Con
sumers, Experimental Measure 1 ( r e b a s e d ) —re
ferred to as CPI-U-X1—was used to convert minimum
wages prior to 1983 to the 1987 dollar level. Before
1983, the measurement of homeownership costs in
the official CPI included changes based on the asset
value of homes. Recognizing that this method failed
to distinguish between the investment and consump
tion aspects of homeownership, the b l s began a pro
gram of research in the early 1970’s, and the rental
equivalence method was introduced in 1983. The bls
also developed, for research purposes, an index
which links the rental equivalence method to years
before 1983 and provides a series which treats
homeownership consistently over time.1
The calculation begins with the year 1967 because
that was the first year in which those covered under
minimum-wage legislation comprised the same broad
group of workers that are currently covered.2 This
low-earnings measure, updated each year, will permit
more meaningful year-to-year comparisons than
would be possible using the actual minimum-wage
level in effect at any particular time.
A weekly “low-earnings” value was determined by
multiplying $4.18 by 40 hours, yielding $167.20.
This figure was then compared with the average
weekly earnings for full-time wage and salary work
ers, which was obtained by dividing annual earnings
by the number of weeks worked.3 The minimumwage level and 150 percent of this level, used to
demonstrate the sensitivity of the number of lowwage workers to the choice of wage level used, were
determined in a similar way. The minimum wage of
$3.35 was multiplied by 40 hours (= $134.00) and
150 percent of the minimum ($5.03) by 40 hours
(= $201.20). These levels were then compared with
the computed average weekly earnings of the full
time wage and salary workers. Alternatively, the esti
mated low-earnings level using the official CPI is
$4.33 times 40 (= $173.20). A comparison of these
four estimates is presented in table A -2 . No values
are given for part-time workers, because past re
search has shown the unreliability of weekly earnings
estimates for that group. (See text footnote 6.)
The low-wage level of $4.18 was not applied to
hourly earnings directly, because (1) many workers
are not paid at hourly rates; (2) earnings such as
tips and commissions are generally not reported as
part of the worker’s hourly rate; and most impor
tantly, (3) the reference period for the other data
used in this analysis is a year. No hourly wage data
are collected that would apply to such a reference
period.
Footnotes to the appendix
1
For more information on price indexes using a rentalMay 1988, pp. 3 -1 3 .
equivalence approach, see the following Monthly Labor Re
2 The 1966 Amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act
view articles: Janet L. Norwood, “Two Consumer Price
extended private employee coverage to about the level
Index issues: weighting and homeownership,” March 1981,
which currently exists. Government employees became cov
pp. 58-59; “Indexing Federal programs: the cpi and other
ered in 1985 as the result o f a court decision which rescinded
indexes,” March 1981, pp. 60-65; and “The effect o f rental
their previous exclusion.
equivalence on the Consumer Price Index, 1 9 6 7 -8 2 ,”
February 1985, pp. 5 3 -5 5 . See also “Changing the Home3 The technique implicitly assumes that full-time work
ownership Component of the Consumer Price Index to
occurred in each week, although it is applied to individuals
Rental Equivalence,” CPI Detailed Report, January 1983,
who usually worked full time. Such workers may have
pp. 7 -1 3 . For a prior use of the cpi- u- x i , see Michael W.
worked less than a full-time workweek during some of their
Horrigan and Steven E. Haugen, “The declining middleweeks o f employment.
class thesis: a sensitivity analysis,” Monthly Labor Review,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
13
Developing statistics
to meet society’s needs
Three historical illustrations
show how Government agencies adapt
to changing social and economic needs
by developing new concepts and methods
Janet L. Norwood
and
Deborah P. Klein
Janet L. Norwood is
Commissioner o f Labor
Statistics. Deborah P.
Klein is an economist in
the Office o f the
Commissioner. The article
is drawn from “The
Changing Focus o f
Government Statistics: A
Historical Perspective,” an
invited paper prepared by
the authors for the
Sesquicentennial Program
o f the American Statistical
Association. Summaries o f
other bls papers presented
at the 1989 asA conference
appear on pages 2 9 -3 3 .
14
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
he development of statistics in the United
Imagine the confusion if analysts were to
States has been very much stimulated by compare statistics on the textile industry and
the country’s need for knowledge about some surveys included knitting mills while oth
its people, its economy, and the conditionsersofrestricted the information to weaving mills;
life. Beginning with the counting of the popula or, if it had not been decided whether trucking
tion as required by the Constitution, govern firms that deliver textiles were part of the indus
ment data collection has expanded to cover try or separate from it, or whether the manufac
employment, agriculture, industrial production, ture of machinery for textile production should
prices, earnings, consumption, health condi be included as part of the industry. Ambiguities
tions, and a variety of other important areas. As such as these led to the establishment of the
the statistical system developed, data collection Standard Industrial Classification system.
techniques became standardized and scientif
Even what would appear to be the simple
ic sampling and estimation procedures were counting of the people in the country has
developed.
required the development of definitions and
Although the history of this methodological categories that are accepted as relevant to the
progress is well known, it is surprising that so characteristics of the population at the time of
little attention has been paid to the development data collection. The earliest U.S. censuses
of the concepts and definitions that frame the enumerated slaves and free men. Slavery was
issues and give substance to the results of statis abolished, but concerns about racial charac
tical series. This is especially true when social teristics continued, and the categories for which
and economic phenomena are measured, be counts would be made reflected those concerns.
cause definitions in these areas tend to change Later, the large waves of immigration that
with society’s view of the issue.
took place in the 19th and 20th centuries high
A statistical system, if it is to remain relevant, lighted the need for additional racial and ethnic
must build on the past but also must be prepared classifications.
for change. O f course, there also must be order
As congressional legislation required the col
in the system for useful statistics to be de lection of information on conditions of work,
veloped; without consensus on what to meas and more particularly on the earnings of work
ure and on the definitions and classifications ing men and women in the United States, further
involved, statistical knowledge cannot be refinement of concepts occurred in that area.
developed.
The point is that the phenomena underlying
T
October 1989
government statistics keep changing, the coun
try’s view of the concepts underlying data also
changes, and those responsible for the measure
ment of these phenomena in official statistical
series need to take account of the changes in the
definitions used in the conduct of surveys.
As conditions in society have changed, new
information needs have emerged, and new clas
sification schemes and innovative approaches to
the conceptual framework and the definitions
within it have been developed and modified to
meet those needs. This article discusses three
examples of the conceptual contributions of
Federal agencies to statistical development.
Employment by industry
National information on employment by de
tailed industry dates back to the 1899 Census of
Manufactures, although the Bureau of Labor
Statistics had conducted a number of special
surveys in particular areas and industries in the
1880’s. Earlier population censuses, such as the
one in 1810, made broad distinctions among
agriculture, commerce, and manufacturing. By
1910, the population census obtained informa
tion on the occupation and industry of every
working person. The instructions to the enumer
ators noted that “the occupation, if any, fol
lowed by a child of any age, or by a woman is
just as important for census purposes as the oc
cupation followed by a m an.” The interviewers
were further instructed to “describe the branch
of industry, the kind of business or establish
ment, line of work or place in which this person
works, as cotton mill, general farm, dry goods
store, insurance office, bank.” 1
Some individual States began compiling intercensal employment estimates early in the
20th century, but these data were largely re
stricted to those industries dominant in each
State’s economy.2
The Bureau of Labor Statistics introduced
publication of the Monthly Labor Review in
1915 and included employment statistics for
about a dozen countries in the statistical section.
Recognizing that the information for Great
Britain, Germany, and France was superior to
that for the United States, b l s began a program
to collect and publish industry employment
data. Beginning with four industries— boots
and shoes, cotton goods, cotton finishing, and
hosiery and underwear— the program was the
forerunner of today’s Current Employment
Statistics Program, a Federal-State cooperative
venture that covers all nonfarm establishments.
The depression of 1920-21 focused attention
on the need for timely industry employment
data, and funds were provided by the Congress
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
to expand the survey. By 1923, the survey cov
ered 52 industries grouped into 12 major cate
gories, one of the first examples of industry
classification.3
In the 1930’s, several Federal agencies had
their own systems of industrial classification,
including the Bureau of the Census, the Internal
Revenue Service, and the Social Security Board
and its affiliated State Employment Security
Agencies. However, the data system was frag
mented and comparisons were difficult. Recog
nizing the need to develop a general industrial
classification system for all Federal statistical
agencies, developmental work was begun under
the auspices of the U.S. Central Statistical
Board, the predecessor of the Statistical Policy
Office of the Office of Management and Budget
( o m b ) . The first Standard Industrial Classifica
tion (sic) Manual was issued in 1939.
The sic manual has been revised several
times, to reflect changes in the economy and in
the consensus of how best to organize the infor
mation. For example, views have changed back
and forth on the proper classification of govern
ment activities— either according to the par
ticular function, such as education or health
services, or separately as its own industry.
Other issues have included the treatment of sep
arate administrative offices, the type of organi
zation (corporate, sole proprietor, for profit/not
for profit), character of the work force, and use
of technology.
The basic principle of the sic system is that
establishments are classified by type of eco
nomic activity. But under that umbrella come
several different approaches. In most cases, the
dominating factor is product or activity, but, in
some instances, end use, nature of raw materi
als, or market structure may play a role. Thus,
one can have the anomaly of one industry pro
ducing what seems to be several different prod
ucts, while what appears to be a single product
may be produced in several different industries.
For example, sic 3651 — Household Audio and
Video Equipment— consists of establishments
that manufacture not only v c r ’ s and clock ra
dios for consumer use, but also juke boxes and
loud speakers for public address systems. On
the other hand, a simple product, chairs, may be
produced in one of six different industries de
pending on whether the chair is wood or metal,
upholstered or not, produced for home or for
office use. Establishments that produce chairs
that convert into beds would be classified in still
another industry.
The latest sic manual, the 1987 revision, is
just now being introduced into the Federal
statistical system, but discussions continue on
many issues. Is the establishment still the best
As conditions in
society have
changed, new
information needs
have emerged.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
15
Statistics to M eet Society’s Needs
A tradeoff must
be made between
relevance to new
conditions and
continuity o f time
series.
unit of measurement? Should the process of pro
duction carry more weight than the output? How
do you best classify firms with many products or
services? What is the nature of output in the
service sector?
It is important to recognize, of course, that
once a classification system has been set in
place, change is often difficult to achieve. A
tradeoff must be made between relevance to
new conditions and continuity of time series
analysis. Furthermore, the development of his
torical revisions or overlapping series can be
very costly. The sic has, over the years, pro
vided the consistency and uniformity required
for an organized system of Federal statistics.
Nonetheless, as the statistical system comes to
grips with changes in the economic system that
have caused the bulk of its employment and a
large part of its output to move to the serviceproducing sector, the need for a thorough re
view of the basic theory of the sic and of the
concepts underlying it has become increasingly
apparent, and some work has begun in this
direction.
Race and ethnicity
One important classification with a long history
revolves around race and ethnicity. The subject
is also one of considerable sensitivity because
the availability of data for a particular demo
graphic group may determine fund allocation or
program development.
While at least a partial identification of
whites and blacks goes back to the first popula
tion census, the underlying concepts and the
salient aspects have changed markedly. For ex
ample, in the 1890 census, separate information
for quadroons and octoroons— persons with onequarter or one-eighth black parentage— was
collected, while in 1930, any mixture of white
and some other race was to be reported accord
ing to the race of the parent who was not white.
We often behave as though there were a uni
form scientific basis for the racial definitions,
yet the categories have changed markedly over
the years, as has our understanding of them. In
1870, the census form instructed, “Be particu
larly careful in reporting the class Mulatto. The
word here is generic, and includes quadroons,
octoroons, and all persons having any percepti
ble trace of African blood. Important scientific
results depend on the correct determination of
this class . . . .” A hundred years later, the
Statistical Policy Division of o m b , in issuing
Race and Ethnic Standards fo r Federal Statis
tics and Administrative Reporting, noted that
“these classifications should not be interpreted
as being scientific or anthropological in na
ture.”4 Similarly, a BLS-prepared Directory o f
16
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Data Sources on Racial and Ethnic Minorities
noted that “the concept of race as used in these
data sources does not denote clear-cut scientific
definitions of biological stock. Rather it reflects
self-identification by respondents or determina
tion of race by an interviewer.”5
The issue of self-determination versus inter
viewer determination is an interesting one. In
the early years of the census, the determination
was always by observation. In the biographical
novel, Sally Flemings, Barbara Chase-Riboud
describes the 1830 visit of a census enumerator
to the home of Sally Hemings, a former slave,
widely believed to have been the mistress of
Thomas Jefferson. The census taker “opened to
a new page in his ledger. If Sally Hemings was
who and what people said she was, then Thomas
Jefferson had broken the law of Virginia . . . .
He hesitated for a moment and then wrote:
Sally Hemings, Female, between 50 and 60,
Without occupation, Race: W hite.”
The practice of racial classification by the
interviewer rather than the respondent was
carried over into the Current Population Survey
( c p s ) both for operational and conceptual rea
sons. Operationally, the fear was that in some
face-to-face situations the asking of a person’s
race might be considered so offensive as to dam
age further respondent cooperation in the sur
vey. Also, because a major objective was to
obtain information on the number of persons in
the study population who might be subject to
discrimination because of the community’s
perception of their racial or ethnic heritage, the
observation of the interviewer was thought to
be a good proxy for community opinion. In
the 1970 population census, data collection
changed from being done exclusively or largely
by personal visit to mail. This, of course, pre
cluded determination by observation, and ques
tions for self-identification were developed.6
At the same time, rising consciousness among
various segments of our society led to a
strong demand for statistics based on selfidentification. Thus, in 1978, the collection pro
cedures in the c p s were officially changed to
self-identification.
In the c p s , tabulation and publication of in
formation separately for whites and all others
began in 1948 but, without separate monthly
population estimates, only rates and percentages
were shown. In 1954, with the introduction of
procedures to make monthly population esti
mates by race, absolute numbers were published
for the first time. The non white category— in
cluding blacks and other minorities— was used
as a proxy for the labor market situation for
what were then called Negroes. In the 1960’s, it
became clear that significant differences existed
in labor market experiences within the overall
non white category, and the possibility of tabu
lating data separately for “Negroes” was ex
plored. Procedures were developed to do this,
and, beginning in 1972, data became available
monthly for blacks as a separate group.
In the last two decades, rising interest in the
extent of Hispanic immigration and the socio
economic conditions of this group has led to a
desire for separate data on persons of Hispanic
origin. Yet, there was considerable difficulty in
developing an appropriate method of classifica
tion. The ethnic identifier with the longest
history of use in household surveys is the birth
place of the individual or his or her parents.
Obviously, this only identifies first- and secondgeneration Americans.
Other identifiers that have been used are
Spanish surname, mother tongue, and Hispanic
origin. A list of Spanish surnames was de
veloped for use in the five Southwestern
States with large concentrations of MexicanAmericans, many of whose ancestors had set
tled in the area centuries earlier and could not be
identified by country of birth. The list of
surnames was not useful elsewhere in the coun
try because many of the names on the list are
also common among persons of Italian, Por
tuguese, and other Latin but non-Hispanic
origin.
Mother tongue— the language spoken at
home during childhood— has also been used as
an identifier. It also tends to be most successful
for first- and second-generation Americans.
For the 1970 population census, a “Spanish
heritage” definition was adapted which com
bined these various identifiers:
(1) Spanish surname or Spanish mother tongue
for the five Southwestern States (Arizona, Califor
nia, Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas);
(2) Puerto Rican birth or parentage in New
York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania; and
(3) Spanish mother tongue in the remaining
States.
The confusion and difficulty of using such
mixed procedures led to efforts to develop a
single, specific question to obtain Hispanic
origin. This approach is now used in both the
population census and the Current Population
Survey. In the c p s , the respondent is asked the
origin or descent of each member of the house
hold while being shown a flashcard with such
entries as German, Irish, Polish, Mexican,
Puerto Rican, Cuban. The c p s interviewers’
manual states that “origin or descent refers to
the national or cultural group from which a per
son is descended and is determined by the na
tionality or lineage of a person’s ancestors.
There is no set rule as to how many generations
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
are to be taken into account in determining
origin.”
Some of the issues we have faced in trying to
develop appropriate classifications for race and
ethnicity have also been faced in other coun
tries. For example, in Great Britain where the
evolution into a multiracial society is relatively
recent, and historically there had been little
large-scale immigration, the measurement of
race and ethnicity has been problematic. In the
1950’s and 1960’s, questions on country of
birth could be used to infer race/ethnicity, and a
question on parents’ country of birth was added
in 1971 to identify the second generation. With
recognition that this approach would not last
another generation, work was begun on the de
velopment of a question on national or ethnic
origin. The 1991 British census will probably
have such a question— most likely with seven
categories: white, black, Indian, Pakistani,
Bangladeshi, Chinese, and other. But, there is
concern about possible respondent objection,
and discussion about the appropriate groups to
identify continues.7
Wages
In the first 50 years after the American Statisti
cal Association was established, occasional at
tempts were made to develop statistics on the
social and economic status of American workers
through wage surveys. Then, as now, however,
the underlying concepts, purposes, and defini
tions were complex and sometimes difficult to
understand. Even a century ago, survey pro
grams had to meet more than one objective. In
fact, about 100 years ago, a State Commissioner
of Labor Statistics, in the first annual report of
his agency, wrote:
Investigations about wages may have several dis
tinct objects. One is, to find the rate of money
wages actually paid. Another is, to compare it
with the necessary expenses of living. A third is,
to compare the laborer’s share of the product with
that of the capitalist’s. A fourth question, perhaps
most important of all, is to find in what direction
things are moving.8
I t becam e clear
that sig nificant
d ifferences existed
in labor m arket
experiences w ithin
the nonw hite
category.
The early attempts collected information on
wage rates— either per hour or per year— for
different demographic groups— men, women,
and children. As early as 1875, the collection of
wage statistics was attempted in a State popula
tion census. Interestingly, in the State of Massa
chusetts, experiments were tried to collect wages
from two different sources: from employers and
from the workers themselves. Data collected
from employers— $580 a year on average for
males— was considerably higher than the data
collected directly from workers— only $482.9
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
17
Statistics to M eet Society’s Needs
A way had to be
found to separate
wages by
occupation and
by hours o f work
if the data were
to be meaningful.
18
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The feeling at the time was that these two
sources of reports might contain bias. The em
ployer paying high wages is proud of that fact,
it was thought, and would be happy to report
this good treatment, whereas the low-wage em
ployer would prefer to conceal the facts from the
data collectors. On the other side, the bias could
be upward or downward. A worker willing to
report was generally thought to be a person of
greater than average intelligence— and, there
fore, someone likely to be earning a higher
salary. On the other hand, a worker reporting
his earnings never believes that they are ade
quate and might well under report them .10
While modem society requires that employ
ers maintain accurate records, our efforts to col
lect data directly from individuals still may
suffer from some of these conditions. Studies
have found that earnings collected from c p s
households, for example, generally are slightly
lower than those collected from business
records. In addition, definitions have become
more complex, and recall more difficult. Many
people remember take-home pay— not the over
all rate of pay before deductions for Social Se
curity and income taxes, health insurance, and
the em ployee’s share of the cost of employerprovided benefits. The statistical community is
making efforts to improve the questions asked
in household surveys because this source is es
sential for understanding individual earnings in
a family context.
The problem of developing averages and in
terpreting their meaning was also an issue that
was discussed a century ago. Carroll Wright,
the first Commissioner of b l s , wrote in the first
report of his new Federal bureau in 1886: “A
casual examination of these summaries will
show that any attempt to prove an American rate
of wages must necessarily result in failure.
There is no such thing as an American rate of
wages.” 11
Even then, it was clear that a way had to be
found to separate wages by occupation and by
hours of work if the data were to be meaningful
for analytical purposes. In those early days, the
Nation’s railroads hired temporary workers,
many of whom did not work full time. In dis
cussing the question of the meaning of aggre
gate wages with his State colleagues, Mr.
Wright expressed the view that it was very easy
to collect two simple facts from the railroads—
the aggregate wages paid and the total number
of workers employed at a given time. Division
of one number by the other produced, according
to W right, “a vicious quotient” to represent the
average earnings of all railroad workers. This
general average could be quite misleading, he
maintained, and he insisted that those involved
October 1989
with data collection must find a way to “in
dividualize” the account so that the actual
earnings of each worker would be properly
reported.12
From these beginnings, two types of wage
and earnings statistics have evolved. The effort
has involved both the collection of average
earnings for business establishments and the
study of occupational wages by industry and by
geographic area.
The early requests for data often involved
“rate of wages paid in different States of the
Union . . . for instance, for puddlers in New
York or carpenters in O hio.”13 These surveys,
generally of straight-time hourly wage rates,
have been collected for a changing group of
occupations and industries ever since. Over the
years, the surveys have been expanded to cover
salary rates as well as wage rates of pay and to
provide information on the structure of rates by
region and locality, industry, union status, and
sex.
The other early source of earnings statistics
was from the monthly survey of establishments’
employment and payroll. While this survey
began in 1915, only payroll totals were avail
able until 1933, when average hourly earnings
and average weekly earnings were published for
the first time. At about the same time, legisla
tion was passed to establish the payroll survey
as a Federal-State Cooperative program, en
abling it to expand in size to its current position
as the largest monthly establishment survey.
This survey was an excellent vehicle for collec
tion of aggregate wage data as well as payroll
employment information at the detailed industry
level, making its average hourly and weekly
earnings series quite popular for general analyt
ical purposes.
These data have been especially useful during
recent decades, which have included periods of
recession and expansion as well as years of very
high inflation and concerns about the trend of
unit labor costs. The average earnings series,
while affected by problems of shifting mix— of
changes in full-time and part-time workers as
well as shifts in occupations and earnings—
proved useful in gauging overall trends in the
economy.
During the early 1970’s, Federal Government
efforts at wage and price controls highlighted
the need for a general wage index based on
occupational wage surveys of employers that
would include the increasingly important sup
plements to wages, cover the entire economy,
and be free from shifts of employment among
occupations and industries. The Employment
Cost Index ( e c i ) , currently the best indicator of
wage trends, was designed to cover all costs of
workers’ compensation— wages, salaries, and
employer costs for workers’ benefits. The e c i ,
like the Consumer Price Index, has a market
basket with base-period weights; the e c i uses
fixed employment weights by occupation and
by industry. It has developed in stages to its
current profile of more than 100 published se
ries, including occupations, industries, geo
graphic regions, and union status.
Discussion continues on such issues as the
treatment of lump-sum and other nonrecurring
payments, and the value of noncash payments
such as health insurance, retirement contribu
tions, and child care benefits. It is clear that the
classification system in the wage area will con
tinue to undergo further development.
Where we are
This article has focused on three examples
which illustrate different aspects of the evolu
tion of content in Federal statistics. The first,
the system of industry classification, introduced
order and relationship into survey design so that
statistical data could be defined more precisely,
presented more intelligently, and analyzed in a
more meaningful fashion. Although a number
of revisions and additions to the Standard Indus
trial Classification system have taken place, the
system has promoted stability in data relation
ships over a long period of time. The industrial
restructuring that has taken place, especially
over the last few decades, and the challenges of
new technology suggest that it may be time for
a comprehensive reexamination of the concepts
underlying the sic structure and a modernization
of the entire system.
The review of the definitions of race and
ethnicity shows the evolution that occurred in
collecting and processing these demographic
data; it also demonstrates the use of innovative
approaches to deal with societal change within
the survey process. These issues remain with
us. As the country’s ethnic composition and the
situation of our minority citizens change, our
information data base must be kept relevant.
The final example deals with the historical
development of an economic concept, clearly
one of the most difficult of all the issues with
which the survey statistician must deal. Com
pensation, which can be looked at as a cost to
the employer as well as a benefit to the worker,
has been measured in one form or another for
more than a century, and studies on the issues
are still going on. This example is intended to
show how a clear understanding of the underly
ing concept is essential for the collection of
meaningful data. The statistical system will
need to give far more attention in the future than
it has in the past to the identification and delin
eation of the concepts which underlie our data
collection. Indeed, this area is one of the most
important elements of nonsampling error that
must be dealt with by the statistical system.
As we look to the future, we see emerging
issues of economic growth, income distribution,
potential labor shortages, illness, pollution, and
a whole host of other important topics. Will the
progress made in the three areas discussed here
be sufficient to carry us into the year 2000 and
beyond? Probably not. But we have seen from
this brief review that the changing views of
society force changes in survey concepts and
definitions so that the Nation’s data base can
keep up with society’s needs. We know that
changes will occur in the future, and we believe
that the statistical community will continue to
be responsive to the need of our country for
information that remains relevant to the critical
issues of our time.
□
The changing
views o f society
force changes in
survey concepts
and definitions.
Footnotes
1 Bureau o f the Census, Twenty Censuses: Population
and Housing Questions, 1790-1980 (Washington, Gov
ernment Printing Office, 1979), pp. 4 3 -4 4 .
7 Martin Bulmer, “A Controversial Census Topic: Race
and Ethnicity in the British Census,” Journal of Official
Statistics, Voi. 2, No. 4, 1986, pp. 471 -8 0 .
2 “Thumbnail Sketches of bls Statistical Series,” Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, unpublished, Apr. 2, 1964.
8 Connecticut Bureau of Labor Statistics, First Annual
Report (Hartford, CT, Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co.,
3 Ibid.
4 Katherine K. Wallman and John Hodgdon, “Race and
Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative
Reporting,” Statistical Reporter, 1977, pp. 450-54.
1885).
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
5 Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Directory of Data Sources
on Racial and Ethnic Minorities, Bulletin 1879 (Washing
11 U .S. Commissioner of Labor, First Annual Report,
Industrial Depressions (Washington, Government Printing
ton, Government Printing O ffice, 1975).
O ffice, 1886), p. 142.
6
For an excellent discussion o f the development o f these
12 National Convention of Chiefs and Commissioners of
questions, see Elizabeth Martin, Theresa DeMaio, and
the Various Bureaus of Statistics of Labor in the United
Pamela Campanelli, “Context Effects for Census Measures
States, Proceedings, 1889, p. 20.
on Race and Hispanic Origin,” Proceedings of the American
13 “Thumbnail Sketches.”
Statistical Association Annual Meetings, 1988.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
19
Employer provisions
for parental leave
Slightly more than one-third
of full-time employees in medium and large firms
in private industry were covered
by maternity or paternity leave policies;
days off were usually without pay
Joseph R.
Meisenheimer II
Joseph R. Meisenheimer
II, an economist formerly
with the Division of
Occupational Pay and
Employee Benefit Levels,
Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
is currently with the
Division o f Labor Force
Statistics.
20
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
rowth in the number of two-earner
families and in the number of working
women of childbearing age has stimu
lated interest in leave arrangements for working
parents. But what arrangements are available
for new parents who need time off from work to
care for infants? A recent Bureau of Labor
Statistics survey found that while parental leave
may provoke much discussion, it is not widely
available to employees. For example, in 1988,
only 36 percent of the full-time employees in
medium and large firms in private industry were
covered by maternity or paternity leave poli
cies— 2 percent of them were under policies
providing for paid leave.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 1988 Em
ployee Benefits Survey provides representative
data for approximately 31 million full-time em
ployees of establishments employing 100 work
ers or m ore.1 This article analyzes survey data
on the incidence and the provisions of employ
ers’ parental leave policies. In addition, legisla
tive developments in this country and abroad are
summarized.
G
Changing demographics
Data from the Current Population Survey2 docu
ment the increasing labor force participation of
women. In 1988, 57 percent of all women were
October 1989
in the labor force, as were 71 percent of women
between the childbearing ages of 16 and 44
years, up from 42 percent and 47 percent, re
spectively, in 1968. Further, three-fourths of
the working women held full-time iobs in
1988.3
The increased labor force participation of
women has shifted the balance between working
and raising a family. Women are less likely to
leave the labor force to raise families today than
they were during the post-World War II baby
boom. Rather, many women now maintain ca
reers and raise families simultaneously.
For example, in the 1950’s, the labor force
participation rate of women in the prime child
bearing age group (25 to 34 years) was much
lower than that of women in the 20-to-24 and
35-to-44 age groups. Today, however, labor
force participation of women no longer drops
significantly during these prime childbearing
years. In 1988, 73 percent of women in the
25-to-34 age group participated in the labor
force, approximately the same percentage as
those in the 20-to-24 and 35-to-44 age groups.4
These demographic changes have sparked
interest in the work-family relationship. Such
issues as employer-sponsored dependent care,
flexible work arrangements, and, in particular,
parental leave are of interest to all workers,
especially parents.
Incidence and provisions
The Employee Benefits Survey defines parental
leave as an employer policy allowing a father or
mother to take time off from work to care for a
newborn child. (See box below.) Because such
policies may differ for mothers and fathers, the
Bureau collected data separately on maternity
and paternity leave provisions.
Maternity leave was available more fre
quently than was paternity leave. Thirty-six per
cent of full-time employees of medium and
large private firms (11 million men and women)
were covered by maternity leave policies, and
17 percent of employees (5 million) by paternity
leave policies. Both types of leave were almost
always without pay; nearly nine-tenths of the
employees under each type of policy could re
ceive only unpaid days off. (See table 1.)
Maximum durations of unpaid maternity and
paternity leave varied, but commonly were be
tween 6 and 26 weeks. The most common max
imum duration of unpaid maternity leave was 6
weeks, covering 19 percent of the employees.
(See table 2.) Other common maximum dura
tions were 13, 26, and 52 weeks. Employees
rarely could receive more than 52 weeks of un
paid maternity leave. The maximum durations
of unpaid paternity leave were similar to those
of unpaid maternity leave. The average maxi
mum duration was 19.1 weeks for unpaid
maternity leave and 18.3 weeks for unpaid pa
ternity leave.5
Paid parental leave was rare in medium and
large firms in private industry. Only 2 percent of
full-time employees were covered by paid ma-
Defining and measuring parental leave
Parental leave is an employer policy allowing
a father or mother to take time off from work
to care for a newborn child. A parent must
reasonably expect to have his or her job or a
similar job available upon returning to work,
and cannot be penalized by the employer for
taking parental leave.
The benefit is separate and in addition to
other established leave plans available both to
new parents and other employees, such as
vacations, sick leave, and personal leave. Ac
cording to the 1988 Employee Benefits Sur
vey, nearly all employees in medium and
large firms in private industry received paid
vacations, and almost one-quarter received
paid personal leave. Although an employee
might be permitted to use these leave benefits
to care for a newborn child, such benefits
were excluded from the definition of parental
leave used in this analysis. Thus, the data in
this article may understate the availability of
leave benefits for new parents.
However, the survey’s definition of
parental leave is not restricted to policies
specifically limited to maternity and paternity
leave. It also includes general leave-ofabsence plans— covering such situations as
extended training or military leave— under
which employees can reasonably expect an
opportunity to take time off after the birth of
a child. In fact, benefits were usually pro
vided through these general leave-of-absence
policies, rather than through specific parental
leave plans.
Only nondisability parental leave benefits
are considered in this analysis. Replacement
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
income for disability associated with mater
nity is provided under an employer’s short
term disability program, as required by the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978. (The
act prohibits employers from discriminating
against female employees on the basis of
pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical con
ditions.) In 1988, 89 percent of full-time
workers in medium and large firms in private
industry had short-term disability benefit
plans.
The data in this article refer to potential
rather than actual beneficiaries. The Em
ployee Benefits Survey did not obtain infor
mation on the number of workers actually
taking parental leave. Therefore, data on the
incidence of leave policies may reflect the
composition of a company’s work force. Em
ployers may offer parental leave benefits
more frequently when employees are ex
pected to need such benefits.
Also, the data show the percent of workers
covered by parental leave policies without re
gard to gender, age, or family status. For ex
ample, suppose an establishment with 100
employees (50 men and 50 women) had a
maternity leave policy applicable to all work
ers. In this case, the survey would count all
100 employees as covered by the maternity
leave policy, even though many were not
women of childbearing age.
Employees who were required to work a
minimum period, such as 6 months or 1 year,
before they qualified for parental leave were
considered covered by the policy, even if they
had not yet fulfilled the service requirement.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
21
Employer Provisions fo r Parental Leave
temity leave, and only 1 percent by paid pater
nity leave. Both types of leave, usually pro
vided at full pay, generally were limited to 1 or
3 days. Workers who received paid parental
leave sometimes received unpaid parental leave
as well; in these instances, they would be paid
for a short time at the beginning of the leave
period with the remainder of the period being
unpaid.
The survey reported separate data for em
ployees in three broad occupational groups:
professional and administrative, technical and
clerical, and production and service. The pro
fessional and administrative and technical and
clerical groups (white-collar workers) were
more likely to have parental leave than were the
production and service group (blue-collar work
ers). (See table 1.) Maternity leave policies
covered 40 percent of professional and adminis
trative employees and 36 percent of technical
and clerical employees, compared with 33 per
cent of production and service employees.
Paternity leave benefits were available to 20
percent of professional and administrative
workers, 18 percent of technical and clerical
Table 1.
Percent of full-time employees covered by
parental leave policies, medium and large firms
in private industry, 1988
Professional
Technical Production
All
and
and
and
employees administrative
clerical
service
employees
employees employees
Type of policy
All full-time employees..........
Employees covered by
parental leave1 .............................
Maternity leave ...........................
Unpaid days o n ly .....................
Paid days only .........................
Both unpaid and paid days . . . .
Information not available on
type of days ...........................
No maternity leave .....................
100
100
100
100
36
36
30
40
40
34
2
1
37
36
31
1
1
33
33
28
1
1
3
1
(2)
(2)
1
1
3
(2)
3
3
Employees not covered by
parental leave ...............................
64
60
63
67
All full-time employees.........
100
100
100
100
36
17
14
1
40
20
17
1
37
18
15
1
33
14
12
1
Employees covered by
parental leave1 .............................
Paternity leave.............................
Unpaid days o n ly .....................
Paid days only .........................
Both unpaid and paid days . . . .
Information not available on
type of days ...........................
No paternity leave .......................
Employees not covered by
parental leave1 .............................
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
1
19
2
20
2
19
1
19
64
60
63
67
1 Parental leave refers to nondisability maternity leave or paternity leave. Both male and female
employees were counted as being covered by maternity or paternity leave if the benefit was
available. (See box, p. 21, for detail on defining and tabulating parental leave.)
2 Less than 0.5 percent.
Note : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.
22 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
workers, and 14 percent of production and serv
ice workers.
White-collar workers also had a longer aver
age duration of parental leave benefits than did
blue-collar workers. The maximum duration of
unpaid maternity leave averaged 20.8 weeks for
professional and administrative employees and
19.5 weeks for technical and clerical workers,
compared with 17.6 weeks for production and
service workers. For paternity leave, maximum
duration averaged 20.7 weeks for professional
and administrative employees, 18.8 weeks for
technical and clerical employees, and 16.0
weeks for production and service workers.
Parental leave policies differ in their provi
sions for continuing health care and life in
surance coverage during periods of leave, the
amount employees must pay to continue these
benefits, and the accrual of seniority and pen
sion plan credits. However, these items were
not studied in the 1988 survey.6
The Employee Benefits Survey of State and
local government employees in 1987 shows that
more than half of these government workers
were covered by policies providing unpaid ma
ternity leave, and one-third by policies for un
paid paternity leave. As is the case in private
industry, paid maternity and paternity leave
coverage was rare in the public sector.7
Mandated parental leave
United States. In addition to policies estab
lished by individual firms, laws in six States call
for nondisability parental leave benefits. Maine,
Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin,
and Vermont require employers to provide a
specified duration of unpaid parental leave for
male and female private sector employees.8
Duration of the mandated leave ranges from 6 to
13 weeks. These States have laws requiring that
an employee receive his or her job or a similar
job upon returning from parental leave. The
laws also prohibit employers from reducing the
compensation or seniority of an employee who
returns from leave within the legally required
time.
In the Employee Benefits Survey, workers in
States mandating parental leave benefits were
counted as receiving the mandated level of ben
efits. If the employer offered more generous
benefits than legally required, then the workers
were counted as receiving the higher level.
The issue of parental leave has also received
congressional attention. The U.S. Congress,
over the last several years, has debated bills that
would require employers to grant employees
unpaid leave to care for a newborn, newly
adopted, or seriously ill child.9
Other countries. While the United States thus
far has emphasized parental leave policies
developed by employers alone or through col
lective bargaining, such benefits in other
countries are frequently government-mandated.
Statutes in Sweden, Canada, and the United
Kingdom provide pertinent information for the
current debate in the United States over a na
tional parental leave policy.
Sweden has perhaps the most comprehensive
parental leave policy in the world. The Child
Care Leave Act of 1978 permits Swedish em
ployees to take up to 12 months of leave to care
for their children. The leave can be divided be
tween both parents and can be taken in full days
or in partial-day increments until the child
reaches age 8. While on parental leave, em
ployees are paid 90 percent of pay for 9 months
and a flat rate for the remaining 3 months. The
payments are from a national insurance fund,
financed by a tax on employers and through
general government revenues.
Canada has a decentralized parental leave
policy. Its only nationwide parental leave policy
applies to Federal Public Service em ployees.10
All but one of the provincial and territorial gov
ernments (the Northwest Territories) mandate
unpaid maternity leave benefits for public and
private sector workers in their jurisdictions. A
minority of jurisdictions also mandate unpaid
paternity leave. In most jurisdictions, the dura
tion of leave is 17 or 18 w eeks.11
In the United Kingdom, the Employment
Protection Act of 1975 mandates parental leave
benefits for female employees. Qualifying
women can receive post-disability maternity
leave with pay equal to 90 percent of salary for
up to 6 weeks. The benefit is paid from a M ater
nity Pay Fund, which is financed by payroll
taxes on employers and employees. In addition
to paid leave, women can receive unpaid leave
for up to 29 weeks after the birth of a child.
Women who work for employers with more
than six workers are guaranteed reinstatement
after maternity leave. Male employees receive
no statutory parental leave benefits.
b e n e f it s f o r n e w p a r e n t s have become
more important as the demographic composition
Leave
Table 2.
Percent distribution of full-time employees
covered by unpaid maternity and paternity leave
policies, by maximum duration of leave, medium
and large firms in private industry, 1988
Maximum duration1
All full-time employees covered by
unpaid maternity leave policies2 . . .
Professional Technical Production
and
and
and
All
service
clerical
employees administrative
employees employees
employees
100
100
100
100
Under 6 weeks.............................
6 weeks ...................................
Over 6 but under 8 weeks...........
8 weeks ...................................
Over 8 but under 13 weeks.........
13 weeks .................................
Over 13 but under 26 weeks —
26 weeks...................................
Over 26 but under 52 weeks —
52 weeks .................................
2
19
3
13
(3)
(3)
4
11
10
23
17
4
9
2
25
(3)
5
12
8
22
14
4
7
Over 52 weeks.............................
(3)
4
11
11
25
17
4
11
1
3
14
(3)
3
11
12
24
20
4
8
19.1
20.8
Average duration (weeks)............
All full-time employees covered by
unpaid paternity leave policies2 . . .
(3)
(3)
19.5
17.6
100
100
100
100
Under 6 weeks.............................
6 weeks ...................................
Over 6 but under 8 weeks...........
8 weeks ...................................
Over 8 but under 13 weeks..........
13 weeks .................................
Over 13 but under 26 weeks —
26 weeks .................................
Over 26 but under 52 weeks —
52 weeks .................................
4
22
4
16
4
19
(3)
1
2
12
14
16
17
2
1
3
5
30
(3)
11
10
16
15
19
15
1
11
1
1
16
10
14
12
19
12
2
7
Average duration (w eeks)...........
18.3
20.7
18.8
16.0
15
22
1
1 Data include policies that provide a maximum number of unpaid days off; paid days off are not
included.
2 Data are for male and female employees. See box, p. 21, for detail on defining and tabulating
parental leave.
3 Less than 0.5 percent.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.
of the work force has changed. The Bureau of
Labor Statistics projects that women will ac
count for 64 percent of U.S. labor force growth
to the year 2000, suggesting that interest in
parental leave is not likely to subside.12 Em
ployers and governments are beginning to ad
dress the parental leave issue, and the debate
can be expected to continue.
□
Footnotes
1
The 1988 Employee Benefits Survey is a sample surveypublished in a Department of Labor news release, in Bul
letin 2336, Employee Benefits in Medium and Large Firms,
o f approximately 2,500 private sector establishments in the
1988 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1989), and in articles in
District o f Columbia and all States, except Alaska and
the Monthly Labor Review.
Hawaii. The survey provides data on a variety of employee
2
The Current Population Survey, a monthly survey of
benefits, such as leave benefits, short- and long-term dis
about 55,800 households, provides information on the labor
ability coverage, health benefits, life insurance, retirement
force, employment, and unemployment by demographic
and capital accumulation plans, child care, employee assis
and economic characteristics.
tance programs, and educational assistance. Survey data are
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
23
Employer Provisions fo r Parental Leave
3 Employment and Earnings, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
January 1989.
4 Susan E. Shank, “Women and the labor market: the link
grows stronger,” Monthly Labor Review, March 1988, pp.
3 -8 ; and Employment and Earnings, Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, January 1989.
5 Computation o f the average maximum durations ex
cludes workers not under maternity or paternity leave poli
cies.
6 For further data, see “ Family Leave Policies o f U .S.
Employers Review ed,” Spencer Research Reports, April
1988, pp. 3 2 3 .11.01-5.
7 Data on benefits for State and local government em
ployees can be found in Employee Benefits in State and
Local Governments, 1987, Bulletin 2309 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988).
8 A number o f States mandate unpaid leave for the period
o f disability associated with maternity. This analysis deals
solely with nondisability parental leave to be used by a
working parent to care for a newborn child. At the time of
the survey, Tennessee mandated nondisability leave for
working mothers, but that statute has since been amended to
require only disability maternity leave. The Maine and Ver
mont laws were not effective until after collection of the
1988 survey data. Therefore, these statutes did not affect the
parental leave data in this article.
9 As of the summer of 1989, the Family and Medical
Leave Act (Senate Bill 345, House o f Representatives Bill
770) was being considered by the Congress. These bills
would guarantee an em ployee’s right to reinstatement fol
lowing parental leave and would require the continuation of
such employee benefits as health insurance during the leave.
Employers with fewer than a specified number of workers
would be exempt from the proposed legislation.
10 Time off, generally unpaid, may be granted to both
male and female employees. Unemployment insurance pay
ments may be received during these periods.
11 Laurie Schwartz, Parental and Maternity Leave Poli
cies in Canada and Sweden (Kingston, Ontario, Industrial
Relations Center, Queens University, 1988), pp. 5 3 -6 0 .
12 Projections 2000, Bulletin 2302 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1988), p. 22.
A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement,
challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be considered
for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not
polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed to the Editor-inChief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Depart
ment of Labor, W ashington, d c 20212.
24
M onthly L abor R eview
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
O ctober 1989
Employer-sponsored
life insurance: a new look
For the first time, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics derives average amounts
of life insurance coverage for full-time employees
of medium-sized and large private firms
Adam Z. Bellet
Adam Z. Bellet is an
economist formerly in the
Division o f Occupational
Pay and Employee Benefit
Levels, and currently in
the Division o f Foreign
Labor Statistics, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
mployer-sponsored life insurance is an
important source of survivor protection
for working men and women. Benefits
are available both to assist with immediate ex
penses and to make up for the loss of family
income. Amounts of life insurance benefits can
vary widely. As one example, white-collar
workers more commonly receive benefits based
on their salary, while blue-collar workers are
more likely to receive a fixed-dollar benefit.
This difference is pointed up in a new analysis,
which looks at average life insurance amounts
derived from all benefit formulas.
In 1988, 92 percent of full-time employees of
medium-sized and large private firms partici
pated in life insurance plans financed wholly or
partly by their employers. Insurance protection
at 10 years of service ranged from an average of
$20,020 if earnings were $15,000 a year to
$54,440 if earnings were $55,000. On average,
amounts of insurance rose only slightly with
length of service. Thus, at 30 years’ seniority,
benefits averaged $20,161 and $54,581 at the
aforementioned earnings levels.
These findings are from an analysis of in
E
surance plan provisions obtained through the
Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 1988 Employee
Benefits Survey. Data were collected from U.S.
private firms employing at least 100 workers.
The survey, which did not include Alaska and
Hawaii, used a sample of 2,493 establishments
that represented almost 107,000 firms with
more than 31 million full-time employees. Data
are presented for all types of workers combined
and separately for three broad occupational
groups: professional and administrative, techni
cal and clerical, and production and service
workers. The first two groups together are often
labeled white-collar workers, in contrast to the
blue-collar production and service workers.1
The Bureau has been reporting on the inci
dence and characteristics of employer-sponsored
life insurance plans since the inception of the
Employee Benefits Survey in 1979. Included in
its reports are tabulations on methods of deter
mining basic life insurance (for example, per
cent of participants covered by eamings-based
versus flat-dollar-amount benefit formulas) and
on amounts of insurance available under various
plans (such as the percent of workers covered by
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
25
Employer-Sponsored Life Insurance
plans providing $5,000 or $10,000 of coverage).
This article reports on the first effort to utilize
the data on plan provisions to derive informa
tion on average amounts of life insurance avail
able to full-time employees, regardless of the
formula used to compute benefits. Given the
specific ages, salaries, and lengths of service
incorporated in the analysis, the results provide
a comprehensive measure of the life insurance
protection provided by medium-sized and large
private firms.
Type of analysis
To conduct the analysis, a computer model was
developed that takes account of the variables
that influence benefits under individual life
insurance plans, such as salary and, in some
instances, length of service. In addition, the
model applies provisions for minimum and
maximum benefits and rounds protection
amounts as specified by the plan.2 The model
also factors in age-related benefit reductions,
Table 1.
Average life insurance coverage for full-time
plan participants by annual salary and length of
service, medium-sized and large private firms,
1988
Annual salary
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$35,000
$45,000
$55,000
$19,735
19,820
20,020
20,127
20,161
$24,656
24,741
24,940
25,048
25,082
$29,430
29,515
29,714
29,822
29,855
$37,635
37,720
37,919
38,027
38,061
$46,028
46,113
46,312
46,420
46,453
$54,156
54,241
54,440
54,548
54,581
23,579
23,599
23,927
24,122
24,185
29,617
29,637
29,965
30,160
30,223
35,518
35,538
35,866
36,061
36,123
45,870
45,891
46,218
46,413
46,476
56,785
56,806
57,133
57,329
57,391
67,536
67,556
67,884
68,079
68,142
21,609
21,646
21,820
21,901
21,927
27,659
27,696
27,870
27,951
27,976
33,243
33,280
33,454
33,535
33,560
43,217
43,255
43,428
43,509
43,535
53,702
53,739
53,913
53,994
54,020
63,662
63,700
63,873
63,954
63,980
16,317
16,468
16,601
16,667
16,687
19,935
20,086
20,218
20,285
20,304
23,569
23,720
23,852
23,918
23,938
29,482
29,633
29,766
29,832
29,852
35,176
35,327
35,459
35,526
35,545
40,678
40,829
40,962
41,028
41,048
All participants
3 ye a rs .................................
5 ye a rs .................................
10 ye a rs...............................
20 ye a rs ...............................
30 ye a rs ...............................
Professional and
administrative participants
3 ye a rs .................................
5 y e a rs .................................
10 ye a rs ...............................
20 ye a rs ...............................
30 ye a rs...............................
Technical and clerical
participants
3 y e a rs .................................
5 y e a rs .................................
10 ye a rs ...............................
20 ye a rs ...............................
30 ye a rs...............................
Production and service
participants
3 ye a rs .................................
5 y e a rs .................................
10 ye a rs ...............................
20 ye a rs ...............................
30 ye a rs ...............................
Note: Life insurance figures are average amounts prior to any age-related reductions in benefits.
26 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
allowing review of the insurance available to
older workers.
In performing the analysis, life insurance
benefits were projected under the provisions of
each insurance plan for employees at various
assumed annual salary levels and lengths of
service. Benefits were computed for an em
ployee in mid-career (for example, age 40) and
for older employees.
The same assumptions were applied to all
three occupational groups studied, even though
some of the salary levels would not be widely
applicable in each group. That is, it is not likely
that many production and service workers had a
salary as high as $55,000, nor is it likely that
many professional and administrative workers
had a salary as low as $15,000 or $20,000, in
1988. Because benefit formulas may be de
signed for a specific group of workers having a
known range of earnings, benefits shown at
these unlikely earnings levels may not be mean
ingful. Hence, in examining the results of this
analysis, one should focus on benefits at earn
ings levels that are appropriate for a particular
occupational group.
Benefit levels
Table 1 shows the average life insurance
amounts at the length-of-service and salary lev
els studied. In each occupational group, the
benefit amount increased only slightly with
service, yet rose significantly as salary in
creased. This is expected, as plans frequently
base benefits on earnings and rarely on length of
service.3 W hite-collar workers had the greater
average benefit available at all salary levels,
with the disparity widening with increasing
annual salary. Thus, at $15,000, white-collar
benefits were 44 percent higher than blue-collar
benefits, while at $35,000, they were 55 percent
higher.
Average life insurance amounts for whitecollar workers were more sensitive to salary
changes than were those for blue-collar work
ers. For example, when salaries of white-collar
workers increased 80 percent, from $25,000 to
$45,000, average insurance benefits increased
60 percent. For blue-collar workers, the in
crease was 50 percent over the same salary
range. The analysis for blue-collar workers in
the upper salary ranges, though, may be skewed
due to the aforementioned assumptions re
garding the inapplicability of higher earnings to
this occupational group. Over the lower applica
ble salary range of $15,000 to $25,000, when
salary increased 67 percent, insurance increased
44 percent.4 In any event, one would expect
greater sensitivity of white-collar workers’ in-
surance to salary changes because in 1988
nearly 80 percent of the white-collar partici
pants in medium-sized and large firms had life
insurance tied to earnings, compared with 50
percent of the blue-collar participants.
With life insurance benefits expressed as a
percent of employees’ annual salaries, average
benefits for white-collar participants were al
ways greater than annual salary, while for bluecollar participants that was true only at the lower
salary levels. The following tabulation presents
projected life insurance benefits as a percent of
annual salary at 10 years of service:
Annual salary
Participants
All p la n s .............
Professional and
administrative.........
Technical and clerical
Production and
service......................
$15,000
.
133
$25,000 $55,000
119
99
.
.
160
145
143
134
123
116
.
I ll
95
74
As shown in table 2, dollar amounts of protection at any one salary level varied widely
among the individual life insurance plans in the
survey. Nevertheless, clusterings are apparent,
reflecting the prominence of plans paying bene
fits equal to the annual salary or flat amounts
such as $5,000, $10,000, and $20,000.
Life insurance for older workers
Table 2.
Percent of full-time life insurance participants by
amounts of coverage at 10 years of service and
selected annual salaries, medium-sized and
large private firms, 1988
Annual salary
Coverage
Total
Less than $5,000 .
$5,000-$9,999 ..
$10,000-$19,999
$20,000-$29,999
$30,000-$39,999
$40,000-$49,999
$50,000-$59,999
$60,000-$69,999 ..
$70,000-$79,999 . .
$80,000-$89,999 ..
$90,000-$99,999 ..
$100,000-$109,999
$110,000-$119,999
$120,000 or more ..
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$35,000
$45,000
$55,000
100
100
100
100
100
100
4
9
19
33
9
4
9
18
5
32
4
9
17
4
9
17
6
6
4
2
2
20
7
4
28
5
2
2
1
17
( 1)
<1)
(1)
2
1
1
11
4
9
49
20
11
22
35
3
1
19
3
0)
0)
( 1)
4
8
2
1
( 1)
0)
(1)
(1)
0)
1
1
1
0)
3
17
1
2
4
1
(1)
1
37
15
5
1 Less than 0.5 percent.
Note : Percentages are for life insurance amounts prior to any age-related reductions in benefits.
Dash indicates no employees in the given category. Because of rounding, sums of individual items
may not equal totals.
Table 3.
Average life insurance coverage for older
full-time workers by age, length of service, and
annual salary, medium-sized and large private
firms, 1988
Annual salary
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act
prohibits employers from discriminating against
any person with respect to hiring, compen
sation, or privileges of employment based on
the person’s age. Originally, the Act protected
individuals between ages 40 and 65, but as
amended, it now applies to all employees 40
years of age or older.
One effect of the Age Discrimination in Em
ployment Act is to ban mandatory retirement.
Because of this, employees may choose to
continue working past typical retirement age.
For such employees, the cost of employersponsored life insurance may continue to in
crease, as the life expectancy of older workers
declines. To compensate for this added cost,
many employers have reduced the amount
of life insurance protection afforded these
workers.5
Life insurance provisions for older workers
varied widely in medium-sized and large private
firms. In 1988, plans covering 56 percent of
full-time participants imposed benefit reduc
tions for older workers. The amount of in
surance was first reduced at age 65 in plans
covering 57 percent of those participants with
age-related reductions, at age 70 for 32 percent,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Age and years
of service
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$35,000
$45,000
$55,000
$17,355
17,361
$21,697
21,703
$25,884
25,891
$33,121
33,127
$40,516
40,523
$47,749
47,755
13,588
13,594
16,829
16,835
19,949
19,955
24,965
24,971
30,499
30,506
35,923
35,929
12,866
12,872
15,931
15,938
18,854
18,860
23,366
23,372
28,529
28,535
33,579
33,585
Age 65
10 years’ service ..
30 years’ service ..
Age 70
10 years’ service ..
30 years’ service ..
Age 75
10 years’ service ..
30 years’ service ..
Note : Life insurance figures reflect policies in force prior to June 1989 Supreme Court decision;
see note 5 in text.
and at other ages for the remaining 11 percent.
A slight majority of the participants in plans
specifying age-based benefit reductions could
expect a single reduction in insurance; the re
mainder could expect more than one benefit de
crease. A common arrangement in plans with
multiple reductions was to lower benefits to 65
percent of prior coverage at age 65 and to 50
percent at age 70. White-collar participants
more commonly were in plans with age-based
reductions than were blue-collar workers.6
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
27
Employer-Sponsored Life Insurance
Coverage for employees ages 65, 70, and 75
with 10 and 30 years of service is shown in table
3. As in table 1, there is little variation in benefit
amounts based on length of service, and bene
fits still increase as salary increases. More sig
nificant is a 12- to 14-percent drop in protection
at age 65 from comparable pay and service
amounts unreduced by age provisions.7
As table 3 shows, the decline in benefits was
most prominent after age 65, particularly be
tween ages 65 and 70. Over this 5-year span,
insurance amounts dropped 22 to 25 percent,
depending on length of service and salary; be
tween ages 70 and 75, the decline was 5 to 7
percent.
Table 4 presents the distribution of life in
surance benefit amounts for older workers at
the $15,000 and $35,000 salary levels. Prior to
age-based reductions in coverage, 15 percent
of participants at the $15,000 salary level had
life insurance coverage of less than $10,000
(table 2). At age 65, however, 25 percent of
plan participants had coverage of less than
$10,000. The percent of employees who had
less than $10,000 coverage continued to in
crease to 43 percent at age 70 and 48 percent at
age 75.
At the $35,000 salary level, the percent of
plan participants with less than $10,000 of cov
erage is lower than at the $15,000 level and does
not rise as sharply as age increases. Only 13
percent of employees received these low bene
fits prior to age-related reductions, the figure
Table 4.
Percent of full-time life insurance participants
by amounts of coverage at 10 years of service
and selected ages and annual salaries,
medium-sized and large private firms, 1988
Age and annual salary
Age 65
Coverage
Age 70
$15,000
$35,000
$15,000
$35,000
$15,000
$35,000
Total ..............................
100
100
100
100
100
100
Less than $5,000 .....................
$ 5 ,0 0 0 -$ 9 ,9 9 9 .......................
$ 1 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 1 9,999 ...................
$ 2 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 2 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
$ 3 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 3 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
11
14
46
12
15
10
10
17
10
27
17
26
40
8
7
15
11
22
26
37
7
6
18
12
27
10
20
$ 4 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 4 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
$ 5 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 5 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
$ 6 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 6 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
$ 7 0 ,0 0 0 -$ 7 9 ,9 9 9 ..................
$80,000 or more .....................
1
5
5
2
13
3
1
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
_
(1)
3
3
1
(1)
(1)
5
1
1
(1)
_
(1)
(1)
2 Provisions for maximum amounts o f insurance, de
signed to limit benefits that are tied to earnings, are more
common than provisions for minimums. Formulas provid
ing benefits expressed as multiples of earnings (such as one
or two times annual salary) commonly stipulate rounding
rules; insurance amounts are most often rounded to the next
higher thousand dollars.
3 In 1988, 58 percent o f life insurance participants in
medium-sized and large firms were provided with a basic
benefit expressed as a multiple of their earnings, and an
additional 7 percent derived their benefit from a graduated
schedule based on earnings. O f the remaining participants,
31 percent were provided with a flat benefit amount and 3
percent with a flat benefit based on service.
28 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
25
12
20
4
4
1
6
1
1 Less than 0.5 percent.
N ote : Percentages shown reflect policies in force prior to June 1989 Supreme Court decision;
see note 5 in text. Dash indicates no employees in the given category. Because of rounding, sums
of individual items may not equal totals.
increasing to 20 percent at age 65, 26 percent at
age 70, and 30 percent at age 75. For purposes
of comparison, the percent of employees earn
ing $35,000 and having life insurance benefits
of $70,000 or more fell from 22 percent prior to
reductions to 6 percent at age 75.
□
Footnotes
1 Excluded from coverage in the survey are benefits for
executive management, part-time, seasonal, and temporary
employees, as well as for employees who are on regular
travel assignments (such as airplane crews and long-distance
truckdrivers). In addition to life insurance, the survey exam
ines the incidence and detailed characteristics of health care,
short- and long-term disability insurance, retirement, and
capital accumulation plans, and a number of paid and unpaid
time-off items. It also reports on eligibility for a variety of
other benefits. Key findings of the 1988 survey are in Em
ployee Benefits in Medium and Large Firms, 1988, Bulletin
2336 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1989).
Age 75
4 Data from the Bureau’s Employment Cost Index show
average hourly wages and salaries of $11.84 for white-collar
occupations in 1988, compared with $9.59 for blue-collar
occupations. See Employment Cost Indexes and Levels,
1975—1988, Bulletin 2319 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
1988), p. 48.
5 Prior to June 23, 1989, reductions in life insurance
benefits for older workers were governed by guidelines
established in the U .S. Department o f Labor’s 1979 inter
pretive bulletin (29 c fr 860.120). These guidelines allowed
benefit reductions if justified by increased costs. On June
23, 1989, the Supreme Court, in Public Employees Retire
ment System of Ohio v. Betts, ruled that the Department of
Labor’s cost-justification guidelines were invalid. Data in
this article reflect life insurance plan provisions in effect
prior to this ruling.
6 For further information on age-related reductions in life
insurance, see Michael A. Miller, “Age-related reductions
in workers’ life insurance,” Monthly Labor Review, Sep
tember 1985, pp. 2 9-34.
7 Table 3 includes all plans in the survey. For those with
out age-based insurance reductions, the inputs are the same
as those for table 1. The differences between the two tables
would be greater if each were restricted to plans calling for
age-related reductions in life insurance benefits.
Conference
papers
Twenty-two b l s analysts presented pa
pers at the Sesquicentennial Program
of the American Statistical Associa
tion, August 6 -1 0 , 1989, in Washing
ton, DC. The paper by Commissioner
of Labor Statistics Janet L. Norwood
and Deborah P. Klein is presented in
full on pp. 14-19 of this issue. Sum
maries of the presentations of other b l s
participants appear below.
Abstracts of the papers have been
published by the American Statistical
Association in 1989 Program and A b
stracts— Joint Statistical Meetings.
For copies of individual papers, write
to the author, Bureau of Labor Statis
tics, 441 G Street N .W ., Washington,
DC 20212.
*
*
*
*
Thomas J. Plewes, “Pointing the Way:
Data, Analysis, and Decision
m aking.”
The role that statistics play in alloca
tion of Federal funding for transfer
payments to other units of government,
in escalation of tax rates and payments
to individuals, and in determining the
distribution of seats in the House of
Representatives is well known. Less
well understood is the role that statis
tics play in the process of formulating
decisions and evaluating results.
As the statistical arm of the Depart
ment of Labor, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics attempts to direct its program
to support understanding of issues of
current importance. Plewes discusses
the relationship between statistics and
decisionmaking, examining the chang
ing role of the Bureau in collecting,
analyzing, and publicizing data of im
portance in policy formulation. The
challenges posed by the impact of new
technology and the increasing sophisti
cation of policy analysis are explored.
Plewes details the linkage between
data and policy in three special data
collections on issues of national impor
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tance— dislocated workers, day care,
and drug testing in industry. He points
out that the statistical agency is emerg
ing as an honest-broker, causing a ten
sion between the need for objectivity
and policy relevance that agencies
must confront on a daily basis.
*
*
*
*
Penny L. Asbury, “A Survey on the
Temporary Help Supply Industry.”
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has
been conducting and publishing wage
surveys of specific industries since the
first annual report of the Commissioner
of Labor in 1886. In a continuing effort
to cover emerging industries, the Bu
reau conducted its first occupational
wage survey of the temporary help
supply industry in 1987. The decision
to undertake this study was influenced
by the rapid growth of the industry in
recent years.
One of the many challenges of this
survey was to develop a sample design
that balanced the need for national and
locality data within extreme budget
constraints. Federal policymakers re
quired national data to assess the im
pact that the industry’s growth has had
on the total economy. Other data users
needed statistics that reflected the in
dustry’s locality-based wage structure.
To yield results that met the needs of
both types of data users, a sample de
sign was developed that allowed the
data to be published nationally, for 26
localities, and also, in combination,
for large metropolitan areas.
The results of the survey showed
that hourly wages in this industry are
variable and locality based. The large
metropolitan areas, which employed
61 percent of the industry’s workers,
consistently had higher pay levels than
the industry’s national averages. How
e v e r, even am ong the in d iv id u a l
metropolitan areas, some differences
were large for the same occupations.
For other occupations, area differences
were not as great, depending on the
number of employees in the occupation
and on the specificity of the occupa
tional definitions.
The sample design very effectively
uncovered the high variability among
the areas in the locality data and pro
vided a basis for understanding the na
tional averages. As expected, the wage
structure for the temporary help supply
industry proved to be locality based,
but due to the broad interest in tempo
rary help supply workers and their wag
es, any future survey of this industry
must also develop national statistics.
*
*
*
*
T erry M . B u rd ette, Steve C ohen,
and C. Joseph Cooper, “Recent
Changes in the White-Collar Pay
Survey.”
Since 1959, the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics has conducted an annual pay
survey in selected professional, admin
istrative, technical, and clerical occu
pations (the p a t c survey). Since its
inception, the survey has been related
to the paysetting process for whitecollar employees of the Federal Gov
ernment. Over time, this survey has
gradually expanded in geographic and
industrial coverage, and in the number
of occupations studied. It is currently
the only probability based source of
w hite-collar salary data by occupa
tional work level.
Since 1985, the survey scope has
been expanded from 45,000 establish
ments to more than 285,000 establish
ments. This increase was accomplished by
lowering the minimum employment
size of the establishments to be sur
veyed to a uniform 50 employees for
all industries, and by adding the pri
vate service industries not previously
studied.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
29
Conference Papers
These expansions were carried out
by surveying segments of the goodsproducing and service-producing sectors
in alternate years. This paper describes
the resulting changes in the sample de
sign, the estimation process used to
combine the separate segments into all
economy data, and the effects that the
expansion had on survey estimates.
*
*
*
*
Jaqueline A. Richter,
“Integrating the
Employment Cost Index and the
Employee Benefits Survey.”
In response to a request from Congress
to improve statistics for white-collar
pay and benefits, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics will integrate the Employ
ment Cost Index ( e c i ) and the Em
ployee Benefits Survey ( e b s ) , with
common data collection beginning in
1990. The quarterly e c i focuses on the
employer cost of wages and benefits.
The e b s focuses on benefit plan provi
sions, with data for half its scope being
published each year.
Integrating the two surveys will
permit associations between many
benefits and costs, elimination of du
plicate data collection, and publication
of benefit provisions in small establish
ments. Suitable common definitions,
scopes, and data collection methods
are needed. The reliability of the esti
mates should be maintained or im
proved.
The e c i program will continue to
collect all data during an initiation per
sonal visit to a sample establishment
and then update these data quarterly for
4 years. The e b s will remain an annual
survey, with all data collected during
the initiation and updated in the appro
priate survey year.
The e b s will adopt the e c i method of
selecting a sample of occupations
within an establishment, with probabil
ity proportionate to occupational em
ployment. Simulations on data from
the 1986 e b s indicate that the quality of
the published data will not change.
A successful small firms test col
lected e b s data from establishments
with fewer than 50 employees. An
other test collected e b s data by tele
phone, with no difficulty, for the 75
percent of e c i establishments which
will already be in the sample at the
30
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
time joint collection starts. The results
of a data collection test currently in the
field will help determine the most effi
cient way to collect the joint data.
*
*
*
*
Charles C. Mason, Mary Lynn Sch
midt, Robin Duncan, and Nathan
Amble, “A Comparative Anal
ysis of Price Indexes Produced by
National Governments for Older
Consumers.”
The United States currently does not
produce a price index based solely on
the price and expenditure experience of
older citizens. However, the United
Kingdom, Canada, and Japan do pro
duce such indexes. The Bureau of
Labor Statistics has calculated an ex
perimental price index for older con
sumers for the period January 1983
through March 1988. In this paper, the
results of the experimental index are
presented and compared to the price
index behavior reported by those coun
tries producing similar statistics.
*
*
*
*
Judith Hellerstein, “The Effects of
Sample Size on Variances of the
Producer Price Index.”
This paper describes a simulation study
which was conducted to examine the
variances of the Producer Price Index
( p p i ) . In the study, price data from six
lowest-level publication cells in six dif
ferent industries were examined. Price
indexes and variances for each cell
were computed for 13 months of data
(January 1987-January 1988). Sub
sampling using various subsample sizes
was conducted for each cell. The vari
ances computed from the indexes of
each subsample size were then com
pared to the variance computed for the
full ppi sample of each cell.
The results in each cell indicated
that, in all cases, sample size reduc
tions led to increased variance levels.
This is consistent with statistical the
ory. However, there was no constant
proportionality between sample sizes
and variances. The existing relation
ships are examined and discussed in
detail as they related to differences in
the underlying economic characteris
tics of each cell.
The results of this study illustrate the
importance of sample size to ppi data.
The number of price quotes used in the
estimation of price change in an industry
can have dramatic effects on variances
and the quality of published indexes. Fu
ture research will focus on developing
industry-specific models for predicting
variances based on the inherent eco
nomic characteristics of each particular
industry. These models will then be used
to better distribute ppi sample allocations
across industries and to predict the
gradual deterioration of samples to en
sure that timely resampling takes place.
*
*
*
*
Chester H. Ponikowski and Sue A.
Meily, “ Controlling Response Er
ror in an Establishment Survey.”
Response error may be defined as the
difference between the value obtained
from the survey and the desired or true
value.1 Frequently, business establish
ment records used for responding are
not consistent with specific survey
definitions. At the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, a record check technique has
been used in the Current Employment
Statistics ( c e s ) survey to identify and
control response errors resulting from
records used for responding.
The c e s record check instrument
compares the survey definitions to the
establishment’s recordkeeping system.
The objectives are to identify defini
tional differences in recordkeeping and
to request that deviations be corrected
in future reports. To prolong correct
reporting, a form is sent to the respond
ent listing adjustments to the reported
data which the respondent agreed to
make. The interviews are conducted by
telephone using Computer Assisted
Telephone Interviewing ( c a t i ) , which
is less expensive than personal visits.
The results obtained from the c e s
c a t i record check survey provide in
formation on the percentage of reports
needing adjustments and the percent
age of reporters agreeing to adjust.2 Er
rors which occur most frequently
within each data item are identified.
These percentages provide an indirect
measure of the response error in the
survey. Overall, a substantial percent
age of respondents require some ad-
justment to their reported employment;
two-thirds of these respondents agreed
to make the adjustments. However,
many of the errors occur infrequently
or affect only a small percentage of the
employees at an establishment. Also,
there is a canceling effect at the aggre
gate because some of the error sources
produce a positive bias, while others
result in a negative bias. A direct meas
ure of response error computed from a
previously conducted record check sur
vey indicates that reporting errors
would result in less than one percent
bias in total employment estim ates.3
The quality of the Current Employ
ment Statistics survey is reflected in its
total survey error: annual revisions to
total employment estimates have aver
aged 0.2 percent over the last five
years. The continued focus on con
trolling response error will further
reduce the magnitude of annual revi
sions. Beginning in 1990, a modified
record check survey will be conducted
for all c e s reporters with 250 or more
employees.
1 M. H. Hansen, W. N. Hurwitz, and M. A.
Bershad, “Measurement Errors in Censuses and
Surveys,” Bulletin of International Statistical In
stitute, no. 38, 1961, pp. 359-74.
2 Chester H. Ponikowski and Sue A. Meily,
“Controlling Response Error in an Establishment
Survey,” ASA Proceedings of the Section on Sur
vey Research Methods, forthcoming.
3 G. S. Werking, A. R. Tupek, and R. L.
Clayton, “cati and Touchtone Self-Response
Applications for Establishment Surveys,” Pro
ceedings of the U.S. Bureau of the Census An
nual Research Conference.
*
*
*
*
Lawrence Boehm, “Reliability of Proxy
Response in the Current Popula
tion Survey.”
Self-other differences in knowledge
and cognitive processing are of practi
cal importance to survey researchers
because a number of national surveys
allow “any responsible” adult member
of a household to respond for all the
members of that household. Such
proxy responses are permitted in the
Current Population Survey ( c p s ) and
account for approximately 50 percent
of the interviews conducted. The c p s is
a monthly survey of approximately
59,000 households in the United
States, from which monthly estimates
of labor force status (employed, unem
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ployed, and not in the labor force) and
related characteristics are developed.
A laboratory study evaluating the re
liability of proxy responses in the c p s
has been conducted. The study in
volved interviewing two members of
household using the c p s questionnaire.
Subjects answered questions for them
selves (self response) and for the other
family member (proxy response). Thus, it
was possible to compare the proxy re
sponse to the self response for each
person. Respondents also provided a
confidence rating of their ability to re
port acceptable answers and a rating of
their knowledge of the other person’s
job or job search.
Responses from self and proxy re
spondents were generally correlated,
yet proxy respondents disagreed with
self respondents on 30 percent of the
c p s questions. Further, it was not un
common for proxy respondents to pro
vide data that resulted in different labor
force classifications, especially when
responding for those not in the labor
force and the unemployed. Although
the study found that proxies’ knowl
edge and confidence ratings were
generally high, the ratings were unre
lated to performance, suggesting that
screening proxy respondents on the
basis of self-rated confidence or
knowledge would not be useful.
*
*
*
*
Maria P. Fracasso, “Reliability and
Validity of Response Categories
for Open-Ended Questions in the
Current Population Survey.”
For open-ended questions, the inter
viewer is the interpreter of informa
tion, and hence frequently must
classify respondent answers to fit into
response categories. However, when
interpretation takes place, errors may
occur. The labor force section of the
Current Population Survey ( c p s ) con
tains several open-ended questions.
The present research has focused on
the reliability and validity of the
current categories as well as c p s inter
viewers’ interpretation and categoriza
tion of respondents’ answers to these
open-ended questions. Based on the
apparent underuse of some present c p s
category choices and overuse of the
“other” category, an alternative set of
category choices was designed. Actual
c p s interviewers and expert c p s ana
lysts used a sorting technique to clas
sify responses into either the present or
an alternative set of category choices
for each of the open-ended questions.
This paper discusses the usefulness
of alternative versus present category
choices in facilitating use of all category
choices and eliminating the potential
for misclassification of individual re
sponses. In addition, it examines the
consistency with which interviewers
and experts categorize responses for
the open-ended c p s questions.
*
*
*
*
Mark Palmisano, “Respondent Un
derstanding of Key Labor Force
Concepts Used in the CPS.”
This paper discusses research identify
ing conceptual and wording difficulties
in the Current Population Survey ( c p s )
questionnaire which may influence the
classification of an individual’s labor
force status. The purpose of this re
search has been to determine whether
the same operational definitions of
the phrases and words used in the c p s
labor force classification questions are
shared among individual respondents
and between respondents and the sur
vey designers. Focus groups have been
conducted using paraphrasing and
probing techniques to evaluate respon
dents’ interpretation of c p s questions.
Analyses of the results have verified
the presence of at least one particularly
ambiguous concept— “on layoff.” Al
ternative questions have been devel
oped based on results obtained thus
far. A method to evaluate the relative
data quality of these alternative ques
tions also has been developed, and fur
ther laboratory tests and field tests are
planned to confirm these results.
*
*
*
*
Leslie A. Miller, “Improving Com
prehension and Recall in the
Consumer Expenditure Interview
Survey.”
Survey research often involves written
questionnaires administered by per
sonal interviews. Literature documents
the care that must be taken in designing
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
31
Conference Papers
such interviews to minimize reporting
errors. Two concerns of the present
work on the Health and Medical Ex
penditure section of the Consumer
Expenditure Interview Survey were
possible lack of comprehension and the
inability to stimulate recall when
lengthy recall periods are involved.
The research reported here extends
the recent integration of survey metho
dology and cognitive psychology by
attempting to increase comprehension
and recall abilities through the use of
investigative laboratory techniques.
Preliminary methodology included: fo
cus groups, probing, paraphrasing,
protocol analysis, and questionnaire
revisions. Matching of written versus
oral responses was used to obtain re
sponse reliability. Current feasibility
field testing of the revised forms will
indicate whether the procedures used
to increase comprehension and to im
prove recall will be replicated and ex
panded to the rest of the questionnaire.
*
*
*
*
Arthur L. Hughes and Flora K. Peitzmeier, “Weighting and Imputa
tion Methods for Nonresponse in
CPS Gross Flows Estimation.”
Estimates of month-to-month gross
flows in the Current Population Survey
( c p s ) can provide insight into the
movements underlying the month-tomonth net change in the cross-sectional
(stock) data. However, the usefulness
of gross flows data is substantially
weakened because of significant errors
such as bias due to nonresponse. Also,
gross flows data are inconsistent with
the monthly stock data. The current
gross flows nonresponse adjustment
methodology consists of revising the
tabulated data so that agreement with
the current month’s independently
derived male and female population
estimates is achieved.
In this paper, the current non
response adjustment procedure and
several alternative procedures were
evaluated based on a simulation study.
Gross flows data are based on c p s
sample persons who match in two con
secutive months. In the simulation
study, some of the respondents were
designated as partial nonrespondents
32
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
(individuals with a response in one
month but not the other), and each ad
justment procedure was applied.
Results of the simulation study indi
cate that multiple imputation is supe
rior to the other procedures, producing
a nonresponse bias that is one-fourth as
large as the bias from the current
method. The multiple imputation pro
cedure “fills in” the nonrespondents’
missing values with two or more val
ues from a pool of respondents. A
weighting procedure was second best,
producing a nonresponse bias that is
one-half as large as the bias from the
current method. In this method, the
sampling weights of the respondents
were adjusted to account for partial
nonrespondents within specified labor
force and age categories.
*
*
*
*
Richard Clayton and Louis Harrell,
“Developing a Cost Model for
Alternative Collection Methods:
Mail, CATI, and TDE.”
The publication of high quality eco
nomic data begins with collecting ac
curate data on a timely basis from our
respondents. As a part of ongoing im
provement efforts, research began at
b l s in 1984 to investigate methods of
improving the timeliness and accuracy
of collection in the Current Employ
ment Statistics ( c e s ) program. The c e s
is a monthly survey of establishments
providing some of the earliest informa
tion on the health of the U.S. econ
omy. There is a growing array of data
collection methods available through
advances in technology, each with
differing characteristics affecting the
cost and error structure of survey
operations.
Computer Assisted Telephone Inter
viewing ( c a t i ) involves interviewers
calling respondents and directly enter
ing answers in a computer which in
stantly edits the data and provides
other improvements. Thus, c a t i com
bines the power of inexpensive com
puters and the strengths of direct
telephone contact with respondents to
collect accurate data in a short, con
trollable timeframe. This powerful tool
dramatically improves the collection of
time-critical information, but may be
more expensive than the mail question
naire process currently used. Under
Touchtone Data Entry ( t d e ) , the re
spondent calls a computer which uses
digitized phrases to ask the survey
questions. The respondent enters data
and answers other questions by push
ing the appropriate pads of a touchtone
telephone, t d e maintains the high re
sponse rates available under c a t i , and
eliminates many of the costly, labor
intensive activities of both mail data
collection and c a t i .
In providing a generalized approach
to evaluating alternatives, this paper
discusses each method, its costs and
performance measures, as well as other
implications of employing automated
collection methods. Current cost and
performance measures are combined
into a single overall yardstick for com
parison, and future costs are estimated
to provide additional insight to survey
planners considering alternative col
lection methods.
*
*
*
*
Clyde Tucker, “Characteristics of
Commercial Residential Tele
phone Lists and Dual Frame
Designs.”
A particularly attractive type of
telephone survey design combines
information from a sample drawn
from a directory of residential numbers
and a supplementary sample selected
through Random Digit Dialing ( r d d ).
Use of the list can not only save time
and money but also increase response
rates if the list sample residences are
contacted by mail prior to the survey.
The r d d supplement is needed to pro
vide coverage for numbers not on the
list. Unfortunately, the effectiveness of
this design depends upon characteris
tics of the list which often are not avail
able to the user.
This paper addresses the problem by
examining the characteristics of lists
for four sample areas in the Bureau of
Labor Statistics Current Point-ofPurchase Survey. These sample areas
vary by size and geography. Among
the issues considered are the cost of the
lists, how they are constructed, their
accuracy, and their usefulness for im
proving survey efficiency.
Carol Spease, “Comparison of Vari
ance Estimators for Producer Price
Index D ata.”
In an effort to measure sample variabil
ity in the Producer Price Index ( p p i ) ,
the B ureau o f L ab o r S ta tistic s is
evaluating variance estimators based
on a sample replication method. The
method, called balanced half-sample
replication, is commonly used in sur
veys that have a complex sample de
sign and in which a ratio, such as the
p p i , is estimated.
In this paper, a simulation study is
described. Three estimators of vari
ance of the long-term index using the
balanced half-sam ple m ethod were
computed and compared to determine
which form of the estimator is most
appropriate for ppi data. The compari
son of the estimators was based on
three criteria that measure the accuracy
of the estimators.
In the study, 19 months of actual
price data from three manufacturing in
dustries were used. Original sample
units (companies) formed finite popu
lations for sampling in the simulation
study. Repeated samples were drawn
from the populations, and indexes,
variances, and comparison statistics
were computed and averaged over all
samples drawn.
As a result of the study, one of the
estimators was found to perform best
on the ppi data. The observed variance
estimates of the best variance estimator
were closer to the true population vari
ance than the o th er tw o varian ce
estimators, which at times severely un
derestimated the true population vari
ance. Also, when confidence intervals
were formed around each of the sample
indexes based on the size of the cor
responding sample variances, the in
tervals formed using the best variance
estimator contained the true population
index more often than the intervals
formed using the other two variance
estimators.
The estimator found in the study
to be the best estimator of the vari
ance of the long-term index will be
incorporated into the Bureau’s index
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
estim ation system and variances of
the estim ates will be com puted on
a routine basis. Eventually, the index
variances w ill be published along
with the index values.
*
*
*
*
Richard Tiller, “A Kalman Filter Ap
proach to Labor Force Estimation
Using Survey D ata.”
A new approach to estimating State
wide employment and unemployment
in 39 States and the District of Colum
bia was introduced by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics in 1989. It is based on
a time series model that treats the ob
served monthly labor force estimate
from the Current Population Survey
( c p s ) as the sum of an unobserved true
labor force value plus an error arising
from sampling only a portion of the
population. The true values are rep
resen ted by a dynam ic regression
equation that uses data on the insured
unemployed and payroll employment
as explanatory variables with tim e
varying coefficients.
Each month, as new c p s sample data
become available, an algorithm known
as the Kalman filter is used to estimate
the true labor force by combining cur
rent and past sample data with data on
the explanatory variables. The purpose
of this approach is to reduce the effect
of high variance in the Statewide c p s
estimates due to small sample sizes.
*
*
*
*
John T. McCracken, “The Interna
tional System of Labor Statis
tics.”
The International Labor Organization
( i l o ) is a co n stituent body o f the
U nited N ations w ith 154 m em ber
countries. Its mission is to establish
and improve standards of work and liv
ing conditions throughout the world.
Labor statistics are essential to this
mission. The il o publishes data on the
economically active population of na
tions, including estimates of the em
ployed and unemployed, hours of work
and wages, costs, consumer pnce in
dexes, occupational injuries and dis
eases, strikes, and lockouts. M any
countries lack a com plete range of
labor statistics, while others seek to
ov erco m e p ro b lem s o f p o o r data
quality.
To achieve universal availability
and quality of data, the il o develops
standards for labor statistics and as
sists developing nations in instituting
statistical systems through recommen
dations and technical aid. il o Confer
ences of Labor Statisticians develop
standard concepts, definitions, method
ology, and publication criteria to pro
mote high quality and to facilitate
international comparisons and analy
sis. The standard-setting decisions of
the il o take the form of Conventions or
of Recommendations. From a constitu
tional and legal standpoint, there is a
fundamental difference between the
two types of decisions. Conventions
are designed as obligation-creating in
struments. On the other hand, Recom
mendations are designed as guidance
providing instruments.
In 1985, the il o adopted Convention
160 concerning labor statistics. Ratify
ing countries will be obligated to pro
duce labor statistics in nine program
areas using internationally adopted
standards. The required statistics cover
the economically active, the employed
and unemployed, earnings and hours,
wages, labor costs, consumer prices,
household expenditures, occupational
injuries and diseases, and industrial
disputes. The Convention provides
guidance for concepts and definitions,
and for collecting, compiling, and pub
lishing data.
The U . S Senate is expected to ratify
this Convention in the late fall of 1989.
The Convention is an essential tool in
establishing a universal system of high
quality labor statistics. The b l s inter
national comparisons program meas
uring how the United States is faring in
relation to other countries w ill be
greatly enhanced by the adoption of
Convention 160 by the nations of the
world.
□
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
33
Convention
report
I • «ro • I
U
United Auto Workers
29th constitutional convention
Henry P. Guzda
Dem ocracy— econom ic, social, and
political— was the dominant theme of
the 29th constitutional convention of
the United Auto W orkers ( u a w ). It was
a gathering that could have been con
frontational and divisive, particularly
because of a well-organized and grow
ing dissident faction within the union.
Yet, when the proceedings ended, it
was clear that the philosophy of the
majority prevailed, while the rights
of the dissidents were honored and
their protests heard. In addition, the
delegates passed a host of resolutions
pledging to support trade unionism and
solidarity on a global scale, and to or
ganize foreign-owned auto production
facilities in the United States. The at
tendees also pondered the future of the
trade union movement, while remem
bering the struggles for economic and
social justice that have continued for
more than 50 years.
New directions or old?
Observers of auto industry labor rela
tions have noted the em ergence of
dissidence in the u a w over the past
decade. A group calling themselves the
“New Directions” movement and led
by Jerry Tucker, director of region 5,
argue that the union’s leaders have
coopted members’ rights by cooperat
ing with em ployers in jo in t labor-
Henry P. Guzda is an industrial relations special
ist with the Bureau o f Labor Management Rela
tions and Cooperative Programs, U .S. Depart
ment o f Labor.
34
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
f
i
E
management programs. They contend
that auto manufacturers have used joint
programs (for example, team concept
production and Japanese style manage
ment) to erode seniority provisions, re
duce wage rates, and jeopardize other
collective bargaining benefits by pit
ting local unions against each other
during contract negotiations and in plant
closing situations—a process they call
“ whipsawing.” New Directions mem
bers, paradoxically, want union leaders
to abandon labor-management coopera
tion and revert to the philosophy of
adversarial labor-management relations
prevalent in the postwar era of the
1950’s. New Directions candidates
have challenged incumbent leaders for
local and national offices, and have
even used the judicial process to win
some contested elections.
Proponents of New Directions and
the incumbent u a w leaders have de
bated the philosophy of the union.
Donald Douglas, president of local 594
in Pontiac, m i , claims “the whipsawing
is just tearing us [the u a w ] apart and
eroding our solidarity.” u a w president
Owen Bieber, however, contends that
“critics insult the intelligence of u a w
members by suggesting that participa
tion in joint programs will compromise
or contam inate the values of union
workers or subvert the union’s inde
pendence.” He further explained, “just
because we use the vehicle of joint ac
tivities to pursue some of our objec
tives, does not mean that we plan to
surrender any of the other tools and
resources that are available to help us
achieve our goals.”
Bieber took issue with charges that
the union’s executive leadership failed
to protect worker rights and challenge
antiunion onslaughts in a corporate
“age of greed.” He retorted that the
u a w authorized 817 strikes over the
past 3 years, and that 81,721 u a w
members marched on picket lines. He
reminded the delegates that at a time
when many workers have suffered eco
nom ic hardships, the u a w accom
plished several goals, including:
• Job bank programs benefiting nearly
40,000 members and their families.
• Winning Trade Adjustment Assist
ance for 677,000 members.
• Obtaining $200 million in Job Train
ing Partnership Act funds.
• Protection for more than 100,000
jobs through job security provisions
in pattern-bargaining contracts.
Speeches from invited guests also
reflected a commitment to new innova
tions in the workplace. California At
torney General John Van de Kamp
focused on the industrial patterns of
work at the New United Motors Manu
facturing plant in Fremont, c a , where
employee involvement has produced
high quality products. Maine Senator
G eorge M itchell spoke about new
workplace partnerships and New York
Governor Mario Cuomo echoed a sim
ilar theme.
Undaunted by such claim s, New
Direction’s leaders attempted to chal
lenge the incumbents through proce
dural means. But, on the convention’s
first day, they lost all appeals contest
ing the outcome of delegate elections.
On the second day, they called for
constitutional revision of the election
process so that all top union officials,
including 850 international representa
tives currently appointed by the incum
bent president, would be elected by the
rank-and-fiie. The dissidents argued
that direct elections would make lead
ers m ore resp o n siv e to m em b ers’
needs, while opponents claimed direct
elections w ould allow interference
from outside interests and encourage
expensive election campaigns. A showof-hands vote overwhelmingly upheld
the delegate system. Following that
loss, New Directions failed to generate
support for a constitutional amendment
prohibiting locals from bargaining
supplemental concessionary contracts.
Instead, the delegates upheld existing
constitutional language prohibiting
locals from bargaining substandard
contracts.
The inability of the dissident faction
to accomplish their goals was further
reflected in union elections. President
Bieber and his so-called “Bieber team”
won all national offices in uncontested
elections. This included William Casstevens (secretary-treasurer), Stephen
Yokich, Odessa Komer, Ernest Lofton,
Stan Marshall (vice presidents), and
Tony DeJesus (trustee). Don Douglas,
New Directions’ candidate for director
of the Detroit area— region 1-18, lost
by a wide margin in his race against
the administration-backed Bob Lent.
Jerry Tucker lost the directorship of
reg io n 5, w hich in clu d es sev eral
Southwestern States, to challenger Roy
Wyse. Tucker had ascended to the di
rector position by appealing the results
o f a 1986 election, and w inning a
Labor Department-administered elec
tion in 1987.
International directions
While the concept of internal democ
racy dominated the proceedings, it was
not the only item on the convention
agenda. Global econom ics, with all
the problems for organized labor (for
exam ple, substandard w age rates,
multinational corporate structures, and
antiunion governments), attracted con
siderable attention as well. Resolutions
commending the progress and political
victories of the Solidamosc union in
Poland and condemning the brutal re
pression of students and trade unionists
in China passed without dissent. Guest
speaker Antonia Hernandez, president
of the Mexican American Legal De
fense and Education Fund, addressed
the issue of Mexican labor migration to
the United States and its implications
for American trade unions. In a very
emotional address and equally moving
delegate ovation, Moses M ayekiso,
general secretary of the National Union
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
o f M etalw orkers o f South A frica,
the u a w convention agenda dating to
thanked the u a w for its efforts leading
the administration of Walter Reuther in
to his release after 901 days in jail for
the 1940’s. This convention featured
trade union activities. The u a w and
B enjam in H ooks, president of the
o th e r A m erican u n io n s, he sa id ,
n a a c p , Massachusetts Senator Edward
showed the apartheid regime in South
Kennedy, Joseph Lowery of the South
Africa that there is international soli
ern Christian Leadership Conference,
darity among unions in the free world.
and former Congresswoman Barbara
Other speakers also focused on the
Jordan. Hooks drew analogies to the
effects of international trade and the
1937 Flint sitdown strikers and Rosa
globalization of trade unionism. Msgr.
Parks sitting down to spark the 1955
George Higgins, chairman of the u a w
M ontgomery bus boycott. Kennedy
Public Review Board, commended the
exalted the u a w for its vanguard role in
union’s struggle for fair treatment of
the prom otion of health care, civil
workers in countries which trade with
rights, parental leave, and minimum
the United States, and urged U.S. offi
wage issues. Jordan reminisced about
cials to act against antiunion repression
the assistance she received from the
by developing nations. House Majority
union over the years in legislative
Leader Richard G ephardt and New
struggles for civil rights. The delegates
York G overnor M ario Cuomo each
unanim ously adopted a reso lu tio n
discussed fair trade and the demands of
calling for the elim ination of “dis
the new global economy, addressing
crimination, racism, and sexism” in
the issue of labor-management coopera
the United States.
tion to meet international challenges.
The convention also promoted the
Employment security
expansion of domestic trade unionism.
The delegates gave unanim ous ap
proval of resolutions to support the
Employment security has become a
United Mine Workers union in their
crucial negotiating point in auto worker
struggle against Pittston Coal Co. and
contracts and has spilled over to other
workers striking against Eastern Air
industries. The convention delegates
Lines. One resolution, calling for in
paid particular attention to resolutions
creased organizing activities by the u a w ,
dealing with plant closings and labor
cited the difficulties facing organizers
law reform that specifically addressed
despite recent successes at Mazda Mo
employment problems. After a demon
tors, Diam ond-Star (a joint venture of
stration against plant closings by dele
Chrysler and Mitsubishi), and Mack
gates from the u a w ’ s Independents,
Trucks. Bieber warned the delegates
Parts, and Suppliers division, a resolu
that representation elections may not
tion was passed w hich encourages
be successful on the first try, but the
legislative action to protect workers
union would eventually succeed.
against shutdowns and job losses; the
In reference to future organizing, the
resolution called for a 1-year advance
delegates passed a resolution support
notice before plant shutdowns and pub
ing the union’s report, A Strong Union
lic input into shutdow n decisions.
in a Changing W orld, which com
Guest speaker Tom Donahue, a f l - c io
ments on the changing workplace and
secretary-treasurer, noted that the u a w
u a w ’ s reactions to those phenomena.
need not be reminded of plant reloca
The report covers a variety of topics
tions and job security. He congratu
such as changes in jobs and workplace
lated the union for its organizing vic
design, changing industrial structures,
tory at Mack Trucks in South Carolina
political conditions, the union image,
following the closing of Mack facilities
communications, organizing, educa
in Pennsylvania and Maryland. Em
tion, training program s, and union
ployment security, he added, meant
empowerment.
w holesale revision o f the N ational
Labor Relations Act. The convention
agreed, and passed a resolution calling
Social justice
for legislative enactment of a series of
The promotion of civil rights and so
fundamental and procedural changes in
cial justice in society has been part of
labor law. The resolution contains lanMonthly Labor Review
October 1989
35
Convention Report
guage specifically calling for prohibi
tion of both lockouts and the hiring of
replacement workers during disputes.
T h e 29 th U n it e d A u t o W o r k e r s
convention was held June 18-23 in
Anaheim, c a . Appropriately, it ended
by marking a milestone in the careers
of two u a w officials who served as cat
alysts o f confrontation and change.
The union honored retiring vice presi
dents Marc Stepp and Donald Ephlin.
Stepp was a key figure in the imple
mentation of modem operating agree
ments at Chrysler Corp. which call for
many new workplace innovations (for
example, team concept, pay for knowl
edge). Ephlin, head of the union’s
General M otors Departm ent, avidly
supported the prom otion o f labormanagement cooperation and helped
create many of the jointly adminis
tered p ro gram s (for in sta n c e , the
g m - u a w Paid Educational Leave Pro
gram). Ephlin’s vice presidency will
be filled by Stephen Yokich, and Stan
Marshall will succeed Stepp at Chrys
ler. Ernest Lofton will replace Yokich
at Ford.
And, while preparing for the future,
the convention delegates also made
sure the past would not be forgotten.
Delegates unanimously adopted a
resolution authorizing the union to pro
vide $3.4 million to construct the
Leonard Woodcock Annex of the
Reuther archives housed at Wayne State
University.
□
Juggling jobs and school
While public and research interest in student work is relatively recent,
student work itself is prevalent and has been for at least three decades.
Growth in student work appears to have halted in recent years, and
percentages of students employed are still below the peaks reached in
the late 1970’s. The percentages of female students working have risen
more rapidly than the percentages of males working. The employment
ratio has also risen for black female students. However, we should be
concerned that the trend in working among black male high-school
students has been declining steadily since 1964 (when information by
race/ethnicity was first collected), particularly if this trend reflects a
decline in opportunity for those who want part-time work or suggests
an increase in alienation from the workplace. While the percent of
black and Hispanic students working is low, there is little difference
overall in the rate of student work in families with different levels of
parent education, which is one measure of socioeconomic level.
— Paul E. Barton
Earning and Learning: The Academic
Achievement o f High-School Juniors With Jobs
(Princeton, nj , Educational Testing Service,
1989), p. 13.
36
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Research
sum m aries
Disabling injuries
in longshore operations
Amy Lettman
In colonial times, bells summoned men
of varied trades to the hazardous task
of manually unloading ships along the
shore. Today, cargo handling on the
waterfront is quite mechanized, but the
risks of disabling injuries are still evi
dent, even for the experienced dockworkers who dominate these jobs. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics tracked the
incidence of injuries and illnesses
among longshore workers as part of its
1987 annual survey; it reported 10
cases in which worktime was lost for
every 100 full-time workers in water
transportation services, compared with
about 4 per 100 in the total private sec
tor. The severity of these disabling
longshore cases, moreover, is also evi
dent in the number of workdays lost: an
average of 41 days per case, double the
national average (18 days).1
The frequency and severity of in
juries involving longshore operations
prompted the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration to request a
special b l s study.2 In response, a longshoring study was designed that, un
like the b l s annual survey, focused on
the characteristics of workers and their
injuries as well as the factors surround
ing the incident, such as worksite con
ditions at the time of the accident and
use of personal protective equipment.
In addition to loading and unloading
ships, this study included cases at
shoreside operations of marine termi
nals and related areas where cargo is
Amy Lettman is an economist in the Division of
Safety and Health Statistics, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. Martin E. Personick, an economist in
the same division, contributed to the preparation
o f this summary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
handled and stored and where cargo han
dling and other equipment is maintained.
Four-fifths of the 582 cases included
in this study were placed in seven dis
tinct job categories. (See table 1.) The
“holdman,” who commonly works be
low the deck of a vessel where the
cargo is stowed, was numerically the
most important job title, accounting for
Table 1.
three-tenths of the total cases. “Driver”
(forklifts, tractors, and so forth) ac
counted for one-sixth, and “dockman”— who assists equipment operators
to hook on cargo, for example— made
up one-eighth of the injured. Other
injured workers were either classified
as checker, deckman, maintenance
mechanic, or warehouse worker, or
Injuries involving longshore operations, selected
characteristics, 1985-86
Characteristic
Percent
of total
cases
Job category at time of accident:
Clerk, checker .............................
Deckman ....................................
Dockman .....................................
Driver; forklift, tractor, and so forth
7
5
12
15
Holdman......................................
Maintenance, mechanic,
gearm an...................................
Warehouse or shedworker .........
Other ..........................................
29
7
6
19
Nature of injury:1
Cut, laceration, puncture.............
Bruise or contusion .....................
Muscle sprain or strain, torn
ligament ...................................
48
Hernia..........................................
Fracture ......................................
Object in eye(s) ...........................
Other ..........................................
1
18
4
9
19
28
Part of body affected:
Head, including ne ck...................
Upper extremities .......................
Lower extremities .......................
Multiple parts2 .............................
9
19
28
28
14
Activity at time of accident:
Handling cargo/equipment by
hand ........................................
Helping crane or winch operator to
load or unload cargo ...............
Driving yard tractor, lift truck, or
other mobile equipment............
Using hand tools .........................
31
19
10
3
Percent
of total
cases
Characteristic
Activity at time of
accident—Continued
Climbing or coming down ladder,
gangway, vehicle, and so forth .
Checking cargo ...........................
Fixing or repairing gear,
equipment, or container...........
Other ..........................................
6
15
Personal protective equipment
worn:1
Dust mask ...................................
Gloves ........................................
Hardhat ......................................
Reflective vest or jacket .............
3
59
77
3
Safety goggles.............................
Steel-toed safety boots or shoes .
Other ..........................................
Not wearing any safety g e a r........
5
61
4
9
9
6
Worksite conditions contributing
to the accident:1
Too n o is y ....................................
Poor weather conditions .............
Cluttered work a re a .....................
Slippery work surface .................
Uneven work surface...................
Equipment broke or did not work
properly....................................
Working in too small or tight an
area..........................................
Hard to see or bad lighting .........
Work area not properly
safeguarded.............................
Other worksite condition .............
N one............................................
2
6
8
17
19
16
13
9
5
8
29
1 Because more than one response is possible, the sum of the percentages exceeds 1 0 0 .
2 Applies when more than one major body part has been affected, such as an arm and a leg.
Note : Percentages are based on the total number of persons who answered the question.
M onthly L abor R eview
O ctober 1989
37
Research Summaries
were placed in the “other” category— a
being rushed and being unaware of
diverse group ranging from first-line
danger as accident-related factors.
supervisor to general laborer.
Most injured workers lacked recent
Youth and inexperience were not
safety training in longshore operations,
contributing factors to longshoring in
but few cited this omission as a con
juries: Three-fourths of those injured
tributing factor to their accident. Of
were 35 years or older, and four-fifths
those who had received training during
had been in their job category for at
the 3 years preceding their accident,
least 5 years. There were indications
the training commonly covered the op
that the age-experience profile for in
eration of mobile equipment and han
jured workers mirrored that for all
dling cargo. Training aside, a clear
longshoring workers. Automation and
majority of the injured workers be
foreign competition, for instance, have
lieved that safety rules were usually
greatly reduced the amount of labor
enforced.
needed to handle cargo, thus limiting
Almost four-fifths of the workers
the entry of new workers into the
felt that their accident could have been
industry.
avoided, citing a wide variety of pre
The study reported on how long
ventive actions, methods, and proce
shore injuries occurred (accident type
dures. These measures included having
and source of injury) and described the
more people, more time, and better
injury (nature and part of body af
equipment to perform the task.
fected).3 Most commonly, injuries
were the result of being struck by or
A COMPREHENSIVE r e p o r t , Injuries
striking against crates, containers, and
Involving Longshore Operations, Bul
other cargo, or similar contact with
letin 2326, may be purchased ($1.50)
cargo-handling equipment. Falls and
from the Superintendent of Docu
overexertion (from lifting heavy ob
ments, Government Printing Office,
jects) were also characteristics of long
W ashington, d c 20402, or from the
shoring accidents. Resulting injuries
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Publication
usually were muscle sprains and strains
Sales Center, P.O. Box 2145, Chicago,
(especially to the back and lower ex
il 60690. The bulletin provides ad
tremities), serious cuts and bruises,
ditional information on the charac
and fractures.
teristics associated with longshoring
About four-fifths of these longshor
accidents.
□
ing cases resulted in lost worktime; not
surprisingly, the most serious injuries,
Footnotes
such as fractures and back sprains,
usually required several weeks away
1 Marine cargo handling accounts for a clear
from the physically demanding work
majority of the workers in water transportation
of the docks. One-eighth of all cases
services. The latter group includes substantial
resulted in hospitalization overnight;
numbers of workers doing miscellaneous serv
for these cases, hospital stays averaged
ices incidental to water transportation, such as
6 nights.
chartering commercial boats. See Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by
Besides recounting the characteris
Industry, 1987, Bulletin 2328 (Bureau o f Labor
tics of their cases, injured workers
Statistics, 1989).
indicated that they were, with few ex
2 The study covers cases processed under the
ceptions, wearing personal protective
Federal Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’
equipment at the time of their accident.
Compensation Act during October 1985 in the
Not surprisingly, though, hardhats,
New York Office o f Workers’ Compensation
Programs and during April 1986 for the follow
gloves, and safety footwear often did
ing other offices: Baltimore, Boston, Houston,
not prevent the types of impact injuries
Jacksonville, Long Beach, New Orleans, Nor
associated with longshoring opera
folk, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Seattle.
tions. Instead, workers felt that certain
Excluded were cases in which the employer was
engaged in drydock and ship repair activities,
worksite conditions or factors, rather
cases that were 120 days old or more, and those
than inadequate safety gear, contrib
that involved assaults or resulted in fatalities.
uted to their accidents. Most often, they
3 The injury characteristics used in this study—
cited slippery or uneven work surfaces,
type of accident, source of injury, nature o f in
faulty equipment, and confined space
jury, and part of the body affected— were classi
as problem conditions, and hurrying or
fied using the American National Standards
38
M onthly L abor R eview
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
O ctober 1989
Institute Z16.2 (1962) Method of Recording Ba
sic Facts Relating to the Nature and Occurrence
of Work Injuries, as modified by BLS.
Federal agencies seek
improvement in quality in
establishment surveys
Quality in Establishment Surveys is a
Federal report that examines the poten
tial sources of error in Government
surveys of business establishments.
Not intended as either a springboard
for defining standards or a means of
evaluating current practices, the intera
gency report aims to provide survey
practitioners with useful reference and
guidance in designing and refining es
tablishment surveys. Information for
the report was garnered from a ques
tionnaire concerning the survey design
practices for 55 Federal establishment
surveys from nine agencies.
Errors occur in surveys at two possi
ble points: in the sample design and
estimation (sampling error) and in the
survey methods and operations (non
sampling error). Errors of either vari
ety can be variable, that is, randomly
introduced and distributed, or in
stances of bias, that is, nonrandom,
systematic error. Control of both of
these is important to establishing the
quality of the survey.
Sampling error results from (1) the
sample design itself and (2) the method
of estimating the probability of occur
rence in the entire population of a feature
characterizing the sample population.
The sample design may contribute to er
rors in a number of different ways.
First, because establishment surveys
are usually dominated by a select few
units, differential sampling by estab
lishment size is performed, often in
volving certainty selection for the larger
units. In some cases, very small units
may be given zero probability of selec
tion and may thereby be altogether
excluded from the target population.
Second, conflicting design objectives
may result in tradeoffs having to be
made wherein reliability may be com
promised, or at least not improved. For
example, when detailed publication
cells are required, the size of the sam-
pie must be increased, often without a
concomitant increase in reliability in
the aggregate cells. Finally, the re
quirement for revision and updating of
the survey design may result in several
kinds of error. Issues that must be
faced during survey redesign involve
the continuity, availability, and current
analyzability of the data. In respect of
the first of these, very often the useful
ness of the data depends on longitudi
nal features as much as on current
measurement.
Errors resulting from sampling esti
mation have two sources: the actual
estimator used and the approach to the
estimation of variance used. As regards
the former, there are four commonly
used estimators, each with its own pe
culiar advantages and disadvantages.
The direct expansion estimator, given
by
n
y
=
2
w <Y‘ ’
i =T
where Y is the estimated total, Wt is the
weight applied to sample unit i , and Yi
is the reported value of sample unit i,
has the advantage of being opera
tionally simple, unbiased, and linear in
its variance estimator. Its chief disad
vantage is that is it not very efficient.
The ratio estimator,
n
2
i=1
2
WY
11 X ,
WtXi
/= 1
where X and Y are at least moderately
positively correlated features of the
population of interest and X is the com
plete enumeration total of the X t , is an
improvement over the direct expansion
estimator because of the existing corre
lation, but is biased due to its nonlinear
form and confronts the researcher with
the problem of deciding whether to use
ratio estimates formed separately for
each sampling stratum and then summed
across all strata or formed for all the
strata combined. The link-relative esti
m ator, which is similar to the ratio
estimator except that only reported val
ues of X; and Yt are used and weights
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
may not be included, is considerably
biased in practice because the units re
porting are rarely representative of the
universe in question. The unweighted
estimator is severely biased, even as
regards trends, but is sometimes em
ployed because it is simple and inex
pensive to use.
Estimating variance usually results
in the computation of the mean squared
error of an estimator. The mean
squared error in turn is composed of
two parts: the sampling variance and
(the square of) a bias component. Al
though the latter may be the dominant
part of the total mean squared error, it
is very difficult and expensive to meas
ure, so that in practice it is rarely re
ported on in establishment surveys. By
contrast, sampling variance is often
readily estimable from the data, al
though for one reason or another, by
the time they go to print, only one-half
of Federal establishment surveys actu
ally include this statistic. The simplest
approach to the calculation of sampling
variance is to base the variance on the
sampling design. When the design is
linear, no problems ensue and the cal
culation is straightforward. However,
more often than not, the estimator used
is nonlinear, and then it is impossible
to use a design-based variance. More
complex calculations of variance bring
higher level difficulties with them, and
in the end it may be that the variance is
not computed at all because of the cost
of the computer time involved, or, if it
is computed, it may not be published,
again because of cost considerations.
Finally, aside from monetary cost, the
considerable delay needed to compute
variances may be seen as too great a
price to pay in time.
The second major category of estab
lishment survey errors is the nonsam
pling errors that occur in the survey
methods and operations. Generally
speaking, there are five kinds of non
sampling error: specification error,
coverage error, response error, nonre
sponse error, and processing error.
Specification error is the error that
arises during the planning stage of a
survey because data specification is ei
ther inadequate or inconsistent. It can
result from poorly worded question
naires or instructions, or it may be a
reflection of the difficulty of measur
ing abstract concepts. Specification
error is measured by performing record
checks, cognitive or validation studies,
pretests of questionnaires, and com
parisons with independent estimates. It
is controlled by requirement reviews,
industry consultations, expert reviews,
and, again, cognitive studies and ques
tionnaire pretests.
Coverage error is the error that re
sults from either (1) failure to include
in the survey all of the units belonging
to the defined population (undercover
age) or (2) failure to exclude from the
survey some units that do not really
belong in it (overcoverage). Coverage
error may occur either because of
defective sampling frames, that is,
frames that are definitionally or intrin
sically deficient in meeting the require
ments of producing a representative,
unbiased sample, or because of defec
tive processes associated with an other
wise adequate sampling frame, for
example, selecting samples that do not
correctly represent the frame. Cover
age error is measured by comparing
current survey data with the results of
earlier surveys or with data from exter
nal sources. Often such measures as
the rate of unclassified units, rate of
misclassified units, and rate of duplica
tion are used. Control is achieved by
identifying the areas where coverage
error is most serious and assigning re
sources to reduce the error there. Among
the techniques used are those which
reduce miscoding, duplication, and
omission of data, and those which get
at the root of lack of timeliness and
rectify it.
Response error may be thought of as
the differences between the data values
actually collected in the survey and the
correct values. Response errors result
from the failure of (1) the respondent
to report the correct value, (2) the in
terviewer to record the value correctly,
or (3) the survey instrument to meas
ure the value correctly. Sometimes
response error occurs because of subtle
factors connected with the peculiarities
of the situation, as, for example, when
the interviewer inadvertently cues the
respondent to a given answer. Meas
urement of response error requires a (us
ually complicated) mathematical model
and is aimed at (1) estimating the pre
cision of survey results, (2) identifyMonthly Labor Review
October 1989
39
Research Summaries
or unweighted), item response rates,
and rates of refusal. Only the direct
measures give accurate estimates of
b ia s, alth o u g h the in d irect m eas
ures give an indication of how serious
the bias may be. Nonresponse error is
controlled by making a strong effort to
produce successful first contacts and
by initiating vigorous followup efforts
in the event of initial failure. Periodic
benchmark surveys and quality control
procedures also aid in controlling non
response error.
Processing error is the error in the
survey results that arises from faulty
implementation of otherwise correct
survey methods. Categorized gener
ally, such tasks as preparation of the
questionnaire, data collection, clerical
handling of the forms, and processing
of the data by clerks, analysts, or com
puters all may result in processing er
rors. Processing error is m easured
mostly indirectly, through the keeping
of performance statistics; only rarely
does the opportunity for direct meas
urem ent of processing error arise,
ing specific survey problems, (3) iden
tifying im provem ents to the survey
methodology, or (4) monitoring the
e ffe c ts o f ch a n g e s in th e su rv ey
methodology. Response error is con
trolled most commonly by identifying
those areas and classes of respondents
of a survey which are more susceptible
to unreliability in reporting than others
and then changing the survey method
ology to deal with them.
Nonresponse error is the result of a
failure to collect complete information
on all units in the selected sample.
N onresponse produces error in two
ways: (1) The decrease in sample size
or am ount o f inform ation collected
produces larger standard errors, and
(2) to the extent that nonrespondents
differ from respondents in a selected
sample, bias is introduced into the sur
vey. Nonresponse error is measured
either directly, through collecting data
from nonrespondents by means of a
followup survey or from a source ex
ternal to the survey, or indirectly, by
calculating unit response rates (weighted
usually because processing error is in
separably mixed in with response, nonre
sponse, and coverage errors. Processing
error is controlled most commonly by
instituting standard quality control pro
cedures like acceptance sampling and
process-control techniques. Concomi
tantly, many surveys are designed to
allow later processing stages to correct
errors made in earlier stages.
Quality in Establishment Surveys is
prepared by the Subcom m ittee on
Measurement of Quality in Establish
ment Surveys of the Federal Commit
tee on Statistical Methodology, under
the joint sponsorship of the Statistical
Policy Office, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, and Office of
Management and Budget. Thomas J.
Plewes, Associate Commissioner, b l s
Office of Employment and Unemploy
ment Statistics, chaired the subcom
mittee. The report, priced at $21.95, is
available from n t is Document Sales,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
v a 22161.
□
Shiskin prize awarded to Frank de Leeuw
Frank de Leeuw, an economist with the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
received the 10th annual Julius Shiskin Award for Economic Statistics,
de Leeuw was honored for “his wide range of contributions to economic
statistics that were characterized by the efficient use of statistical tech
niques and a practical analytical focus.” The award was presented at the
Washington Statistical Society’s annual dinner in June, along with an
honorarium of $500. The prize is named in honor of the ninth U.S.
Commissioner of Labor Statistics.
The Shiskin award program is designed to honor unusually original and
important contributions in the development of economic statistics or in
interpreting the economy. Participating organizations in the program are
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Eco
nomic Analysis, Office of Management and Budget, National Bureau of
Economic Research, National Association of Business Economists, and
the Washington Statistical Society. The late Commissioner Shiskin was
associated with all of these organizations during his long career.
40
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Major
agreem ents
expiring
next month
This list of selected collective bargain
ing agreements expiring in November
is based on information collected by
the Bureau’s Office of Compensation
and Working Conditions. The list in
cludes agreements covering 1,000
workers or more. Private industry is
arranged in order of Standard Indus
trial Classification. Labor organiza
tions listed are affiliated with the
a f l - c i o , except where noted as inde
pendent (Ind.).
Private industry
Construction
Construction Industry Council of West
chester and Hudson Valleys, New York;
Laborers, 1,250 workers
Food products
Hershey Foods, Inc., Hershey, pa; Bak
ery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers,
2,800 workers
Tropicana Products Inc., Bradenton, fl;
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Teamsters, 1,400 workers
Chemicals and allied products
Colgate-Palmolive Co., Interstate; Vari
ous unions, 2,000 workers
Fabricated metal products
Olin Corp., East Alton, il; Machinists,
2,800 workers
Utilities
General Telephone Co. of Pennsylvania,
Pennsylvania; Electrical Workers (ibew),
1,700 workers
Louisville Gas and Electric Co., Louis
ville, ky; Electrical Workers (IBEW),
2,600 workers
Textile Maintenance Institute of Chicagoland (laundry and dry cleaning), Chicago,
il; Textile Processors (Local 46 of the
Teamsters), 3,900 workers
RCA Service C o., Interstate; Electrical
Workers (ibew), 21,000 workers
Health Services
Honolulu hospitals, Hawaii; Hawaii Nurses
Association (Ind.), 1,800 workers
Kaiser Permanente, Northern California;
Service Employees, 9,000 workers
League of Voluntary Hospitals, New York,
NY; Service Employees, 4,500 workers
Public activity
Transportation
Retail trade
Century Food Stores, Milwaukee, wi; Food
and Commercial Workers, 1,000 workers
Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago, il;
Amalgamated Transit Union, 12,000
workers
Services
Safety
Garage and parking lot agreement, San
Francisco, CA; Teamsters, 1,000 workers
Cook County corrections officers, Cook
County, il; T eam sters, 1,700 w orkers □
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
41
Developm ents
in industrial
relations
Magma, Asarco copper contracts
In the copper industry, new agree
ments between Magma Copper and
Asarco, Inc. and Steelworkers and
other unions provided for guaranteed
compensation gains for employees. In
contrast, the 1986 accords among the
parties called for compensation cuts
forced by worldwide depression in the
industry. Since then, the industry has
rebounded and employees at Magma
have received quarterly payments
under a formula in the 1986 contract
linked to the price of copper. The dis
tributions were calculated at 60 cents
for each hour worked in the third quar
ter of 1987, and at $5.50 (the maxi
mum under the formula), $5.25, and
$5 in the following quarters. A possi
ble payment for the fourth quarter of
1988 is in dispute.
Under the 1989 contract at Magma,
each 5-cent-a-pound rise in the price of
copper (up to $1.70) results in wage
increases ranging from 3 or 4 cents an
hour for lower rated employees to 9 or
10 cents for top-rated employees.
Under the 1986 contract, each 1-cent
rise in the price of copper from 71-90
cents resulted in a 10-cent pay in
crease, and each 1-cent rise from 91
cents to $1 resulted in a 25-cent pay
increase.
The 3-year Magma contract, cover
ing 3,100 employees in Arizona, also
provides for average hourly wage in
creases of $1 immediately and 25 cents
in the second and third years and in
creases in pensions.
At Asarco, Inc., the 1,600 workers
“Developments in Industrial Relations” is pre
pared by George Ruben of the Division of De
velopments in Labor-Management Relations,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is largely based
on information from secondary sources. Laurie
B. Lande of the Office of Publications prepared
several of the items.
42 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
will receive wage increases totaling
$1.85 an hour, improvements in health
insurance totaling $1.85 an hour, and
improved health insurance and safety
provisions. The 1986 contract pro
vided for an initial wage cut averaging
about $3.50 an hour, of which $1.75
was later restored. At Magma, the
1986 cut was about $2.82, with no pro
vision for restoration.
The 1986 contract at Kennecott
Copper C o., the largest domestic cop
per producer, expires on June 30,
1990. It cut wages by about $3.22 an
hour and benefits by about $2.18, with
no provision for restoration.
Transit accords
In M inneapolis-St. Paul, m n , 2,000
employees accepted a 3-year contract
proposal, averting a scheduled work
stoppage that would have affected
250,000 commuters. The contract be
tween the Metropolitan Transit Com
mission and the Amalgamated Transit
Union provides for wage increases of
3.25 percent retroactive to May 1, 3.5
percent in May 1990, and 3.75 percent
in May 1991. After the final increase,
top-scale drivers’ earnings will be
$32,573 a year.
In a change in the pay progression
schedule, new employees will be paid
at 55 percent of the top rate during their
first 12 months on the job, 60 percent
during the next 12 months, and will
move to the top rate after a total of 36
months. Previously, new workers were
paid at 60 percent during the first 6
months, 70 percent for the next 12
months, and the top rate after 42
months.
Other terms included establishment
of 5 minutes of paid time for drivers to
prepare to take over bus routes on the
street, and 6 weeks of paid vacation
after 29 years of service (previously,
30 years).
In Boston, m a , 4,400 transit work
ers represented by Local 589 of the
Amalgamated Transit Union were
covered by a 3-year arbitration award.
The award resulted from a provision of
the Massachusetts Bay Transportation
Authority’s controlling statute calling
for arbitration to end bargaining im
passes. The award provides for wage
increases of 6.6 percent retroactive to
April 1, 1988, 6.3 percent retroactive
to April 1, 1989, and 6 percent on
April 1, 1990. Drivers at the top rate,
who had been paid $14.63 an hour,
will receive $17.57 after the 1990
wage increase.
Benefit changes include a 1-day cut
in the 2-day waiting period for sick
leave, 1 day of paid personal leave
each year for employees using less
than half their sick leave, a $240
annual payment to employees who
choose to be covered by their spouses
health insurance, and rewards to em
ployees equal to 25 percent of savings
resulting from their reporting of health
care billing errors.
There also was a revamping of bene
fits for the 1,100 part-time workers
covered by the award. Part-timers
working at least 24 hours a week now
receive 12 annual paid holidays (previ
ously 6), sick leave and personal leave,
$6,000 life insurance, and individual
health insurance fully paid by the au
thority, which will pay a proportionate
amount for employees working fewer
than 24 hours a week.
Similar provisions were negotiated
by 14 other unions in contracts for
2,800 employees.
AFSCME-Harvard University
After winning a May 1988 representa
tion election in an organizing drive that
traces back to 1972, the State, County
and Municipal Employees in June
1989 negotiated an initial contract for
3,500 office, laboratory, and library
employees of Harvard University.
According to the union, wages will
increase an average of 32 percent over
the 3-year term, a result of general in
creases, merit increases, and length-ofservice increases.
Other provisions include:
• Improved family care benefits, such
as a $40,000 a year scholarship
fund, a new child care center, 8
weeks time off at 70 percent of
salary for mothers after giving birth
and 1 week at full salary for fathers
and adoptive parents. (Eighty per
cent of the employees in the unit are
women.)
• Union-management problem-solv
ing and health and safety committees
in each area of the university.
• Stronger affirmative action require
ments.
• A joint committee to consider long
term needs.
• Improvements in pensions, includ
ing uncoupling the formula from
Social Security benefits and provid
ing cost-of-living adjustments for
retirees.
• An increase in the university’s fi
nancing of health insurance, to an
average of about 85 percent of pre
mium costs.
Representing the university in the
talks was former Secretary of Labor
and Harvard professor emeritus John
T. Dunlop, who fostered a joint com
mittee to determine the items to be cov
ered by the agreement.
On the union side, afl- cio president
Lane Kirkland and other federation of
ficials joined with State, County and
Municipal Employees in the organiz
ing campaign leading to the representa
tion election.
Public sector agreements
More than 25,000 employees of vari
ous agencies in the State of Oregon
were covered by new contracts that
incorporated the results of a 1987 leg
islated mandate to eliminate inequities
in the pay classification system. O f the
17,000 workers in the largest bargain
ing unit, 85 percent will receive pay
increases on April 1, 1990, a result of
the reclassification study. Most of the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
employees will receive at least a 5percent increase, and they also will
benefit from moving into pay grades
with higher maximum levels. Pay rates
for 7 percent of the employees will be
reduced on the same date, but instead
of receiving an actual cut in pay, these
employees will be limited to cost-ofliving lump-sum payments in each of
the four succeeding years. Also, for a
3-year period, they will be given pref
erential promotion rights.
The 2-year accord, negotiated by
the Oregon Public Employees Union
(Local 503 of the Service Employees)
also provides for a 3-percent pay raise
effective immediately and a 4.5-percent increase effective January 1,
1991.
A major issue in the talks was the
rising cost of health insurance. The
final terms call for the State to increase
its financing of benefits for full-time
employees by 17 percent on November
1, 1989, to an average of $238 a month
per worker and to an average of $261 a
month a year later. Employees will
now have the option to shift into in
surance plans having premium costs
fully met by the State obligation. Other
changes include a cut in health benefits
for part-time employees and termina
tion of dental benefits.
Also in Oregon, the State, County
and Municipal Employees broke with a
tradition of 2-year agreements by
agreeing to a 3-year contract for 5,700
employees involved in penal and medi
cal activities. Union officials said the
longer contract time will enable them
to focus more attention on specific
matters, such as job safety and work
scheduling.
In another deviation from past prac
tice, the contract calls for a July 1,
1991, wage increase equal to the aver
age of increases for workers in 20 local
government units in Oregon and Wash
ington and State workers in Washing
ton, California, Nevada, and Montana.
The increase is subject to approval by
the State legislature.
Set wage increases are 3 percent
effective immediately and 4.5 percent
effective January 1, 1991. Under the
legislated pay appraisal, 80 percent of
the employees will also receive aver
age increases of about 4.75 percent in
July 1990.
According to the union, the State
agreed to increase its financing of
health insurance by 16 percent in the
first year, to an average of $234 per
worker per month, and to $225 in the
second year. In the final year, the State
will finance whatever amount is neces
sary to maintain existing benefits.
Health care cost containment was
a major issue in negotiations between
the State of New Hampshire and the
State Employees Association for 9,000
workers. An independent factfinder
had earlier recommended that any pos
sible rise in the State’s financing of
health insurance in excess of 20 per
cent during the second contract year be
assumed by employees. Instead, the
2-year contract calls for reopening bar
gaining on the issue if a rise exceeds
20 percent.
The contract, succeeding one that
expired on June 30, did not provide for
an immediate pay increase. Instead,
employees will receive 5-percent in
creases on December 28, 1989, and
October 5, 1990.
The State of New Jersey settled with
two unions for 19,000 employees; the
Communications Workers refused to
accept similar terms for its 40,000
workers, arguing that the wage in
creases were inadequate. The union
also contended that the State had, in
recent years, followed a strategy of
first settling with the smaller unions to
set a pattern of less costly settlements
with all of the unions. Under State law,
the bargaining stalemate was moved
into a factfinding stage.
The two unions that settled were the
State, County and Municipal Employ
ees, representing 10,000 employees at
18 hospitals and rehabilitation centers,
and the International Federation of
Professional and Technical Engineers,
representing 9,000 mechanics, main
tenance and security personnel, and
inspectors.
The 3-year agreements were effec
tive July 1, 1989. They provided for
similar terms, including a 4-percent
wage increase on January 13, 1990, a
4.5-percent increase in October 1990,
and a 5.5-percent increase in July
1991. These increases are in addition
to existing contract provisions calling
for annual increases of 3.6 percent to 5
percent (varying by performance) until
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
43
Developments in Industrial Relations
employees attain 10 years of service.
Prior to the settlements, reported
average annual pay was $15,000 for
employees represented by the State,
County and Municipal Employees,
$21,000 for those represented by the
Professional and Technical Engineers,
and $25,000 for those represented by
the Communications Workers.
The two settlements raised the $460
annual clothing allowance to $480 in
July 1990 and to $500 in July 1991,
and provided for a $200 payment in
December 1991 to employees who
worked the second and third shifts dur
ing the preceding 12 months.
In Pennsylvania, an arbitration panel
awarded 3,600 State corrections of
ficers and 400 psychiatric security
aides six wage increases totaling about
16 percent over the 3-year contract
period. According to a State govern
ment official, the increases, com
bined with annual length-of-service
increases, will bring average annual
pay to $28,911, from $22,672. The ac
cord also eliminated the lower pay rate
range that applied to the security aides.
In the final contract year, the range
will be $19,299 to $36,888 for all
employees.
The parties adopted a “combined”
leave plan, giving employees a set
number of days— varying by senior
ity— each year, to be used for vaca
tions, personal days off, or illness up to
5 days’ duration. Up to 45 days of the
leave can be carried over from year to
year. Previously, the three types of
time off accrued separately, and per
sonal days could not be carried over.
Illnesses lasting longer than 5 days will
be covered by separate long-term
leave, and employees with at least 20
years of service will be partly compen
sated at retirement for unused “com
bined” and long-term leave.
In New Jersey, the Turnpike Au
thority proposed that new employees
begin paying part of health insurance
premium costs. The final settlement
44 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
with the Federation of Professional and
property. The law allocates up to
Technical Engineers did not include
$400,000 from the fund beginning
the two-tier approach, but the parties
with the 1990 fiscal year to provide
did agree to reopen negotiations after
renovations of State buildings for day
January 1991 if the authority’s health
care centers for the next two fiscal
insurance costs exceed $9.5 million
years. The money will first be used to
during the preceding 18 months.
start a pilot program for workers at
The 3-year accord calls for wage
agencies in Austin, the State’s capital.
increases of 6 percent effective im
The program is expected to be operat
mediately and 5 percent in July of
ing smoothly within a year, leading to
1990 and 1991. After the final in
adoption of programs in other cities
crease, hourly wage ranges will
with large numbers of State workers.
include $9.91-$16.75 for toll collec
A child care development board,
tors and $10.67—$18.53 for mainte
consisting of representatives from the
nance workers. Annual salaries will
offices of State administrators, will
range from $17,473-$32,208 for
manage the program. The board will
office and clerical employees and
set the standards for child care services
from $20,739—$44,935 for technical
and select a licensed child care
employees.
provider who will be responsible for all
The State of Rhode Island and 26
aspects of operating the facility.
locals of the State, County and Munic
ipal Employees negotiated a 3-year
Bereavement leave extended
contract calling for an immediate 4.4percent wage increase, a 4.4-percent
Bereavement privileges for New York
increase on July 1, 1990, and a
City municipal employees were ex
1-percent increase on January 1, 1991.
tended to cover the death of a domestic
Other terms include 5-cent-an-hour in
partner regardless of marital status or
creases in night shift differentials in the
sexual preference, under executive
second and third years and a require
order of Mayor Edward Koch. The
ment that employees receive second
order applies to heterosexual, homo
opinions prior to 15 categories of
sexual, and disabled couples 18 years
surgery.
and older. The new policy does not
The accord covers 7,700 workers in
change the 4 days of bereavement
numerous occupations in a number of
leave to which most city employees
State agencies.
are entitled following the death of a
spouse, parent, sibling, child, or any
relative living in the same household.
Onsite day care initiated in Texas
To be granted leave, the domestic
State-owned buildings in Texas will be
partners have to be registered as such
housing day care facilities for the chil
with the city’s personnel department in
dren of State employees as part of a bill
accordance with established proce
signed by Governor Bill Clements.
dures, which will also include guide
The bill mandates the building of on
lines for terminating the partnership.
site or nearby day care facilities at all
The partners are required to have lived
State buildings. In addition, designers
together for at least 1 year at the time
of new State buildings must consider
of registration. They will be barred
inclusion of a day care facility.
from registering if either member cur
The program will be financed by the
rently belongs to another domestic
Texas Capital Trust Fund, which col
partnership or to one that was formally
lects money for capital improvements
ended less than 1 year before the new
from the sale of State-owned land and
registration.
i—i
Book
reviews
Duality of modern demography
Population in an Interacting World.
Edited by William Alonso. Cam
bridge, m a , Harvard University
Press, 1987. 260 pp., bibliogra
phy.
The emergence of two sharply con
trasting, demographic “worlds” clearly
ranks among the most far-reaching
events of our times. In the industrial
ized world, births exceed deaths by a
declining, and soon-to-vanish, margin.
In the less-developed world, the popu
lation “explosion” is still only incom
pletely controlled, and the immense
demographic momentum generated by
a youthful age structure virtually guar
antees that large increases in popula
tion size will persist far into the next
century. This timely collection of es
says examines the tensions created by
these divergent paths. Reflecting cur
rent issues of public policy, the focus is
on migration from the Third World to
the industrialized market economies.
The first four essays supply histori
cal and philosophical background.
William McNeil contributes a highly
compressed, but clear and consistently
interesting, account of population
movements in the premodem era. The
ethnically homogeneous nation, he
reminds us, is a relatively modem
phenomenon.
Aristide Zolberg summarizes the
little-known story of the inflows—
both voluntary and enforced— of for
eign labor into the Western nations,
from the inception of plantation slav
ery to the present century. A portion of
his title, “Wanted But Not Welcome
. . . ,” epitomizes his view of that
process.
Hedley Bull’s essay examines the
divergent perspectives on population
policy that often divide the Third
World from the West, for example, the
long-debated question of whether sus
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tained economic development must
precede successful control of fertility.
The editor’s own contribution ex
plores the troublesome concept of na
tional identity. In his view, citizen
ship— a de jure concept— is replacing
identity based on race, language, and
religion.
The second section of the book is
focused on the causes and conse
quences of international migration.
Juergen Donges’ closely reasoned
essay examines the cross-national
movements of labor from the perspec
tive of neoclassical economic theory.
His conclusion: increased migration to
the industrialized countries is no
panacea for Third World problems;
conversely, halting such immigration
cannot cure chronic unemployment in
developed countries. What is needed,
he argues, is the liberalization of trade
and investment policies, which will ex
pand employment in developing coun
tries by opening up markets for their
exports and supplying capital for their
industries. It is hard to argue with his
prescription, other than to note that
progress in this direction has been slow
and uncertain.
Hans-Joachim Hoffman-Nowotny ad
dresses the complex problem of cul
tural and political friction between
Third World immigrants and their
central and northern European hosts.
The refugee problem— a continuing
tragedy on the international scene— is
the subject of Francis Sutton’s essay.
Unfortunately, his careful analysis
yields little hope that the humane
policies that he advocates will be
implemented.
In a particularly informative essay,
Myron Weiner assesses the economic
benefits to the Third World from ex
porting labor to the industrialized na
tions. Surveying a wide range of
empirical studies, he finds substantial
benefits to the sending countries, and
firm grounds for rejecting the contrary
view. In this reviewer’s opinion, the
collection suffers from the absence of
an equally informed assessment of the
economic effects of labor migration on
the receiving countries of the West.
Another disappointment, to this re
viewer, is Orlando Patterson’s treat
ment of migration into the United
States from Central America and the
Caribbean. Patterson’s approach is
derived from the Neo-Marxist para
digm of an exploiting, capitalist “center”
and an exploited, underdeveloped “pe
riphery.” He draws on a narrow range
of sources to support his view that
migration to the United States benefits
only this country, while harming the
sending countries. His essay is marred,
moreover, by a strong anti-American
tone.
These criticisms aside, the book is
well-written, among its other virtues.
Most notably, it utilizes the perspec
tives of several disciplines to make a
wide range of specialized literature
readily accessible to the general
reader.
— C. R. Winegarden
Professor of Economics
University of Toledo
Publications received
Agriculture, natural resources
Barde, Jean-Philippe, “The Economic Ap
proach to the Environment,” The
OECD Observer, June-July 1989, pp.
12-15.
Fulton, Murray, Ken Rosaasen, Andrew
Schmitz, Canadian Agricultural Pol
icy and Prairie Agriculture, Ottawa,
Economic Council of Canada, 1989,
119 pp. Available from Canadian
Government Publishing Center, Sup
ply and Services Canada.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
45
Book Reviews
Economic, social statistics
Blank, Rebecca M ., “Disaggregating the
Effect of the Business Cycle on the
Distribution of Income,” Economica,
May 1989, pp. 141-63.
Harmon, Lenore W .,
“Longitudinal
Changes in Women’s Career Aspira
tions: Developmental or Historical,”
Journal o f Vocational Behavior, Au
gust 1989, pp. 4 6-6 3 .
Lichtenberg, Frank R. and Donald Siegel,
The Effects o f Leveraged Buyouts on
Productivity and Related Aspects of
Firm Behavior. Cambridge, MA, Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research,
Inc., 1989, 53 pp. (Working Paper Se
ries, 3022.) $2, paper.
Morrison, Catherine J., Markups in U.S.
and Japanese Manufacturing: A Short
Run Econometric Analysis. Cam
bridge, ma , National Bureau o f Eco
nomic Research, Inc., 1988, 36 pp.
(Working Paper Series, 2799.) $2,
paper.
Sorensen, Elaine, “Measuring the Pay Dis
parity Between Typically Female Oc
cupations and Other Jobs: A Bivariate
Selectivity Approach,” Industrial and
Labor Relations Review, July 1989
pp. 624-39.
U .S. Department of Commerce, Census
Catalog & Guide, 1989. Washington,
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bu
reau of the Census, 1989, 412 pp.
(Stock No. 0 0 3 -0 2 4 -0 7 0 0 9 -0 .) $21,
prepaid, U.S. Superintendent o f Doc
uments, Washington 20402.
Industrial relations
Addison, John T., “The Controversy Over
Advance Notice Legislation in the
United States,” British Journal o f In
dustrial Relations, July 1989 pp
235-63.
Attacking Corruption in Union-Manage
ment Relations: “Introduction,” by
James Jacobs and Thomas D.
Thacher, II; “The Waterfront Com
mission of the Port o f New York: A
History and Appraisal,” by Peter B.
Levy; “Controlling Corruption in the
Construction Industry: The Quebec
Approach,” by Jean Sexton; “Govern
ment Regulation of Union-Manage
ment Corruption: The Casino Industry
Experience in New Jersey,” by Bar
bara A. Lee and James Chelius; and
“The Persistence of Organized Crime
in New York City Construction: An
Economic Perspective,” by Casey Ichniowski and Anne Preston, Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, July
46 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
1989, pp. 501-65.
Baer, Walter E ., Collective Bargaining:
Custom and Practice. Jefferson, nc ,
McFarland & Co. Inc., Publishers,
1989, 148 pp. $24.95 ($26.95, post
paid).
Clark, Paul F., “Organizing the Organiz
ers: Professional Staff Unionism in
the American Labor Movement,” In
dustrial and Labor Relations Review,
July 1989, pp. 584-99.
Disney, Richard and Howard Gospel, “The
Seniority Model of Trade Union Be
haviour: A (Partial) Defense,” British
Journal o f Industrial Relations, July
1989, pp. 179-95.
Freeman, Richard B. and Norris M. Klein
er, Employer Behavior in the Face o f
Union Organizing Drives. Cam
bridge, ma, National Bureau of Eco
nomic Research, Inc., 1988, 30 pp.,
bibliography. (Working Paper Series,
2805.) $2, paper.
Greenblatt, Marcia, “Union Officials and
the Labor Bill of Rights,” Fordham
Law Review, March 1989, pp. 6 0 1 16.
Huang, Wei-Chiao, ed., Organized Labor
at the Crossroads. Kalamazoo, ML,
W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employ
ment Research, 1989, 162 pp. $16.95;
cloth; $9.95, paper.
Mitchell, Daniel J. B. and Jane Wildhom,
eds., Can California Be Competive
and Caring? Los Angeles, University
o f California, Institute of Industrial
Relations, 1989, 389 pp. $17, paper.
Professionals and Organizations: Who’s In
Charge? “Introduction,” by Pamela S.
Tolbert; “Physicians Work,” by Alice
A. Oberfield and Pamela S. Tolbert;
“The Changing Legal Profession,” by
Roger C. Cramton; “Engineering: A
Profession in the Making,” by Pamela
Strausser; “Under the Gun: The
Teaching Profession in an Age of Re
form,” by Samuel B. Bacharach; and
“Professional Employees, Collective
Bargaining, and the Law,” by David
M. Rabban, h r Report, Spring 1989
pp. 6 -3 3 .
dence from the 1980s,” International
Monetary Fund, Staff Papers, March
1989, pp. 31-62.
Dooley, Michael P ., J. Saul Lizondo, and
Donald J. Mathieson, “The Currency
Composition of Foreign Exchange Re
serves,” International Monetary Fund,
Staff Papers, June 1989, pp. 3 8 5 434.
Genberg, Hans and Alexander K. Swoboda, “Policy and Current Account
Determination Under Floating Ex
change Rates,” International Mone
tary Fund, Staff Papers, March 1989,
pp. 1-30.
Giavazzi, Francesco and Alberto Giovannini, “Monetary Policy Interactions
Under Managed Exchange Rates,”
Economica, May 1989, pp. 199-213.
Lizondo, J. Saul and Peter J. Montiel,
“Contractionary Devaluation in De
veloping Countries: An Analytical
Overview,” International Monetary
Fund, Staff Papers, March 1989, pp.
182-227.
Ontani, Ichiro and Delano Villanueva,
“Theoretical Aspects of Growth in
Developing Countries,” International
Monetary Fund, Staff Papers, June
1989, pp. 307-42.
Labor and economic history
Gabin, Nancy, “Women and the United
Auto Workers in the 1940’s and
1950’s,” Labor’s Heritage, January
1989, pp. 5 6 -67.
Hogler, Raymond L., “Labor History and
Critical Labor Law: An Interdisci
plinary Approach to Workers’ Con
trol,” Labor History, Spring 1989, pp
165-92.
Holt, Wythe, “The New American Labor
Law History,” Labor History, Spring
1989, pp. 275-93.
Kaufman, Stuart B. and Peter J. Albert,
eds., The Samuel Gompers Papers,
Vol 3: Unrest and Depression, 189194. Chicago, University of Illinois
Press, 1989, 764 pp.
“West Europe,” Current History, Novem
ber 1988, pp. 353-94.
International economics
Labor force
Bhandari, Jagdeep S ., “Trade Reform
Under Partial Currency Convertibility:
Some Suggestive Results,” Interna
tional Monetary Fund, Staff Papers,
June 1989, pp. 494-513.
Barker, Paul, “From Unemployed to Selfemployed,” The OECD Observer,
June-July 1989, pp. 5 -7 .
Corker, Robert, Owen Evans, and Lloyd
Kenward, “Tax Policy and Business
Investment in the United States: Evi
Gibbons, Robert and Lawrence Katz, Lay
offs and Lemons. Cambridge, ma, Na
tional Bureau of Economic Research,
Inc., 1989, 41 pp. (Working Paper Se
ries, 2968.) $2, paper.
□
Current
labor
statistics
Notes on Current Labor Statistics
mmm
.......................
48
Comparative indicators
1. Labor market indicators...............................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation,
prices, and productivity ...........................................................
3. Alternative measures o f wage and compensation changes .
58
59
59
Labor force data
4. Employment status of the total population,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
5. Employment status of the civilian population,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
6. Selected employment indicators, data seasonally adjusted .
7. Selected unemployment indicators,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
8. Unemployment rates by sex and age,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
9. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
10.
11.
12.
13.
Duration o f unemployment, data seasonally adjusted .........
Unemployment rates o f civilian workers, by State ..............
Employment of workers, by State ...........................................
Employment of workers, by industry,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
14. Average weekly hours, by industry,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
15. Average hourly earnings, by industry,
data seasonally adjusted .......................
16. Average hourly earnings, by industry ....................................
17. Average weekly earnings, by industry ....................................
18. Diffusion indexes of employment change,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
19. Annual data: Employment status
o f the noninstitutional population ...........................................
20. Annual data: Employment levels, by industry ....................
21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings levels,
by industry ....................................................................................
61
62
63
64
64
64
65
65
66
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
77
78
78
78
31. Consumer Price Index: U .S. city average, by expenditure
category and commodity and service groups .......................
32. Consumer Price Index: U .S. city average and local data,
all items ........................................................................................
33. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items
and major g r o u p s.........................................................................
34. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of p rocessin g.....................
35. Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ................
36. Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major
industry groups ...........................................................................
37. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes,
by stage of p ro cessin g ................................................................
38. U .S. export price indexes, by Standard International
Trade C lassification ....................................................................
39. U .S. import price indexes, by Standard International
Trade C lassification ....................................................................
79
82
83
84
85
85
86
87
88
67
68
68
69
40. U .S. export price indexes by end-use category .....................
41. U .S. import price indexes by end-use ca teg o ry ....................
42. U .S. export price indexes, by Standard Industrial
Classification ...............................................................................
43. U .S. import price indexes, by Standard Industrial
Classification ...............................................................................
89
89
89
90
70
71
71
72
Productivity data
44. Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
and unit costs, data seasonally a d ju sted ...............................
45. Annual indexes of multifactor productivity ...........................
46. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation,
unit costs, and p r ic e s ..................................................................
47. Annual productivity indexes forselected industries...............
90
91
92
93
International comparisons data
73
74
75
76
26. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from
contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments,
situations covering 1,000 workers or more .........................
27. Average specified compensation and wage adjustments,
bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more . . .
28. Average effective wage adjustments, bargaining situations
covering 1,000 workers or m o r e .............................................
29. Specified compensation and wage adjustments,
State and local government bargaining situations
covering 1,000 workers or m o r e .............................................
30. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more ..............
Price data
60
Labor compensation
and collective bargaining data
22. Employment Cost Index, compensation,
by occupation and industry g ro u p ...........................................
23. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries,
by occupation and industry g ro u p ...........................................
24. Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry
workers, by occupation and industry g r o u p .........................
25. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers,
by bargaining status, region, and area size .........................
Labor compensation
and collective bargaining data— Continued
77
48. Unemployment rates in nine countries,
data seasonally adjusted ...........................................................
49. Annual data: Employment status of civilian working-age
population, 10 countries ...........................................................
50. Annual indexes of productivity and related measures,
12 countries ..................................................................................
95
96
97
Injury and illness data
51. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness
incidence rates .............................................................................
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
98
47
Current Labor Statistics
Notes on Current Labor Statistics
This section of the Review presents the
principal statistical series collected and cal
culated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
series on labor force; employment;
unemployment; collective bargaining set
tlements; consumer; producer; and interna
tional prices; productivity; international
comparisons; and injury and illness statis
tics. In the notes that follow; the data in
each group of tables are briefly described;
key definitions are given; notes on the data
are set forth; and sources o f additional in
formation are cited.
adjustments are made by dividing currentdollar 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
1977 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in
1977 dollars is $2 ($3/150 x 100 = $2).
The $2 (or any other resulting values) are
described as “real,” “constant,” or “1977”
dollars.
General notes
Data that supplement the tables in this sec
tion are published by the Bureau in a vari
ety o f sources. News releases provide the
latest statistical information published by
the Bureau; the major recurring releases are
published according to the schedule pre
ceding these general notes. More informa
tion about labor force, employment, and
unemployment data and the household and
establishment surveys underlying the data
are available in Employment and Earnings,
a monthly publication of the Bureau. More
data from the household survey are pub
lished in the data books— Revised Sea
The following notes apply to several tables
in this section:
Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly
and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect on the data of such factors as
climatic conditions, industry production
schedules, opening and closing o f schools,
holiday buying periods, and vacation prac
tices, which might prevent short-term eval
uation of the statistical series. Tables
containing data that have been adjusted are
identified as “seasonally adjusted.” (All
other data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis
of past experience. When new seasonal fac
tors are computed each year, revisions may
affect seasonally adjusted data for several
preceding years.
Seasonally adjusted data appear in tables
1 -3 , 4 -1 0 , 13-15, 17-18, 44, and 48.)
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in ta
bles 12 and 4 -1 0 were revised in the Febru
ary 1989 issue of the Review and reflect the
experience through 1988. Seasonally ad
justed establishment survey data shown in
tables 13-15 and 17-18 were revised in the
July 1989 Review and reflect the experience
through March 1989. A brief explanation
of the seasonal adjustment methodology
appears in “Notes on the data.”
Revisions in the productivity data in
table 44 are usually introduced in the Sep
tember issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes
and percent changes from month-to-month
and quarter-to-quarter are published for nu
merous Consumer and Producer Price In
dex series. However, seasonally adjusted
indexes are not published for the U .S. aver
age All Items cpi. Only seasonally adjusted
percent changes are available for this
series.
Adjustments
for
price
changes.
Some data— such as the “real” earnings
shown in table 15— are adjusted to elimi
nate the effect of changes in price. These
48
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
n.e.s.
=
not elsewhere specified.
p
=
preliminary. To increase the
timeliness of some series,
preliminary figures are is
sued based on representa
tive but incomplete returns.
r
=
revised. Generally, this re
vision reflects the avail
ability of later data but
may also reflect other
adjustments.
Additional information
sonally Adjusted Labor Force Statistics,
Bulletin 2306, and Labor Force Statistics
Derived From the Current Population Sur
vey, Bulletin 2307. More data from the es
tablishment survey appear in two data
books— Employment, Hours, and Earn
ings, United States, and Employment,
Hours, and Earnings, States and Areas,
and the supplements to these data books.
More detailed information on employee
compensation and collective bargaining
settlements is published in the monthly pe
riodical, Current Wage Developments.
More detailed data on consumer and pro
ducer prices are published in the monthly
periodicals, The C P I Detailed Report, and
Producer Price Indexes. Detailed data on
all of the series in this section are provided
in the Handbook o f Labor Statistics, which
is published biennally by the Bureau, bls
bulletins are issued covering productivity,
injury and illness, and other data in this
section. Finally, the Monthly Labor Review
carries analytical articles on annual and
longer term developments in labor force,
employment, and unemployment; em
ployee compensation and collective bar
gaining; prices; productivity; international
comparisons; and injury and illness data.
Symbols
n.e.c.
=
not elsewhere classified.
Com parative Indicators
(Tables 1-3)
Comparative indicators tables provide an
overview and comparison o f major bls
statistical series. Consequently, although
many o f the included series are available
monthly, all measures in these comparative
tables are presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include em
ployment measures from two major sur
veys and information on rates of change in
compensation provided by the Employment
Cost Index (eci) program. The labor force
participation rate, the employment-topopulation ratio, and unemployment rates
for major demographic groups based on the
Current Population (“household ”) Survey
are presented, while measures o f employ
ment and average weekly hours by major
industry sector are given using nonagricultural payroll data. The Employment Cost
Index (compensation), by major sector and
by bargaining status, is chosen from a vari
ety of bls compensation and wage mea
sures because it provides a comprehensive
measure o f employer costs for hiring labor,
not just outlays for wages, and it is not
affected by employment shifts among oc
cupations and industries.
Data on changes in compensation,
prices, and productivity are presented in
table 2. Measures of rates of change of
compensation and wages from the Employ
ment Cost Index program are provided for
all civilian nonfarm workers (excluding
Federal and household workers) and for all
private nonfarm workers. Measures of
changes in: consumer prices for all urban
consumers; producer prices by stage of
processing; and the overall export and im
port price indexes are given. Measures of
productivity (output per hour of all persons)
are provided for major sectors.
Alternative measures of wage and
compensation rates of change, which
reflect the overall trend in labor costs, are
summarized in table 3. Differences in
concepts and scope, related to the specific
purposes of the series, contribute to the
variation in changes among the individual
measures.
Notes on the data
Definitions of each series and notes on the
data are contained in later sections of these
notes describing each set of data. For de
tailed descriptions of each data series, see
B L S Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2285
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988), as well
as the additional bulletins, articles, and
other publications noted in the separate sec
tions of the Review's “Current Labor
Statistics Notes.” Users may also wish to
consult Major Programs, Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, Report 718 (Bureau o f Labor
Statistics, 1985).
Employment
and Unemployment Data
(Tables 1; 4 -2 1 )
Household survey data
Description of the series
employment data in this section are ob
tained from the Current Population Survey,
a program o f personal interviews con
ducted monthly by the Bureau o f the Cen
sus for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The
sample consists of about 55,800 house
holds selected to represent the U .S. popula
tion 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 include (1) all civil
ians 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 rea
sons. Members of the Armed Forces sta
tioned in the United States are also included
in the employed total. A person working at
more than one job is counted only in the job
at which he or she worked the greatest
number of hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did
not work during the survey week, but were
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
available for work except for temporary ill
ness 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 unem
ployed. The overall unemployment rate
represents the number unemployed as a
percent of the labor force, including the
resident Armed Forces. The civilian un
employment rate represents the number
unemployed as a percent o f the civilian
labor force.
The labor force consists of all employed
or unemployed civilians plus members of
the Armed Forces stationed in the United
States. Persons not in the labor force are
those not classified as employed or unem
ployed; this group includes persons who are
retired, those engaged in their own house
work, those not working while attending
school, those unable to work because of
long-term illness, those discouraged from
seeking work because of personal or jobmarket factors, and those who are voluntar
ily idle. The noninstitutional population
comprises all persons 16 years of age and
older who are not inmates of penal or men
tal institutions, sanitariums, or homes for
the aged, infirm, or needy, and members of
the Armed Forces stationed in the United
States. The labor force participation rate
is the proportion o f the noninstitutional
population that is in the labor force. The
employment-population ratio is total em
ployment (including the resident Armed
Forces) as a percent of the noninstitutional
population.
Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a
decennial census, adjustments are made in
the Current Population Survey figures to
correct for estimating errors during the intercensal years. These adjustments affect
the comparability of historical data. A de
scription of these adjustments and their ef
fect on the various data series appear in the
Explanatory Notes o f Employment and
Earnings.
Labor force data in tables 1 and 4 -1 0 are
seasonally adjusted based on the experi
ence through December 1988. Since Janu
ary 1980, national labor force data have
been seasonally adjusted with a procedure
called X -l 1 ARIMA which was developed
at Statistics Canada as an extension o f the
standard X - ll method previously used by
BLS. A detailed description of the proce
dure appears in the X - l l ARIMA Seasonal
Adjustment Method, by Estela Bee Dagum
(Statistics Canada, Catalogue N o. 1 2 564E, February 1980).
At the end of each calendar year, season
ally adjusted data for the previous 5 years
are revised, and projected seasonal adjust
ment factors are calculated for use during
the January-June period. In July, new
seasonal adjustment factors, which incor
porate the experience through June, are
produced for the July-December period but
no révisons are made in the historical data.
Additional sources of information
For detailed explanations of the data, see
Handbook o f M ethods , Bulletin 2285
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988). Histori
cal unadjusted data from 1948 to 1987 are
available in Labor Force Statistics Derived
from the Current Population Survey, Bul
letin 2307 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
1988). Historical seasonally adjusted data
appear in Labor Force Statistics Derived
BLS
from the Current Population Survey: A
Databook, Vol. II, Bulletin 2096 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1982), and Revised
Seasonally Adjusted Labor Force Statis
tics, 1978-87, Bulletin 2306 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1988).
A comprehensive discussion of the dif
ferences between household and establish
ment data on employment appears in Gloria
P. Green, “Comparing employment esti
mates from household and payroll sur
veys,” Monthly Labor Review, December
1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
Establishment survey data
Description of the series
EMPLOYMENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA
in this section are compiled from payroll
records reported monthly on a voluntary
basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and
its cooperating State agencies by more than
300,000 establishments representing all in
dustries except agriculture. In most indus
tries, the sampling probabilities are based
on the size of the establishment; most large
establishments are therefore in the sample.
(An establishment is not necessarily a firm;
it may be a branch plant, for example, or
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 dif
ference in employment figures between the
household and establishment surveys.
Definitions
An establishment is an economic unit
which produces goods or services (such as
a factory or store) at a single location and is
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
49
Current Labor Statistics
engaged in one type of economic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who
received pay (including holiday and sick
pay) for any part of the payroll period in
cluding the 12th of the month. Persons
holding more than one job (about 5 percent
of all persons in the labor force) are
counted in each establishment which re
ports them.
Production workers in manufacturing
include working supervisors and nonsupervisory workers closely associated with
production operations. Those workers
mentioned in tables 12-17 include produc
tion workers in manufacturing and mining;
construction workers in construction; and
nonsupervisory workers in the following
industries: transportation and public utili
ties; wholesale and retail trade; finance, in
surance, and real estate; and services.
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 exclud
ing irregular bonuses and other special pay
ments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted
to reflect the effects of changes in con
sumer prices. The deflator for this series is
derived from the Consumer Price Index for
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
(CPI-W).
Hours represent the average weekly
hours of production or nonsupervisory
workers for which pay was received, and
are different from standard or scheduled
hours. Overtime hours represent the por
tion of average weekly hours which was in
excess of regular hours and for which over
time premiums were paid.
The Diffusion Index represents the per
cent o f industries in which employment
was rising over the indicated period, plus
one-half of the industries with unchanged
employment; 50 percent indicates an equal
balance between industries with increasing
and decreasing employment. In line with
Bureau practice, data for the 1-, 3-, and
6-month spans are seasonally adjusted,
while those for the 12-month span are un
adjusted. Data are centered within the span.
The March 1989 Review introduced an ex
panded index on private nonagricultural
employment based on 349 industries, and a
new manufacturing index based on 141 in
dustries. These indexes are useful for mea
suring the dispersion of economic gains or
losses and are also economic indicators.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Detailed national data from the establish
ment survey are published monthly in the
BLS periodical, Employment and Earnings.
Earlier comparable unadjusted and season
ally adjusted data are published in Employ
1 9 0 9 -8 4 , Bulletin 1312-12 (Bureau of
Establishment survey data are annually ad
justed to comprehensive counts of employ
M onthly L abor R eview
Additional sources of information
ment, Hours, and Earnings, United States,
Notes on the data
50
ment (called “benchmarks”). The latest ad
justment, which incorporated March 1988
benchmarks, was made with the release of
May 1989 data, published in the July 1989
issue of the Review. Coincident with the
benchmark adjustments, seasonally ad
justed data were revised to reflect the expe
rience through March 1989. Unadjusted
data have been revised back to April 1987;
seasonally adjusted data back to January
1984. These revisions were published in
the Supplement to Employment and Earn
ings (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1989).
Unadjusted data from April 1988 forward
and seasonally adjusted data from January
1985 forward are subject to revision in fu
ture benchmarks.
The bls also uses the X - ll ARIMA
methodology to seasonally adjust establish
ment survey data. Beginning in June 1989,
projected seasonal adjustment factors are
calculated only for the first 6 months after
benchmarking, rather than for 12 months
(April-March) as was previously done. A
second set of projected factors, which in
corporate the experience though October,
will be produced for the subsequent period
and introduced with the publication of data
for October. The change makes the proce
dure used for the establishment survey data
more parallel to that used in adjusting the
household survey data. Revisions o f histor
ical data will continue to be made once a
year coincident with the benchmark revi
sions.
In the establishment survey, estimates
for the 2 most recent months are based on
incomplete returns and are published as
preliminary in the tables (13 to 18 in the
Review). When all returns have been re
ceived, the estimates are revised and pub
lished as “final” (prior to any benchmark
revisions) in the third month of their ap
pearance. Thus, December data are pub
lished as preliminary in January and Febru
ary and as final in March. For the same
reasons, quarterly establishment data (table
1) are preliminary for the first 2 months of
publication and final in the third month.
Thus, fourth-quarter data are published as
preliminary in January and February and
final in March.
O ctober 1989
Labor Statistics, 1985) and its annual sup
plement. For a detailed discussion of the
methodology of the survey, see b l s Hand-
book o f Methods, Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1988).
A comprehensive discussion of the dif
ferences between household and establish
ment data on employment appears in Gloria
P. Green, “Comparing employment esti
mates from household and payroll sur
veys, Monthly Labor Review, December
1969, pp. 9 -2 0 .
Unemployment data by State
Description of the series
Data presented in this section are obtained
from two major sources— the Current Pop
ulation Survey (cps) and the Local Area
Unemployment Statistics (laus) program,
which is conducted in cooperation with
State employment security agencies.
Monthly estimates of the labor force,
employment, and unemployment for States
and sub-State areas are a key indicator of
local economic conditions and form the ba
sis for determining the eligibility of an area
for benefits under Federal economic assis
tance programs such as the Job Training
Partnership Act and the Public Works and
Economic Development Act. Insofar as
possible, the concepts and definitions un
derlying these data are those used in the
national estimates obtained from the cps.
Notes on the data
Data refer to State of residence. Monthly
data for 11 States— California, Florida, Il
lin ois, M assachusetts, M ichigan, New
York, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and Texas— are obtained di
rectly from the cps, because the size of the
sample is large enough to meet bls stand
ards o f reliability. Data for the remaining
39 States and the District of Columbia are
derived using standardized procedures es
tablished by bls. Once a year, estimates for
the 11 States are revised to new population
controls. For the remaining States and the
District o f Columbia, data are benchmarked to annual average cps levels.
Additional sources of information
Information on the concepts, definitions,
and technical procedures used to develop
labor force data for States and sub-State
areas as well as additional data on subStates are provided in the monthly Bureau
of Labor Statistics periodical, Employment
and Earnings, and the annual report, Geo
graphic Profile o f Employment and Unem
ployment (Bureau of Labor Statistics). See
also B L S Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin
2285 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1988).
Compensation and Wage Data
(Tables 1-3; 22-30)
compensation and wage data are gath
ered by the Bureau from business establish
ments, State and local governments, labor
unions, collective bargaining agreements
on file with the Bureau, and secondary
sources.
ing status, region, and metrópolitan/nonmetropolitan area series, however, employ
ment data by industry and occupation are
not available from the census. Instead, the
1980 employment weights are reallocated
within these series each quarter based on
the current sample. Therefore, these in
dexes are not strictly comparable to those
for the aggregate, industry, and occupation
series.
Employment Cost Index
Definitions
Description of the series
Total compensation costs include wages,
The Employment Cost Index (eci) is a
quarterly measure of the rate o f change in
compensation per hour worked and in
cludes wages, salaries, and employer costs
of employee benefits. It uses a fixed market
basket of labor— similar in concept to the
Consumer Price Index’s fixed market bas
ket of goods and services— to measure
change over time in employer costs of em
ploying labor. The index is not seasonally
adjusted.
Statistical series on total compensation
costs, on wages and salaries, and on benefit
costs are available for private nonfarm
workers excluding proprietors, the selfemployed, and household workers. The
total compensation costs and wages and
salaries series are also available for State
and local government workers and for the
civilian nonfarm economy, which consists
of private industry and State and local gov
ernment workers combined. Federal work
ers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability
sample consists o f about 4,200 private non
farm establishments providing about
22,000 occupational observations and 800
State and local government establishments
providing 4,200 occupational observations
selected to represent total employment in
each sector. On average, each reporting
unit provides wage and compensation in
formation on five well-specified occupa
tions. Data are collected each quarter for
the pay period including the 12th day of
March, June, September, and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed
employment weights from the 1980 Census
of Population are used each quarter to cal
culate the civilian and private indexes and
the index for State and local governments.
(Prior to June 1986, the employment
weights are from the 1970 Census o f Popu
lation.) These fixed weights, also used to
derive all of the industry and occupation
series indexes, ensure that changes in these
indexes reflect only changes in compensa
tion, not employment shifts among indus
tries or occupations with different levels of
wages and compensation. For the bargain
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
salaries, and the employer’s costs for em
ployee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist of earnings
before payroll deductions, including pro
duction bonuses, incentive earnings, com
missions, and cost-of-living adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers
for paid leave, supplemental pay (including
nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retire
ment and savings plans, and legally
required benefits (such as Social Secur
ity, workers’ compensation, and unem
ployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and
employee benefits are such items as pay
ment-in-kind, free room and board, and
tips.
Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index for changes in
wages and salaries in the private nonfarm
economy was published beginning in 1975.
Changes in total compensation cost—
wages and salaries and benefits com
bined— were published beginning in 1980.
The series of changes in wages and salaries
and for total compensation in the State and
local government sector and in the civilian
nonfarm economy (excluding Federal em
ployees) were published beginning in
1981. Historical indexes (June 1981 = 100)
of the quarterly rates of change are pre
sented in the March issue o f the bls period
ical, Current Wage Developments.
Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion of the Em
ployment Cost Index, see the Handbook o f
Methods, Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988), Employment Cost Indexes
and Levels, 1975-88, Bulletin 2319 (Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1988), and the fol
lowing Monthly Labor Review articles:
“Estimation procedures for the Employ
ment Cost Index,” May 1982; and
“Introducing new weights for the Employ
ment Cost Index,” June 1985.
Data on the ECI are also available in BLS
quarterly press releases issued in the month
following the reference months of March,
June, September, and December; and from
the Handbook o f Labor Statistics, Bulletin
2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
Collective bargaining settlements
Description of the series
Collective bargaining settlements data
provide statistical measures of negotiated
adjustments (increases, decreases, and
freezes) in compensation (wage and benefit
costs) and wages alone, quarterly for pri
vate industry and semiannually for State
and local government. Compensation mea
sures cover all collective bargaining situa
tions involving 5,000 workers or more and
wage measures cover all situations involv
ing 1,000 workers or more. These data,
covering private nonagricultural industries
and State and local governments, are calcu
lated using information obtained from bar
gaining agreements on file with the Bureau,
parties to the agreements, and secondary
sources, such as newspaper accounts. The
data are not seasonally adjusted.
Settlement data are measured in terms of
future specified adjustments: those that will
occur within 12 months of the contract ef
fective date— first-year— and all adjust
ments that will occur over the life of the
contract expressed as an average annual
rate. Adjustments are worker weighted.
Both first-year and over-the-life measures
exclude wage changes that may occur
under cost-of-living clauses that are trig
gered by future movements in the Con
sumer Price Index.
Effective wage adjustments measure all
adjustments occurring in the reference pe
riod, regardless of the settlement date. In
cluded are changes from settlements
reached during the period, changes de
ferred from contracts negotiated in earlier
periods, and changes under cost-of-living
adjustment clauses. Each wage change is
worker weighted. The changes are prorated
over all workers under agreements during
the reference period yielding the average
adjustment.
Definitions
Wage rate changes are calculated by di
viding newly negotiated wages by the aver
age straight-time hourly wage rate plus
shift premium at the time the agreement is
reached. Compensation changes are calcu
lated by dividing the change in the value of
the newly negotiated wage and benefit
package by existing average hourly com
pensation, which includes the cost of previ
ously negotiated benefits, legally required
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
51
Current Labor Statistics
social insurance programs, and average
hourly earnings.
Compensation changes are calculated
by placing a value on the benefit portion of
the settlements at the time they are reached.
The cost estimates are based on the as
sumption that conditions existing at the
time of settlement (for example, methods
of financing pensions or composition of
labor force) will remain constant. The data,
therefore, are measures o f negotiated
changes and not of total changes of em
ployer cost.
Contract duration runs from the effec
tive date of the agreement to the expiration
date or first wage reopening date, if appli
cable. Average annual percent changes
over the contract term take account o f the
compounding of successive changes.
sional, technical, maintenance, toolroom,
powerplant, material movement, and
custodial occupations common to a wide
variety of industries in the areas (labor mar
kets) surveyed. Reports are issued through
out the year as the surveys are completed.
Summaries of the data and special analyses
also appear in the Review.
Definitions
The National Survey o f Professional,
Administrative, Technical, and Clerical
Pay provides detailed information annually
Number of stoppages:
The number of
strikes and lockouts involving 1,000 work
ers or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
Workers involved: The number of
workers directly involved in the stoppage.
Number of days idle: The aggregate
number of workdays lost by workers in
volved in the stoppages.
Days of idleness as a percent of esti
mated working time: Aggregate work
Notes on the data
Comparisons of major collective bargain
ing settlements for State and local govern
ment with those for private industry should
note differences in occupational mix,
bargaining practices, and settlement char
acteristics. Professional and white-collar
employees, for example, make up a much
larger proportion of the workers covered by
government than by private industry settle
ments. Lump-sum payments and cost-ofliving adjustments (cola) clauses, on the
other hand, are rare in government but
common in private industry settlements.
Also, State and local government bar
gaining frequently excludes items such as
pension benefits and holidays, that are pre
scribed by law, while these items are typi
cal bargaining issues in private industry.
Additional sources of information
For a more detailed discussion on the se
ries, see the b l s Handbook o f Methods,
Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1988). Comprehensive data are published
in press releases issued quarterly (in Janu
ary, April, July, and October) for private
industry, and semiannually (in February
and August) for State and local govern
ment. Historical data and additional de
tailed tabulations for the prior calendar year
appear in the April issue o f the bls period
ical, Current Wage Developments.
Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the num
ber and duration of major strikes or lock
outs (involving 1,000 workers or more)
occurring during the month (or year), the
number of workers involved, and the
52 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
amount of time lost because of stoppage.
Data are largely from newspaper ac
counts and cover only establishments di
rectly involved in a stoppage. They do not
measure the indirect or secondary effect of
stoppages on other establishments whose
employees are idle owing to material short
ages or lack of service.
October 1989
days lost as a percent of the aggregate
number of standard workdays in the period
multiplied by total employment in the
period.
Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one
terminated in 1981 that covered strikes in
volving six workers or more.
Additional sources of information
Data for each calendar year are reported in
a bls press release issued in the first quarter
o f the following year. Monthly and histori
cal data appear in the bls periodical, Cur
rent Wage Developments . Historical data
appear in the Handbook o f Labor Statistics,
Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985).
Other compensation data
Other bls data on pay and benefits, not
included in the Current Labor Statistics sec
tion o f the Monthly Labor Review, appear
in and consist o f the following:
Industry Wage Surveys provide data for
specific occupations selected to represent
an industry’s wage structure and the types
of activities performed by its workers. The
Bureau collects information on weekly
work schedules, shift operations and pay
differentials, paid holiday and vacation
practices, and information on incidence of
health, insurance, and retirement plans.
Reports are issued throughout the year as
the surveys are completed. Summaries of
the data and special analyses also appear in
the Monthly Labor Review.
Area Wage Surveys annually provide
data for selected office, clerical, profes
on salary levels and distributions for the
types of jobs mentioned in the survey’s title
in private employment. Although the defi
nitions o f the jobs surveyed reflect the du
ties and responsibilities in private industry,
they are designed to match specific pay
grades of Federal white-collar employees
under the General Schedule pay system.
Accordingly, this survey provides the le
gally required information for comparing
the pay of salaried employees in the Federal
civil service with pay in private industry.
(See Federal Pay Comparability Act of
1970, 5 U.S.C. 5305.) Data are published
in a bls news release issued in the summer
and in a bulletin each fall; summaries and
analytical articles also appear in the
Review.
Employee Benefits Survey provides na
tionwide information on the incidence and
characteristics of employee benefit plans in
medium and large establishments in the
United States, excluding Alaska and
Hawaii. Data are published in an annual
bls news release and bulletin, as well as in
special articles appearing in the Review.
Price Data
(Tables 2; 31-43)
Price data are gathered by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics from retail and primary
markets in the United States. Price indexes
are given in relation to a base period
(1982 = 100 for many Producer Price In
dexes or 1982—84 = 100 for many Con
sumer Price Indexes, unless otherwise
noted).
Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index (cpi) is a mea
sure of the average change in the prices
paid by urban consumers for a fixed market
basket o f goods and services. The CPI is
calculated monthly for two population
groups, one consisting only o f urban
households whose primary source of in
come is derived from the employment of
wage earners and clerical workers, and the
other consisting of all urban households.
The wage earner index (cpi- w) is a contin
uation of the historic index that was intro
duced well over a half-century ago for use
in wage negotiations. As new uses were
developed for the CPI in recent years, the
need for a broader and more representative
index became apparent. The all urban con
sumer index (cpi- u), introduced in 1978, is
representative of the 1982-84 buying
habits of about 80 percent of the noninstitutional population of the United States at
that time, compared with 32 percent repre
sented in the CPi-w. In addition to wage
earners and clerical workers, the CPI-U cov
ers professional, managerial, 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, cloth
ing, shelter, fuel, drugs, transportation
fares, doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other
goods and services that people buy for dayto-day living. The quantity and quality of
these items are kept essentially unchanged
between major revisions so that only price
changes will be measured. All taxes di
rectly associated with the purchase and use
of items are included in the index.
Data collected from more than 21,000
retail establishments and 60,000 housing
units in 91 urban areas across the country
are used to develop the “U .S. city aver
age.” Separate estimates for 27 major urban
centers are presented in table 31. The areas
listed are as indicated in footnote 1 to the
table. The area indexes measure only the
average change in prices for each area since
the base period, and do not indicate differ
ences in the level o f prices among cities.
Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the
way in which homeownership costs are
measured for the CPI-U. A rental equiva
lence method replaced the asset-price ap
proach to homeownership costs for that
series. In January 1985, the same change
was made in the CPI-W. The central purpose
of the change was to separate shelter costs
from the investment component of homeownership so that the index would reflect
only the cost of shelter services provided by
owner-occupied homes. An updated cpi-u
and CPi-w were introduced with release of
the January 1987 data.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method for
computing the CPI, see bls Handbook of
Methods, Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988). The recent change in the
measurement of homeownership costs is
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
discussed in Robert Gillingham and Walter
Lane, “Changing the treatment of shelter
costs for homeowners in the CPI,” Monthly
Labor Review, July 1982, pp. 9 -1 4 . An
overview of the recently introduced revised
CPI, reflecting 1982-84 expenditure pat
terns, is contained in The Consumer Price
Index: 1987 Revision, Report 736 (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1987).
Additional detailed CPI data and regular
analyses o f consumer price changes are
provided in the C P I Detailed Report, a
monthly publication of the Bureau. Histori
cal data for the overall CPI and for selected
groupings may be found in the Handbook
o f Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1985).
Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes (ppi) measure av
erage changes in prices received by domes
tic producers of commodities in all stages
of processing. The sample used for calcu
lating these indexes currently contains
about 3,100 commodities and about 75,000
quotations per month selected to represent
the movement of prices of all commodities
produced in the manufacturing, agricul
ture, forestry, fishing, mining, gas and
electricity, and public utilities sectors. The
stage of processing structure of Producer
Price Indexes organizes products by class
of buyer and degree o f fabrication (that is,
finished goods, intermediate goods, and
crude materials). The traditional commod
ity structure of ppi organizes products by
similarity of end use or material composi
tion. The industry and product structure of
ppi organizes data in accordance with the
Standard Industrial Classification (sic) and
the product code extension of the sic devel
oped by the U .S. Bureau o f the Census.
To the extent possible, prices used in
calculating Producer Price Indexes apply to
the first significant commercial transaction
in the United States from the production or
central marketing point. Price data are gen
erally collected monthly, primarily by mail
questionnaire. Most prices are obtained di
rectly from producing companies on a vol
untary and confidential basis. Prices gener
ally are reported for the Tuesday of the
week containing the 13th day of the month.
Since January 1987, price changes for
the various commodities have been aver
aged together with implicit quantity
weights representing their importance in
the total net selling value o f all com
modities as of 1982. The detailed data are
aggregated to obtain indexes for stage-ofprocessing groupings, commodity group
ings, durability-of-product groupings, and
a number of special composite groups. All
Producer Price Index data are subject to
revision 4 months after original publica
tion.
Notes on the data
Beginning with the January 1986 issue, the
Review is no longer presenting tables of
Producer Price Indexes for commodity
groupings or special composite groups.
However, these data will continue to be
presented in the Bureau’s monthly publica
tion Producer Price Indexes.
The Bureau has completed the first major
stage of its comprehensive overhaul of the
theory, methods, and procedures used to
construct the Producer Price Indexes.
Changes include the replacement of judg
ment sampling with probability sampling
techniques; expansion to systematic cover
age of the net output of virtually all in
dustries in the mining and manufacturing
sectors; a shift from a commodity to an
industry orientation; the exclusion of im
ports from, and the inclusion of exports in,
the survey universe; and the respecification
of commodities priced to conform to Bu
reau of the Census definitions. These and
other changes have been phased in gradu
ally since 1978. The result is a system of
indexes that is easier to use in conjunction
with data on wages, productivity, and em
ployment and other series that are orga
nized in terms of the Standard Industrial
Classification and the Census product class
designations.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the methodology for
computing Producer Price Indexes, see b l s
Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2285 (Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1988).
Additional detailed data and analyses of
price changes are provided monthly in Pro
ducer Price Indexes. Selected historical
data may be found in the Handbook o f
Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217 (Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1985).
International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The bls International Price Program
produces quarterly export and import price
indexes for nonmilitary goods traded be
tween the United States and the rest of the
world. The export price index provides a
measure of price change for all products
sold by U .S. residents to foreign buyers.
(“Residents” is defined as in the national
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
53
Current Labor Statistics
income accounts: it includes corporations,
businesses, and individuals but does not
require the organizations to be U.S. owned
nor the individuals to have U.S. citizen
ship.) The import price index provides a
measure of price change for goods pur
chased from other countries by U .S. resi
dents. With publication of an all-import
index in February 1983 and an all-export
index in February 1984, all U .S. merchan
dise imports and exports now are repre
sented in these indexes. The reference
period for the indexes is 1985 = 100, un
less otherwise indicated.
The product universe for both the import
and export indexes includes raw materials,
agricultural products, semifinished manu
factures, and finished manufactures, in
cluding both capital and consumer goods.
Price data for these items are collected
quarterly by mail questionnaire. In nearly
all cases, the data are collected directly
from the exporter or importer, although in
a few cases, prices are obtained from other
sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered
refer to prices at the U .S. border for exports
and at either the foreign border or the U.S.
border for imports. For nearly all products,
the prices refer to transactions completed
during the first 2 weeks of the third month
of each calendar quarter— March, June,
September, and December. Survey respon
dents are asked to indicate all discounts,
allowances, and rebates applicable to the
reported prices, so that the price used in the
calculation of the indexes is the actual price
for which the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes of prices
for U .S. exports and imports, indexes are
also published for detailed product cate
gories of exports and imports. These cate
gories are defined by the 4- and 5-digit
level of detail of the Standard Industrial
Trade Classification System (sitc). The
calculation of indexes by sitc category fa
cilitates the comparison of U .S. price
trends and sector production with similar
data for other countries. Detailed indexes
are also computed and published on a
Standard Industrial Classification (sicbased) basis, as well as by end-use class.
Notes on the data
The export and import price indexes are
weighted indexes of the Laspeyres type.
Price relatives are assigned equal impor
tance within each weight category and are
then aggregated to the sitc level. The val
ues assigned to each weight category are
based on trade value figures compiled
by the Bureau of the Census. The trade
weights currently used to compute both in
dexes relate to 1985.
54 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Because a price index depends on the
same items being priced from period to pe
riod, it is necessary to recognize when a
product’s specifications or terms of trans
action have been modified. For this reason,
the Bureau’s quarterly questionnaire re
quests detailed descriptions of the physical
and functional characteristics o f the prod
ucts being priced, as well as information on
the number of units bought or sold, dis
counts, credit terms, packaging, class of
buyer or seller, and so forth. When there
are changes in either the specifications or
terms of transaction o f a product, the dollar
value of each change is deleted from the
total price change to obtain the “pure”
change. Once this value is determined, a
linking procedure is employed which al
lows for the continued repricing o f the
item.
For the export price indexes, the pre
ferred pricing basis is f.a.s. (free alongside
ship) U .S. port of exportation. When firms
report export prices f.o.b. (free on board),
production point information is collected
which enables the Bureau to calculate a
shipment cost to the port of exportation. An
attempt is made to collect two prices for
imports. The first is the import price f.o.b.
at the foreign port of exportation, which is
consistent with the basis for valuation of
imports in the national accounts. The sec
ond is the import price c.i.f. (cost, in
surance, and freight) at the U .S. port of
importation, which also includes the other
costs associated with bringing the product
to the U .S. border. It does not, however,
include duty charges. For a given product,
only one price basis series is used in the
construction of an index.
Beginning in 1988, the Bureau has also
been publishing a series of indexes which
represent the price o f U .S. exports and im
ports in foreign currency terms.
Additional sources of information
For a discussion of the general method of
computing International Price Indexes, see
b l s Handbook o f M ethods, Bulletin 2285
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988).
Additional detailed data and analyses of
international price developments are pre
sented in the Bureau’s quarterly publication
U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes and
in occasional Monthly Labor Review arti
cles prepared by bls analysts. Selected his
torical data may be found in the Handbook
o f Labor Statistics , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
o f Labor Statistics, 1985). For further in
formation on the foreign currency indexes,
see “bls publishes average exchange rate
and foreign currency price indexes,”
Monthly Labor Review, December 1987,
pp. 4 7 -4 9 .
Productivity Data
(Tables 2; 4 4 -47)
Business sector and major sectors
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real phys
ical output to real input. As such, they en
compass a family of measures which
include single factor input measures, such
as output per unit of labor input (output per
hour) or output per unit of capital input, as
well as measures of multifactor productiv
ity (output per unit of labor and capital in
puts combined). The Bureau indexes show
the change in output relative to changes in
the various inputs. The measures cover the
business, nonfarm business, manufactur
ing, and nonfinancial corporate sectors.
Corresponding indexes of hourly com
pensation, unit labor costs, unit nonlabor
payments, and prices are also provided.
Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor pro
ductivity) is the value of goods and services
in constant prices produced per hour of
labor input. Output per unit of capital
services (capital productivity) is the value
of goods and services in constant dollars
produced per unit of capital services input.
Multifactor productivity is the ratio of
output per unit of labor and capital inputs
combined. Changes in this measure reflect
changes in a number of factors which affect
the production process such as changes in
technology, shifts in the composition of the
labor force, changes in capacity utilization,
research and development, skill and efforts
of the work force, management, and so
forth. Changes in the output per hour meas
ures reflect the impact of these factors as
well as the substitution of capital for labor.
Compensation per hour is the wages
and salaries of employees plus employers’
contributions for social insurance and pri
vate benefit plans, and the wages, salaries,
and supplementary payments for the selfemployed (except for nonfinancial corpora
tions in which there are no self-employed)—
the sum divided by hours paid for. Real
compensation per hour is compensation
per hour deflated by the change in the
Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compensa
tion costs expended in the production of a
unit of output and are 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 compen
sation of all persons from current dollar
value of output and dividing by output.
Unit nonlabor costs contain all the compo
nents of unit nonlabor payments except unit
profits.
Unit profits include corporate profits
with inventory valuation and capital con
sumption adjustments per unit of output.
Hours of all persons are the total hours
at work of payroll workers, self-employed
persons, and unpaid family workers.
Capital services is the flow of services
from the capital stock used in production. It
is developed from measures o f the net stock
of physical assets— equipment, structures,
land, and inventories— weighted by rental
prices for each type of asset.
Labor and capital inputs combined are
derived by combining changes in labor and
capital inputs with weights which represent
each component’s share of total output.
The indexes for capital services and com
bined units of labor and capital are based on
changing weights which are averages of the
shares in the current and preceding year
(the Tomquist index-number formula).
Notes on the data
Output measures for the business sector is
equal to constant-dollar gross national
product but excludes the rental value of
owner-occupied dwellings, the rest-ofworld sector, the output of nonprofit insti
tutions, the output of paid employees of
private households, general government,
and the statistical discrepancy. Output of
the nonfarm business sector is equal to
business sector output less farming. The
measures are derived from data supplied by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis. U.S.
Department of Commerce, and the Federal
Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing
output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics to annual estimates of
manufacturing output (gross product origi
nating) from the Bureau of Economic Anal
ysis. Compensation and hours data are de
veloped from data of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics and the Bureau of Economic
Analysis.
The productivity and associated cost
measures in tables 4 4 -4 7 describe the rela
tionship between output in real terms and
the labor time and capital services involved
in its production. They show the changes
from period to period in the amount of
goods and services produced per unit of
input. Although these measures relate out
put to hours and capital services, they do
not measure the contributions of labor, cap
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ital, or any other specific factor of produc
tion. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of
many influences, including changes in
technology; capital investment; level of
output; utilization of capacity, energy, and
materials; the organization of production;
managerial skill; and the characteristics and
efforts of the work force.
Additional sources of information
Descriptions of methodology underlying
the measurement of output per hour and
multifactor productivity are found in the
b l s Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2285
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1988), chapter
11. Historical data are provided in Hand
book o f Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2217
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1985).
Industry productivity measures
Description of the series
The BLS industry productivity data supple
ment the measures for the business econ
omy and major sectors with annual meas
ures o f labor productivity for selected
industries at the 3- and 4-digit levels of the
Standard Industrial Classification system.
The industry measures differ in methodol
ogy and data sources from the productivity
measures for the major sectors because the
industry measures are developed independ
ently of the National Income and Product
Accounts framework used for the major
sector measures.
Definitions
Output per employee hour is derived by
dividing an index of industry output by an
index of aggregate hours of all employees.
Output indexes are based on quantifiable
units of products or services, or both, com
bined with fixed-period weights. Whenever
possible, physical quantities are used as the
unit of measurement for output. If quantity
data are not available for a given industry,
data on the constant-dollar value of produc
tion are used.
The labor input series consist of the
hours of all employees (production and
nonproduction workers), the hours of all
persons (paid employees, partners, propri
etors, and unpaid family workers), or the
number of employees, depending upon the
industry.
serve Board, regulatory agencies, trade as
sociations, and other sources.
For most industries, the productivity in
dexes refer to the output per hour of all
employees. For some transportation indus
tries, only indexes of output per employee
are prepared. For some trade and service
industries, indexes of output per hour of all
persons (including the self-employed) are
constructed.
Additional sources of information
For a complete listing of available industry
productivity indexes and their components,
see Productivity Measures fo r Selected In
dustries and Government Services (1985),
Bulletin 2322 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1989). For additional information about the
methodology for computing the industry
productivity measures see Handbook o f
Methods , Bulletin 2285 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1988), chapter 11.
There are breaks in the data series for
Germany (1983), Italy (1986), the Nether
lands (1983), and Sweden (1987). For both
Germany and the Netherlands, the breaks
reflect the replacement of labor force sur
vey results tabulated by the national statisti
cal offices with those tabulated by the Eu
ropean Community Statistical Office
(Eurostat)— the Dutch figures for 1983
onward also reflect the replacement of
man-year employment data with data from
the Dutch Survey of Employed Persons.
The impact o f the changes was to lower the
adjusted unemployment rate by 0.3 per
centage point for Germany and by about 2
percentage points for the Netherlands.
For Italy, the break in series reflects
more accurate enumeration of time of last
job search. This resulted in a significant
increase in the number of people reported
as seeking work in the last 30 days. The
impact was to increase the Italian unem
ployment rates approximating U .S. con
cepts by about 1 percentage point.
Sweden introduced a new questionnaire.
Questions regarding current availability
were added and the period of active work
seeking was reduced from 60 days to 4
weeks. These changes result in lowering
Sweden’s unemployment rate by 0.5 per
centage point.
International Comparisons
(Tables 4 8-50)
Notes on the data
Labor force and unemployment
The industry measures are compiled from
data produced by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, the Departments of Commerce,
Interior, and Agriculture, the Federal Re
Description of the series
Tables 48 and 49 present comparative
measures of the labor force, employment,
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
55
Current Labor Statistics
and unemployment— approximating U.S.
concepts— for the United States, Canada,
Australia, Japan, and several European
countries. The unemployment statistics
(and, to a lesser extent, employment statis
tics) published by other industrial countries
are not, in most cases, comparable to U.S.
unemployment statistics. Therefore, the
Bureau adjusts the figures for selected
countries, where necessary, for all known
major definitional differences. Although
precise comparability may not be achieved,
these adjusted figures provide a better basis
for international comparisons than the fig
ures regularly published by each country.
Definitions
For the principal U .S. definitions of the
labor force, employment, and unemploy
ment, see the Notes section on EMPLOY
MENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DATA:
Household Survey Data.
Notes on the data
The adjusted statistics have been adapted to
the age at which compulsory schooling
ends in each country, rather than to the
U .S. standard of 16 years of age and over.
Therefore, the adjusted statistics relate to
the population age 16 and over in France,
Sweden, and from 1973 onward, the
United Kingdom; 15 and over in Canada,
Australia, Japan, Germany, the Nether
lands, and prior to 1973, the United King
dom; and 14 and over in Italy. The institu
tional population is included in the
denominator of the labor force participation
rates and employment-population ratios for
Japan and Germany; it is excluded for the
United States and the other countries.
In the U .S. labor force survey, persons
on layoff who are awaiting recall to their
job are classified as unemployed. European
and Japanese layoff practices are quite dif
ferent in nature from those in the United
States; therefore, strict application o f the
U .S. definition has not been made on this
point. For further information, see Monthly
Labor Review, December 1981, pp. 8-1 1 .
The figures for one or more recent years
for France, Germany, Italy, the Nether
lands, and the United Kingdom are calcu
lated using adjustment factors based on
labor force surveys for earlier years and are
considered preliminary. The recent-year
measures for these countries are, therefore,
subject to revision whenever data from
more current labor force surveys become
available.
There are breaks in the data series for
Germany (1983 and 1987), Italy (1986),
the Netherlands (1983), and Sweden
56 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
(1987). For both Germany and the Nether
lands, the 1983 breaks reflect the replace
ment o f labor force survey results tabulated
by the national statistical offices with those
tabulated by the European Community
Statistical Office (eurostat). The Dutch
figures for 1983 onward also reflect the
replacement o f man-year employment data
with data from the Dutch Survey of Em
ployed Persons. The impact of the changes
was to lower the adjusted unemployment
rate by 0.3 percentage point for Germany
and by about 2 percentage points for the
Netherlands. The 1987 break for Germany
reflects the incorporation of employment
statistics based on the 1987 Population
Census, which indicated that the level of
employment was about one million higher
than previously estimated. The impact of
this change was to lower the adjusted un
employment rate by 0.3 percentage point.
When historical data benchmarked to
the 1987 Census became available, bls will
revise its comparative measures for
Germany.
For Italy, the break in series reflects
more accurate enumeration o f time of last
job search. This resulted in a significant
increase in the number of people reported
as seeking work in the last 30 days. The
impact was to increase the Italian unem
ployment rates approximating U .S. con
cepts by about 1 percentage point.
Sweden introduced a new questionnaire.
Questions regarding current availability
were added and the period o f active work
seeking was reduced from 60 days to 4
weeks. These changes result in lowering
Sweden’s unemployment rate by 0.5 per
cent point.
Additional sources of information
For further information, see International
Comparisons o f Unemployment, Bulletin
1979 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978),
Appendix B , and Supplements to Appendix
B. The statistics are also analyzed periodi
cally in the Monthly Labor Review . Addi
tional historical data, generally beginning
with 1959, are published in the Handbook
o f Labor Statistics and are available in
statistical supplements to Bulletin 1979.
Manufacturing productivity and
labor costs
Description of the series
Table 50 presents comparative measures
o f manufacturing labor productivity,
hourly compensation costs, and unit labor
costs for the United States, Canada, Japan,
and nine European countries. These mea
sures are limited to trend comparisons—
that is, intercountry series o f changes over
time— rather than level comparisons be
cause reliable international comparisons of
the levels of manufacturing output are
unavailable.
Definitions
Output is constant value output (value
added), generally taken from the national
accounts of each country. While the na
tional accounting methods for measuring
real output differ considerably among the
12 countries, the use of different proce
dures does not, in itself, connote lack of
comparability— rather, it reflects differ
ences among countries in the availability
and reliability of underlying data series.
Hours refer to all employed persons in
cluding the self-employed in the United
States and Canada; to all wage and salary
employees in the other countries. The U.S.
hours measure is hours paid; the hours mea
sures for the other countries are hours
worked.
Compensation (labor cost) includes all
payments in cash or kind made directly to
employees plus employer expenditures for
legally required insurance programs and
contractual and private benefit plans. In ad
dition, for some countries, compensation is
adjusted for other significant taxes on pay
rolls or employment (or reduced to reflect
subsidies), even if they are not for the di
rect benefit of workers, because such taxes
are regarded as labor costs. However, com
pensation does not include all items of
labor cost. The costs of recruitment, em
ployee training, and plant facilities and ser
vices— such as cafeterias and medical
clinics— are not covered because data
are not available for most countries. Selfemployed workers are included in the U.S.
and Canadian compensation figures by as
suming that their hourly compensation is
equal to the average for wage and salary
employees.
Notes on the data
For most o f the countries, the measures
refer to total manufacturing as defined by
the International Standard Industrial Classi
fication. However, the measures for France
(beginning 1959), Italy (beginning 1970),
and the United Kingdom (beginning 1971),
refer to manufacturing and mining less en
ergy-related products and the figures for the
Netherlands exclude petroleum refining
from 1969 to 1976. For all countries, man
ufacturing includes the activities of govern
ment enterprises.
The figures for one or more recent years
are generally based on current indicators of
manufacturing output, employment, hours,
and hourly compensation and are consid
ered preliminary until the national accounts
and other statistics used for the long-term
measures become available.
ratio estimator. The characteristics used to
stratify the establishments are the Standard
Industrial Classification (sic) code and size
of employment.
Additional sources of information
Definitions
For additional information, see the
Recordable occupational injuries and ill
nesses are: (1) occupational deaths, regard
bls
Handbook o f M ethods , Bulletin 2285 (Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1988), and peri
odic Monthly Labor Review articles. His
torical data are provided in the Handbook
of Labor Statistics , Bulletin 2217 (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1985). The statistics are
issued twice per year— in a news release
(generally in June) and in a Monthly Labor
Review article.
Occupational Injury and
Illness Data
(Table 51)
Description of the series
The Annual Survey of Occupational In
juries and Illnesses is designed to collect
data on injuries and illnesses based on
records which employers in the following
industries maintain under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970: agriculture,
forestry, and fishing; oil and gas extraction;
construction; manufacturing; transportation
and public utilities; wholesale and retail
trade; finance, insurance, and real estate;
and services. Excluded from the survey are
self-employed individuals, farmers with
fewer than 11 employees, employers regu
lated by other Federal safety and health
laws, and Federal, State, and local govern
ment agencies.
Because the survey is a Federal-State co
operative program and the data must meet
the needs of participating State agencies, an
independent sample is selected for each
State. The sample is selected to represent
all private industries in the States and terri
tories. The sample size for the survey is
dependent upon (1) the characteristics for
which estimates are needed; (2) the indus
tries for which estimates are desired; (3) the
characteristics of the population being sam
pled; (4) the target reliability of the esti
mates; and (5) the survey design employed.
While there are many characteristics
upon which the sample design could be
based, the total recorded case incidence
rate is used because it is one of the most
important characteristics and the least vari
able; therefore, it requires the smallest sam
ple size.
The survey is based on stratified random
sampling with a Neyman allocation and a
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
less of the time between injury and death,
or the length o f the illness; or (2) nonfatal
occupational illnesses; or (3) nonfatal occu
pational injuries which involve one or more
of the following: loss o f consciousness, re
striction of work or motion, transfer to an
other job, or medical treatment (other than
first aid).
Occupational injury is any injury such
as a cut, fracture, sprain, amputation, and
so forth, which results from a work acci
dent or from exposure involving a single
incident in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal
condition or disorder, other than one result
ing from an occupational injury, caused by
exposure to environmental factors associ
ated with employment. It includes acute
and chronic illnesses or disease which may
be caused by inhalation, absorption, inges
tion, or direct contact.
Lost workday cases are cases which in
volve days away from work, or days o f
restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workday cases involving re
stricted work activity are those cases
which result in restricted work activity only.
Lost workdays away from work are the
number of workdays (consecutive or not)
on which the employee would have worked
but could not because o f occupational in
jury or illness.
Lost workdays— restricted work ac
tivity are the number of workdays (consec
utive or not) on which, because of injury or
illness: (1) the employee was assigned to
another job on a temporary basis; or (2) the
employee worked at a permanent job less
than full time; or (3) the employee worked
at a permanently assigned job but could not
perform all duties normally connected with it.
The number of days away from work
or days of restricted work activity does
not include the day of injury or onset of
illness or any days on which the employee
would not have worked even though able to
work.
Incidence rates represent the number of
injuries and/or illnesses or lost workdays
per 100 full-time workers.
Notes on the data
Estimates are made for industries and
employment-size classes and for severity
classification: fatalities, lost workday
cases, and nonfatal cases without lost
workdays. Lost workday cases are sepa
rated into those where the employee would
have worked but could not and those in
which work activity was restricted. Esti
mates of the number of cases and the
number of days lost are made for both
categories.
Most of the estimates are in the form of
incidence rates, defined as the number of
injuries and illnesses, or lost workdays, per
100 full-time employees. For this purpose,
200,000 employee hours represent 100 em
ployee years (2,000 hours per employee).
Only a few of the available measures are
included in the Handbook o f Labor Statis
tics . Full detail is presented in the annual
bulletin, Occupational Injuries and Ill
nesses in the United States, by Industry.
Comparable data for individual States
are available from the bls Office of Safety,
Health, and Working Conditions.
Mining and railroad data are furnished to
bls by the Mine Safety and Health Admin
istration and the Federal Railroad Adminis
tration, respectively. Data from these
organizations are included in bls and State
publications. Federal employee experience
is compiled and published by the Occupa
tional Safety and Health Administration.
Data on State and local government em
ployees are collected by about half of the
States and territories; these data are not
compiled nationally.
Additional sources of information
The Supplementary Data System pro
vides detailed information describing vari
ous factors associated with work-related
injuries and illnesses. These data are ob
tained from information reported by
employers to State workers’ compensation
agencies. The Work Injury Report program
examines selected types of accidents
through an employee survey which focuses
on the circumstances surrounding the in
jury. These data are not included in the
Handbook o f Labor Statistics but are avail
able from the BLS Office of Safety, Health,
and Working Conditions.
The definitions of occupational injuries
and illnesses and lost workdays are from
Recordkeeping Requirements under the Oc
cupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
For additional data, see Occupational In
juries and Illnesses in the United States, by
Industry , annual Bureau of Labor Statistics
bulletin; BLS Handbook o f M ethods, Bul
letin 2285 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1988); Handbook o f Labor Statistics, Bul
letin 2217 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1985), pp. 411-14; annual reports in the
Monthly Labor Review, and annual U .S.
Department of Labor press releases.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
57
Current Labor Statistics:
1.
Comparative Indicators
Labor market indicators
1987
Selected indicators
1987
1988
1989
1988
III
IV
I
II
III
IV
I
II
Employment i„ata
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population
(household survey):1
Labor force participation r a te ...........................................
Employment-population r a tio ............................................
Unemployment rate .....................................
M e n ..........................................
16 to 24 years ....................................
25 years and o v e r ...........................................................................
Women ..................................................
16 to 24 years ......................................................
25 years and o v e r ...................................................................
Unemployment rate, 15 weeks and o v e r .......................
65.6
61.5
6.2
6.2
12.6
4.8
6.2
11.7
4.8
1.7
65.9
62.3
5.5
5.5
11.4
4.2
5.6
10.6
4.3
1.3
65.6
61.7
6.0
6.0
12.2
4.6
6.0
11.4
4.7
1.6
65.7
61.9
5.9
5.8
11.9
4.4
6.0
11.2
4.6
1.5
65.8
62.1
5.7
5.6
11.8
4.3
5.8
11.0
4.5
1.4
65.8
62.2
5.5
5.4
11.2
4.2
5.6
10.7
4.3
1.3
65.9
62.3
5.5
5.4
11.4
4.1
5.6
10.5
4.4
1.3
66.1
62.5
5.3
5.4
11.3
4.1
5.3
10.3
4.2
1.2
66 4
62.9
5.2
5.2
11.2
4.0
5.2
10.2
4.0
1.1
66 5
63 0
5.3
5.1
11.1
3.9
5.4
10.4
43
1.1
102,200
85,190
24,708
19,024
77,492
105,584
88,212
25,249
19,403
80,335
102,500
85,481
24,751
19,061
77,749
103,491
86,336
24,961
19,199
78,530
104,355
87,111
25,022
19,271
79,333
105,184
87,851
25,202
19,360
79,983
105,976
88,577
25,313
19,435
80,663
106,799
89,288
25,452
19,550
81,346
107,680
90,104
25,634
19,659
82,047
108,339
90,661
25,664
19,663
82,676
34.8
41.0
3.7
34.7
41.1
3.9
34.8
40.9
3.8
34.8
41.2
3.9
34.7
41.0
3.8
34.7
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.1
3.9
34.7
41.1
3.8
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household, and Federal workers) ......
Private industry workers ........................................
Goods-producing2 .........................................................
Service-producing2 .........................................
State and local government w o rk e rs .......................................
3.6
3.3
3.1
3.7
4.4
5.0
4.9
4.4
5.1
5.6
1.2
1.0
.8
1.0
2.3
.8
.7
1.0
.5
.9
1.4
1.5
1.8
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.4
.3
1.3
1.0
.6
1.2
2.7
1.0
1.0
.8
1.2
1.1
12
13
1.0
1.5
1.2
1.2
11
1.2
.6
Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
U n io n ......................................................................
Nonunion ................................................................
2.8
3.6
3.9
5.1
.6
1.1
1.1
.6
1.6
1.5
1.0
1.3
.7
1.1
.5
1.2
.8
1.5
10
1.2
Employment, nonagricultural (payroll data), in thousands:1
Total .................................................................
Private sector .......................................
G oods-producing...............................................
M anufacturing...........................................................
Service-producing ...............................................
Average hours:
Private sector .................................................
Manufacturing ...........................................
O vertim e.................................................
Employment Cost Index
' Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-
58 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
producing Industries include all other private sector industries.
2.
Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
1987
1989
1988
1987
Selected measures
1988
IV
III
III
II
I
II
I
IV
Compensation data ’, 2
Employment Cost Index-compensation (wages, salaries,
benefits):
Civilian nonfarm ..........................................................................
Private n o n fa rm .........................................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries
Civilian nonfarm ..........................................................................
Private n o n fa rm .........................................................................
3.6
3.3
5.0
4.9
1.2
1.0
0.8
.7
1.4
1.5
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.2
3.5
3.3
4.3
4.1
1.3
1.0
.7
.6
1.0
1.0
.9
1.1
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
.8
1.0
Price data1
Consumer Price Index (All urban consumers): All ite m s ......
4.4
4.4
1.3
.3
1.0
1.3
1.5
.6
1.5
1.5
Producer Price Index:
Finished g o o d s ............................................................................
Finished consumer g o o d s ........................................................
Capital equipment .....................................................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, components ......................
Crude m ate rials...........................................................................
2.2
2.6
1.3
5.4
8.9
4.0
4.0
3.6
5.6
3.1
.2
.3
-.2
1.2
.6
.1
-.2
1.1
.9
-1.4
.5
.4
.7
1.1
-.3
1.3
1.4
.6
2.6
4.0
.8
1.0
.4
1.2
-1.2
1.3
1.1
1.8
.6
.6
1.9
2.2
.9
1.9
6.1
1.8
2.2
.9
1.0
.7
Productivity data3
Output per hour of all persons:
Business s e c to r.........................................................................
Nonfarm business s e c to r .........................................................
Nonfinancial corporations 4 ......................................................
1.2
1.1
2.2
1.8
2.1
2.6
-2.0
-1.5
.6
2.7
3.0
4.3
1.0
-1.3
-1.8
.2
1.9
-.4
3.1
3.4
1.4
1.3
.7
-.2
3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.
Quarterly percent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly In
dexes. The data are seasonally adjusted.
4 Output per hour of all employees.
1 Annual changes are December-to-December change. Quarterly changes
are calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price
data are not seasonally adjusted and the price data are not compounded.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.
3.
2.9
2.7
1.9
3.9
3.6
5.3
Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ended-
Quarterly average
I
Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business s e c to r........................................................................
All persons, nonfarm business s e c to r........................................................
Employment Cost Index-compensation:
Civilian nonfarm 2 ...........................................................................................
Private nonfarm ...........................................................................................
Union ..........................................................................................................
N onunion....................................................................................................
State and local governm ents....................................................................
Employment Cost Index-wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm2 ............................................................................................
Private nonfarm ...........................................................................................
U n io n ..........................................................................................................
N onunion....................................................................................................
State and local gove rnm ents.....................................................................
Total effective wage adjustments3 .....................................................................
From current settlem ents.............................................................................
From prior settlements .................................................................................
From cost-of-living provision........................................................................
Negotiated wage adjustments from settlements:3
First-year adjustments ...................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.................................................................
Negotiated wage and benefit adjustments from settlements:4
First-year a djustm en t.....................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.................................................................
IV
II
I
1989
IV
III
li
I
II
I
2.8
2.7
5.9
5.5
5.8
5.5
5.2
5.9
4.8
4.8
6.8
5.6
4.4
4.3
5.2
5.1
5.4
5.2
4.9
4.9
5.4
5.4
b. f
5.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.3
.3
1.3
1.0
.7
1.1
2.7
1.0
1.0
.5
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.3
.8
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
.6
4.1
3.9
3.9
4.0
4.9
4.6
4.5
4.3
4.5
5.0
4.7
4.5
4.5
4.5
5.4
5.0
4.9
3.9
5.1
5.6
4.8
4.6
3.0
5.1
5.5
4.8
4.5
3.1
5.0
5.8
1.0
1.0
.4
1.0
.9
.4
.1
.3
.1
.9
1.1
.8
1.2
.3
.9
.3
.5
.1
1.3
1.0
.7
1.0
2.6
.8
.2
.4
.2
1.0
1.0
.4
1.1
1.0
.5
.1
.2
.2
1.1
1.1
.7
1.3
.8
.5
.1
.3
.1
.8
1.0
.8
1.0
.5
1.0
.3
.5
.2
3.5
3.3
2.6
3.5
4.4
3.2
.8
1.8
.5
3.9
3.7
2.9
4.0
4.4
3.0
1.0
1.6
.5
3.9
3.7
2.9
3.9
4.7
2.9
1.0
1.4
.5
4.3
4.1
2.2
4.5
4.8
2.6
.7
1.3
.6
4.4
4.2
2.5
4.8
4.8
2.7
.7
1.3
.6
4.3
4.1
2.6
4.6
5.0
2.8
.7
1.3
.8
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.2
3.2
3.1
3.9
3.3
2.4
2.2
2.4
2.0
2.5
2.2
2.5
2.4
2.7
2.5
3.2
2.9
1.8
1.8
3.1
2.4
3.4
3.2
3.5
2.1
3.2
3.4
5.0
3.4
3.1
2.5
3.0
2.3
3.1
2.5
3.1
2.5
3.3
2.6
3.8
3.0
Seasonally adjusted.
Excludes Federal and household workers.
Limited to major collective bargaining units of 1,000 workers or more. The
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
III
II
1988
1989
1988
Components
most recent data are preliminary.
4 Limited to major collective bargaining units of 5,000 workers or more. The
most recent data are preliminary.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
59
Current Labor Statistics:
4.
Employment Data
Employment status of the total population, by sex, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1988
Annual average
1989
Employment status
1987
1988
184,490
121,602
65.9
114,177
186,322
123,378
66.2
116,677
186,522
123,692
66.3
116,895
186,666
123,688
66.3
117,074
186,801
123,778
66.3
117,260
186,949
124,215
66.4
117,652
187,098
124,259
66.4
117,705
187,340
125,124
66.8
118,407
187,461
124,865
66.6
118,537
187,581
124,948
66.6
118,820
187,708
125,343
66.8
118,797
187,854
125,283
66.7
118,888
187,995
125,768
66.9
119,207
188,149
125,622
66.8
119,125
188,286
125,706
66.8
119,285
61.9
1,737
112,440
3,208
109,232
7,425
6.1
62,888
62.6
1,709
114,968
3,169
111,800
6,701
5.4
62,944
62.7
1,692
115,203
3,142
112,061
6,797
5.5
62,830
62.7
1,704
115,370
3,176
112,194
6,614
5.3
62,978
62.8
1,687
115,573
3,238
112,335
6,518
5.3
63,023
62.9
1,705
115,947
3,238
112,709
6,563
5.3
62,734
62.9
1,696
116,009
3,193
112,816
6,554
5.3
62,839
63.2
1,696
116,711
3,300
113,411
6,716
5.4
62,216
63.2
1,684
116,853
3,223
113,630
6,328
5.1
62,596
63.3
1,684
117,136
3,206
113,930
6,128
4.9
62,633
63.3
1,684
117,113
3,104
114,009
6,546
5.2
62,365
63.3
1,673
117,215
3,112
114,102
6,395
5.1
62,571
63.4
1,666
117,541
3,096
114,445
6,561
5.2
62,228
63.3
1,666
117,459
3,219
114,240
6,497
5.2
62,527
63.4
1,688
117,597
3,307
114,290
6,421
5.1
62,580
88,476
67,784
76.6
63,684
89,404
68,474
76.6
64,820
89,504
68,685
76.7
64,931
89,577
68,604
76.6
65,015
89,637
68,569
76.5
64,976
89,716
68,686
76.6
65,074
89,792
68,638
76.4
65,055
89,914
69,032
76.8
65,322
89,973
69,113
76.8
65,572
90,032
69,190
76.9
65,920
90,094
69,360
77.0
65,767
90,167
69,114
76.7
65,713
90,237
69,507
77.0
66,110
90,315
69,245
76.7
65,961
90,384
69,337
76.7
65,934
72.0
1,577
62,107
4,101
6.1
72.5
1,547
63,273
3,655
5.3
72.5
1,529
63,402
3,754
5.5
72.6
1,540
63,475
3,589
5.2
72.5
1,526
63,450
3,593
5.2
72.5
1,542
63,532
3,612
5.3
72.5
1,534
63,521
3,583
5.2
72.6
1,532
63,790
3,710
5.4
72.9
1,521
64,051
3,540
5.1
73.2
1,521
64,399
3,270
4.7
73.0
1,521
64,246
3,593
5.2
72.9
1,511
64,202
3,401
4.9
73.3
1,501
64,609
3,397
4.9
73.0
1,499
64,462
3,284
4.7
72.9
1,519
64,415
3,403
4.9
96,013
53,818
56.1
50,494
96,918
54,904
56.6
51,858
97,018
55,007
56.7
51,964
97,089
55,084
56.7
52,059
97,164
55,209
56.8
52,284
97,234
55,529
57.1
52,578
97,306
55,621
57.2
52,650
97,427
56,091
57.6
53,085
97,488
55,752
57.2
52,965
97,550
55,758
57.2
52,900
97,614
55,983
57.4
53,029
97,687
56,169
57.5
53,175
97,758
56,261
57.6
53,097
97,834
56,377
57.6
53,164
97,902
56,370
57.6
53,352
52.6
160
50,334
3,324
6.2
53.5
162
51,696
3,046
5.5
53.6
163
51,801
3,043
5.5
53.6
164
51,895
3,025
5.5
53.8
161
52,123
2,925
5.3
54.1
163
52,415
2,951
5.3
54.1
162
52,488
2,971
5.3
54.5
164
52,921
3,006
5.4
54.3
163
52,802
2,787
5.0
54.2
163
52,737
2,858
5.1
54.3
163
52,866
2,953
5.3
54.4
162
53,013
2,994
5.3
54.3
165
52,932
3,164
5.6
54.3
167
52,997
3,213
5.7
54.5
169
53,183
3,018
5.4
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
TOTAL
Noninstitutional population 1, 2 .......
Labor force2 .....................................
Participation rate 3 ..................
Total employed 2 ..........................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ......................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ......................
Agriculture ...............................
Nonagricultural in dustries.....
U nem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
Not in labor force ...........................
Men, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population \ 2 .......
Labor force2 .....................................
Participation rate 3 ..................
Total employed 2 ..........................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ......................................
Resident Armed Forces ' .......
Civilian employed ......................
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
Women, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population \ 2 .......
Labor force2 .....................................
Participation rate 3 ..................
Total employed2 ...........................
Employment-population
ratio 4 ......................................
Resident Armed Forces 1 .......
Civilian employed ......................
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment rate 5 ............
1 The population and Armed Forces figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation.
2 Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
3 Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
60
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
4 Total employed as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
5 Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces).
5. Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
1989
1988
Annual average
Employment status
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Participation rate ....................
E m p lo ye d ......................................
Employment-population
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment ra te ...............
Not in labor force ...........................
182,753
119,865
65.6
112,440
184,613
121,669
65.9
114,968
184,830
122,000
66.0
115,203
184,962
121,984
66.0
115,370
185,114
122,091
66.0
115,573
185,244
122,510
66.1
115,947
185,402
122,563
66.1
116,009
185,644
123,428
66.5
116,711
185,777
123,181
66.3
116,853
185,897
123,264
66.3
117,136
186,024
123,659
66.5
117,113
186,181
123,610
66.4
117,215
186,329
124,102
66.6
117,541
186,483
123,956
66.5
117,459
186,598
124,018
66.5
117,597
61.5
7,425
6.2
62,888
62.3
6,701
5.5
62,944
62.3
6,797
5.6
62,830
62.4
6,614
5.4
62,978
62.4
6,518
5.3
63,023
62.6
6,563
5.4
62,734
62.6
6,554
5.3
62,839
62.9
6,716
5.4
62,216
62.9
6,328
5.1
62,596
63.0
6,128
5.0
62,633
63.0
6,546
5.3
62,365
63.0
6,395
5.2
62,571
63.1
6,561
5.3
62,228
63.0
6,497
5.2
62,527
63.0
6,421
5.2
62,580
79,565
62,095
78.0
58,726
80,553
62,768
77.9
59,781
80,669
62,916
78.0
59,839
80,751
62,884
77.9
59,979
80,851
62,915
77.8
60,004
80,924
62,995
77.8
59,999
81,001
63,002
77.8
60,049
81,162
63,358
78.1
60,420
81,256
63,490
78.1
60,636
81,333
63,557
78.1
60,869
81,413
63,709
78.3
60,757
81,524
63,503
77.9
60,798
81,592
63,831
78.2
61,093
81,679
63,656
77.9
60,921
81,754
63,643
/ /.8
60,853
73.8
2,329
56,397
3,369
5.4
74.2
2,271
57,510
2,987
4.8
74.2
2,273
57,566
3,077
4.9
74.3
2,249
57,730
2,905
4.6
74.2
2,315
57,689
2,911
4.6
74.1
2,313
57,686
2,996
4.8
74.1
2,292
57,757
2,953
4.7
74.4
2,277
58,143
2,938
4.6
74.6
2,320
58,316
2,853
4.5
74.8
2,317
58,552
2,688
4.2
74.6
2,252
58,505
2,952
4.6
74.6
2,284
58,514
2,705
4.3
74.9
2,256
58,837
2,737
4.3
74.6
2,342
58,579
2,734
4.3
74.4
2,364
58,489
2,790
4.4
88,583
49,783
56.2
47,074
89,532
50,870
56.8
48,383
89,670
50,959
56.8
48,492
89,735
50,991
56.8
48,535
89,807
51,201
57.0
48,788
89,887
51,558
57.4
49,113
89,954
51,587
57.3
49,165
90,072
51,998
57.7
49,543
90,153
51,821
57.5
49,514
90,242
51,851
57.5
49,484
90,318
51,992
57.6
49,544
90,432
52,171
57.7
49,690
90,526
52,231
57.7
49,661
90,607
52,463
57.9
49,850
90,684
52,373
57.8
49,905
53.1
622
46,453
2,709
5.4
54.0
625
47,757
2,487
4.9
54.1
609
47,883
2,467
4.8
54.1
638
47,897
2,456
4.8
54.3
640
48,148
2,413
4.7
54.6
640
48,473
2,445
4.7
54.7
646
48,519
2,422
4.7
55.0
715
48,827
2,455
4.7
54.9
666
48,849
2,306
4.5
54.8
664
48,819
2,367
4.6
54.9
615
48,929
2,448
4.7
54.9
628
49,062
2,480
4.8
54.9
610
49,051
2,570
4.9
55.0
627
49,223
2,613
5.0
55.0
644
49,261
2,468
4.7
14,606
7,988
54.7
6,640
14,527
8,031
55.3
6,805
14,491
8,125
56.1
6,872
14,477
8,109
56.0
6,856
14,456
7,975
55.2
6,781
14,433
7,957
55.1
6,835
14,447
7,974
55.2
6,795
14,410
8,071
56.0
6,748
14,367
7,871
54.8
6,703
14,323
7,856
54.9
6,783
14,293
7,958
55.7
6,812
14,224
7,936
55.8
6,726
14,211
8,040
56.6
6,786
14,196
7,837
55.2
6,687
14,160
8,003
56.5
6,840
45.5
258
6,382
1,347
16.9
46.8
273
6,532
1,226
15.3
47.4
260
6,612
1,253
15.4
47.4
289
6,567
1,253
15.5
46.9
283
6,498
1,194
15.0
47.4
285
6,550
1,122
14.1
47.0
255
6,540
1,179
14.8
46.8
307
6,441
1,323
16.4
46.7
237
6,466
1,168
14.8
47.4
224
6,559
1,073
13.7
47.7
237
6,575
1,146
14.4
47.3
200
6,526
1,210
15.2
47.8
230
6,556
1,254
15.6
47.1
249
6,438
1,150
14.7
48.3
300
6,540
1,163
14.5
156,958
103,290
65.8
97,789
158,194
104,756
66.2
99,812
158,340
105,013
66.3
99,907
158,422
105,036
66.3
100,058
158,524
105,051
66.3
100,199
158,603
105,395
66.5
100,543
158,705
105,411
66.4
100,567
158,865
106,106
66.8
101,183
158,947
105,798
66.6
101,278
159,020
105,988
66.7
101,554
159,098
106,312
66.8
101,458
159,200
106,164
66.7
101,465
159,297
106,455
66.8
101,693
159,400
106,424
66.8
101,581
159,470
106,446
66.8
101,670
62.3
5,501
5.3
63.1
4,944
4.7
63.1
5,106
4.9
63.2
4,978
4.7
63.2
4,852
4.6
63.4
4,852
4.6
63.4
4,844
4.6
63.7
4,923
4.6
63.7
4,521
4.3
63.9
4,434
4.2
63.8
4,854
4.6
63.7
4,699
4.4
63.8
4,762
4.5
63.7
4,843
4.6
63.8
4,777
4.5
20,352
12,993
63.8
11,309
20,692
13,205
63.8
11,658
20,736
13,236
63.8
11,733
20,762
13,201
63.6
11,758
20,786
13,290
63.9
11,807
20,811
13,330
64.1
11,831
20,842
13,405
64.3
11,856
20,877
13,477
64.6
11,860
20,905
13,476
64.5
11,873
20,930
13,425
64.1
11,961
20,956
13,287
63.4
11,846
20,986
13,444
64.1
11,968
21,012
13,600
64.7
11,982
21,038
13,555
64.4
12,082
21,060
13,448
63.9
11,958
55.6
1,684
13.0
56.3
1,547
11.7
56.6
1,503
11.4
56.6
1,443
10.9
56.8
1,483
11.2
56.8
1,499
11.2
56.9
1,549
11.6
56.8
1,617
12.0
56.8
1,603
11.9
57.1
1,464
10.9
56.5
1,442
10.8
57.0
1,476
11.0
57.0
1,618
11.9
57.4
1,473
10.9
56.8
1,490
11.1
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
Employed ......................................
Employment-population
A g ricu ltu re ..................................
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ................
Women, 20 years ond over
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Employed ......................................
Employment-population
A g ricu ltu re ..................................
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
E m p lo ye d ......................................
Employment-population
Nonagricultural industries........
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ................
White
Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
E m ployed......................................
Employment-population
U nem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
Black
Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor fo rc e .........................
Participation rate ...................
Employed .....................................
Employment-population
Unem ployed.................................
Unemployment r a te ..............
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
61
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
5. Continued— Employment status of the civilian population, by sex, age, race and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1988
1989
Employment status
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
12,867
8,541
66.4
7,790
13,325
8,982
67.4
8,250
13,381
8,963
67.0
8,214
13,419
9,061
67.5
8,378
13,458
9,075
67.4
8,368
13,495
9,148
67.8
8,419
13,533
9,133
67.5
8,441
13,564
9,205
67.9
8,434
13,606
9,219
67.8
8,596
13,649
9,210
67.5
8,607
13,690
9,262
67.7
8,495
13,731
9,428
68.7
8,686
13,772
9,272
67.3
8,524
13,813
9,433
68.3
8,587
13,853
9,364
67.6
8,521
60.5
751
8.8
61.9
732
8.2
61.4
749
8.4
62.4
683
7.5
62.2
707
7.8
62.4
729
8.0
62.4
692
7.6
62.2
771
8.4
63.2
624
6.8
63.1
603
6.5
62.1
767
8.3
63.3
742
7.9
61.9
748
8.1
62.2
846
9.0
61.5
843
9.0
Hispanic origin
Civilian noninstitutional
population1 .......................................
Civilian labor fo rc e ..........................
Participation rate ....................
Employed ......................................
Employment-population
ratio2 .......................................
Unem ployed..................................
Unemployment r a te ...............
■■
('W f/UIUUWM I i y u i u u
i i w i u u u o u i i a i ty aUJUOLCU.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
6.
because data for the “ other races” groups are not presented and Hispanics are Included
in both the white and black population groups.
Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
Annual average
1988
1989
Selected categories
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
112,440
62,107
50,334
40,265
114,968
63,273
51,696
40,472
115,203
63,402
51,801
40,511
115,370
63,475
51,895
40,513
115,573
63,450
52,123
40,504
115,947
63,532
52,415
40,407
116,009
63,521
52,488
40,483
116,711
63,790
52,921
40,925
116,853
64,051
52,802
40,928
117,136
64,399
52,737
41,083
117,113
64,246
52,866
40,890
117,215
64,202
53,013
40,902
117,541
64,609
52,932
41,102
117,459
64,462
52,997
41,089
117,597
64,415
53,183
40,636
28,107
6,060
28,756
6,211
28,809
6,280
28,836
6,253
28,890
6,344
28,995
6,375
29,053
6,399
29,589
6,416
29,412
6,385
29,569
6,256
29,656
6,243
29,739
6,331
29,481
6,403
29,552
6,456
29,220
6,342
1,632
1,423
153
1,621
1,398
150
1,607
1,411
158
1,612
1,421
137
1,661
1,405
177
1,672
1,450
125
1,698
1,349
149
1,684
1,387
189
1,645
1,419
150
1,656
1,403
138
1,554
1,419
124
1,610
1,358
127
1,550
1,412
126
1,695
1,434
126
1,803
1,420
137
100,771
16,800
83,970
1,208
82,762
8,201
260
103,021
17,114
85,907
1,153
84,754
8,519
260
103,207
17,111
86,096
1,128
84,968
8,508
241
103,501
17,145
86,356
1,119
85,237
8,570
230
103,733
17,240
86,493
1,152
85,341
8,479
232
103,770
17,387
86,383
1,209
85,174
8,619
300
103,904
17,423
86,481
1,210
85,271
8,602
266
104,510
17,393
87,117
1,196
85,921
8,718
298
104,797
17,311
87,486
1,135
86,350
8,517
285
104,982
17,382
87,600
1,163
86,437
8,645
332
104,985
17,180
87,806
1,117
86,689
8,671
281
105,245
17,230
88,015
1,128
86,887
8,516
322
105,519
17,261
88,259
1,140
87,118
8,570
241
105,321
17,519
87,803
1,093
86,710
8,606
239
105,259
17,591
87,668
1,146
86,522
8,625
264
5,401
2,385
2,672
14,395
5,206
2,350
2,487
14,963
5,192
2,315
2,473
14,999
5,097
2,266
2,389
15,270
4,963
2,220
2,399
15,161
5,061
2,279
2,375
15,446
5,321
2,549
2,410
15,363
5,097
2,302
2,352
15,401
4,981
2,303
2,333
15,126
4,968
2,232
2,393
15,561
5,143
2,373
2,425
15,498
4,837
2,296
2,343
15,316
4,957
2,318
2,289
15,416
4,750
2,311
2,138
15,652
4,785
2,282
2 ,107
15,614
5,122
2,201
2,587
13,928
4,965
2,199
2,408
14,509
4,972
2,171
2,408
14,564
4,862
2,102
2,317
14,819
4,727
2,095
2,319
14,679
4,819
2,116
2,288
14,986
5,033
2,377
2,307
14,928
4,837
2,144
2,283
14,970
4,697
2,105
2,272
14,688
4,709
2,048
2,317
15,127
4,930
2,243
2,369
15,060
4,609
2,102
2,301
14,976
4,801
2,190
2,236
14,977
4,505
2,185
2,057
15,219
4,553
2,129
2,024
15,094
CHARACTERISTIC
Civilian employed, 16 years and
o v e r.................................................
M e n ..............................................
Women ........................................
Married men, spouse present ..
Married women, spouse
p re s e n t.......................................
Women who maintain families .
MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS
OF WORKER
Agriculture:
Wage and salary workers ........
Self-employed w o rke rs .............
Unpaid family w o rk e rs ..............
Nonagricultural industries:
Wage and salary w o rk e rs ........
Government .............................
Private in dustries.....................
Private households..............
Other ......................................
Self-employed w o rk e rs .............
Unpaid family w o rk e rs ..............
PERSONS AT WORK
PART TIM E1
All industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack work ..................................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time .......................
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons .
Slack work ..................................
Could only find part-time work
Voluntary part time .......................
1 Excludes persons “ with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.
62
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
7.
Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Unemployment rates)
1989
1988
Annual average
Selected categories
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
6.2
16.9
5.4
5.4
5.5
15.3
4.8
4.9
5.6
15.4
4.9
4.8
5.4
15.5
4.6
4.8
5.3
15.0
4.6
4.7
5.4
14.1
4.8
4.7
5.3
14.8
4.7
4.7
5.4
16.4
4.6
4.7
5.1
14.8
4.5
4.5
5.0
13.7
4.2
4.6
5.3
14.4
4.6
4.7
5.2
15.2
4.3
4.8
5.3
15.6
4.3
4.9
5.2
14.7
4.3
5.0
5.2
14.5
4.4
4.7
5.3
14.4
15.5
13.4
4.8
4.6
4.7
13.1
13.9
12.3
4.1
4.1
4.9
13.7
13.9
13.5
4.3
4.1
4.7
13.4
14.5
12.3
4.1
4.1
4.6
12.9
14.4
11.3
4.1
4.0
4.6
11.9
12.6
11.3
4.2
4.0
4.6
12.6
13.4
11.8
4.1
3.9
4.6
14.1
16.4
11.7
4.0
3.9
4.3
12.1
14.0
10.2
3.8
3.6
4.2
11.3
12.3
10.2
3.6
3.8
4.6
12.3
13.1
11.5
4.0
4.1
4.4
13.1
14.8
11.2
3.6
4.1
4.5
13.0
13.4
12.6
3.7
4.1
4.6
12.8
12.4
13.4
3.8
4.3
4.5
12.8
12.9
12.7
3.8
4.1
13.0
34.7
34.4
34.9
11.1
11.6
11.7
32.4
32.7
32.0
10.1
10.4
11.4
32.1
32.1
32.0
9.7
10.0
10.9
31.9
31.9
31.9
9.1
9.7
11.2
30.9
32.8
28.6
9.6
9.8
11.2
31.1
32.1
29.9
9.8
9.8
11.6
29.6
29.8
29.3
10.0
10.5
12.0
34.5
36.7
32.0
10.4
10.4
11.9
32.4
33.1
31.6
10.5
10.3
10.9
31.6
28.6
34.8
9.8
9.1
10.8
30.8
35.5
26.2
10.0
8.8
11.0
32.4
36.9
28.4
9.4
9.5
11.9
36.5
33.5
40.2
9.4
10.5
10.9
27.4
22.1
33.1
9.3
9.9
11.1
31.6
30.0
33.4
9.8
9.4
8.8
8.2
8.4
7.5
7.8
8.0
7.6
8.4
6.8
6.5
8.3
7.9
8.1
9.0
9.0
3.9
4.3
9.2
5.8
8.4
1.7
7.1
3.3
3.9
8.1
5.2
7.6
1.3
6.3
3.4
4.0
7.5
5.3
7.4
1.3
6.4
3.1
3.8
8.1
5.1
7.4
1.3
6.3
3.1
3.7
7.9
5.0
7.4
1.3
6.1
3.3
3.8
7.7
5.0
7.1
1.2
6.2
3.1
3.7
8.2
5.1
7.0
1.2
6.3
3.1
3.6
8.0
5.0
7.9
1.2
6.2
3.1
3.4
8.0
4.8
7.3
1.1
5.9
2.9
3.5
7.9
4.8
6.2
1.1
5.8
3.2
4.0
7.6
5.0
7.2
1.2
6.0
2.9
3.8
8.3
4.8
6.9
1.1
5.9
2.8
3.8
7.9
4.8
7.7
1.0
6.1
2.9
3.8
8.7
4.9
7.2
1.2
6.0
3.1
3.9
8.0
4.9
6.9
1.1
5.9
6.2
10.0
11.6
6.0
5.8
6.3
4.5
6.9
4.9
3.5
10.5
5.5
7.9
10.6
5.3
5.0
5.7
3.9
6.2
4.5
2.8
10.6
5.6
7.0
10.7
5.5
5.0
6.3
3.8
6.4
4.4
2.9
11.0
5.4
8.6
9.6
5.4
5.2
5.8
3.8
6.2
4.4
2.7
10.8
5.4
8.8
10.0
5.3
5.0
5.7
3.5
6.0
4.5
2.6
10.2
5.5
8.9
10.6
5.1
4.9
5.3
4.0
6.2
4.6
2.5
9.3
5.4
7.7
10.4
5.2
5.0
5.5
3.8
6.3
4.1
2.7
8.8
5.6
6.1
10.4
5.3
5.0
5.7
3.8
6.3
4.7
2.7
9.5
5.1
8.0
10.0
4.9
4.4
5.5
3.9
5.6
4.3
2.7
8.9
5.0
7.0
9.4
4.8
4.7
4.9
3.9
5.6
4.1
2.6
8.9
5.4
5.6
9.7
4.9
4.7
5.2
4.0
5.9
4.8
2.7
10.5
5.2
4.5
9.3
4.9
4.5
5.5
4.0
5.5
4.7
2.9
10.3
5.3
3.7
10.0
5.2
4.6
6.1
4.4
6.0
4.3
3.0
11.0
5.4
5.5
10.5
5.0
4.7
5.5
4.2
6.2
4.4
2.8
8.5
5.4
6.5
10.3
5.2
4.8
5.9
3.6
6.0
4.4
2.7
8.6
CHARACTERISTIC
INDUSTRY
Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers ....
____
1 Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force hours.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
63
Current Labor Statistics:
8.
Employment Data
U n e m p lo y m e n t r a t e s b y s e x a n d a g e , m o n th ly d a t a s e a s o n a lly a d ju s t e d
(Civilian workers)
Annual
average
Sex and age
1987
1988
1988
Aug.
Sept.
1989
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Total, 16 years and o v e r ........................................................................
16 to 24 y e a rs ....................................................................
16 to 19 y e a rs .......................................................................
16 to 17 years ..............................................................
18 to 19 years ........................................................................
20 to 24 y e a rs ................................................................
25 years and o v e r.....................................................................
25 to 54 years ..................................................................
55 years and o v e r .........................................................
6.2
12.2
16.9
19.1
15.2
9.7
4.8
5.0
3.3
5.5
11.0
15.3
17.4
13.8
8.7
4.3
4.5
3.1
5.6
11.0
15.4
18.5
13.7
8.4
4.4
4.5
3.2
5.4
10.9
15.5
19.6
12.8
8.4
4.2
4.4
2.9
5.3
10.9
15.0
17.2
13.3
8.6
4.1
4.3
2.8
5.4
10.6
14.1
15.8
12.9
8.7
4.2
4.4
2.8
5.3
10.9
14.8
16.6
13.3
8.7
4.1
4.3
3.0
5.4
11.9
16.4
18.3
15.4
9.3
4.1
4.2
3.1
Men, 16 years and o v e r ....................................................................
16 to 24 years ...........................................................
16 to 19 y e a rs ...............................................................................
16 to 17 y e a rs ............................................................................
18 to 19 y e a rs ............................................................................
20 to 24 y e a rs ................................................................................
25 years and o v e r ...........................................................................
25 to 54 y e a rs ............................................................................
55 years and o v e r...............................................................
6.2
12.6
17.8
20.2
16.0
9.9
4.8
5.0
3.5
5.5
11.4
16.0
18.2
14.6
8.9
4.2
4.4
3.3
5.6
11.4
16.0
17.7
14.5
8.9
4.4
4.5
3.4
5.4
11.3
16.4
20.8
13.5
8.5
4.1
4.3
2.9
5.4
11.8
16.5
18.5
15.0
9.2
4.0
4.2
3.0
5.4
10.9
14.8
17.3
13.0
8.8
4.2
4.4
3.2
5.3
11.1
15.4
17.3
13.5
8.7
4.1
4.3
3.3
5.5
12.8
18.6
Women, 16 years and o v e r ................................................
16 to 24 y e a rs ......................................................................
16 to 19 years .................................................................
16 to 17 years ..........................................................................
18 to 19 years ..................................................................
20 to 24 years ......................................................
25 years and o v e r ..................................................................
25 to 54 years ......................................................................
55 years and o v e r ................................................................
6.2
11.7
15.9
18.0
14.3
9.4
4.8
5.1
3.0
5.6
10.6
14.4
16.6
12.9
8.5
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.5
10.4
14.8
19.2
12.8
8.0
4.3
4.6
2.8
5.5
10.5
14.5
18.2
12.0
8.2
4.3
4.5
2.9
5.3
9.9
13.3
15.8
11.6
7.9
4.2
4.5
2.4
5.3
10.3
13.3
14.1
12.8
8.6
4.2
4.4
2.4
5.4
10.7
14.2
15.8
13.1
8.7
4.1
4.4
2.6
9.
20.6
17.9
9.6
4.0
4.2
3.0
5.4
10.9
14.0
15.9
12.7
9.1
4.1
4.3
3.1
Mar.
Apr.
5.0
9.8
13.7
15.3
12.5
7.7
3.9
4.1
2.6
5.3
10.5
14.4
14.9
13.8
8.4
4.1
4.4
2.9
5.2
4.8
9.7
14.2
15.8
13.2
7.2
3.8
4.0
2.8
5.3
10.7
15.5
17.0
14.6
8.0
4.2
4.4
3.2
5.1
10.0
13.1
14.8
11.7
8.3
4.0
4.3
2.3
5.3
10.4
13.2
12.7
12.8
8.9
4.1
4.4
2.6
11.1
16.7
19.6
15.1
8.1
4.0
4.1
3.4
5.0
9.7
12.8
16.8
10.0
8.0
3.9
4.2
2.5
June
May
5.1
10.5
14.8
18.2
12.7
8.1
4.0
4.2
3.1
July
Aug.
5.2
10.4
15.2
16.2
14.5
7.7
4.0
4.2
2.9
5.3
11.3
15.6
17.5
14.9
8.9
4.0
4.1
3.3
5.2
10.7
14.7
17.8
12.4
5.2
10.9
14.5
18.1
12.5
8.6
8.8
4.0
4.2
3.1
4.0
4.1
3.1
5.0
5.0
11.5
15.8
20.0
13.6
9.2
3.7
3.7
3.0
4.8
10.4
13.4
17.4
10.7
8.7
3.7
3.9
3.1
5.0
11.4
14.7
17.4
12.7
9.6
3.7
3.8
3.3
11.0
17.0
18.8
15.7
7.7
3.7
3.9
2.9
5.3
9.8
13.4
13.4
13.3
7.7
4.4
4.6
3.0
5.6
5.7
5.4
11.0
11.1
10.2
15.4
14.7
16.2
16.0
18.3
14.4
8.4
4.4
4.6
3.2
14.4
18.8
12.4
7.9
4.2
4.5
2.7
8.6
4.4
4.5
3.8
Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1988
1989
Reason for unemployment
1987
Job losers ........................................................
On la y o ff......................................................................
Other job lo s e rs ..........................................................
Job leavers .....................................................
Reentrants ..............................................................
New entrants .........................................................
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
3,566
943
2,623
965
1,974
920
3,092
851
2,241
983
1,809
816
3,112
880
2,232
986
1,843
800
3,079
833
2,246
985
1,767
761
2,951
844
2,107
984
1,747
747
3,031
814
2,217
963
1,766
799
3,066
819
2,247
998
1,725
799
3,121
827
2,294
985
1,835
780
2,876
774
2,102
985
1,740
765
2,831
808
2,023
885
1,730
713
2,984
847
2,137
978
1,894
671
2,724
790
1,934
1,114
1,852
683
2,765
806
1,958
1,023
2,051
742
2,920
822
2,097
1,010
1,934
724
2,984
873
2,111
1,040
1,768
628
48.0
12.7
35.3
13.0
26.6
12.4
46.1
12.7
33.4
14.7
27.0
12.2
46.2
13.1
33.1
14.6
27.3
11.9
46.7
12.6
34.1
14.9
26.8
11.5
45.9
13.1
32.8
15.3
27.2
11.6
46.2
12.4
33.8
14.7
26.9
12.2
46.5
12.4
34.1
15.1
26.2
12.1
46.4
12.3
34.1
14.7
27.3
11.6
45.2
12.2
33.0
15.5
27.3
12.0
46.0
13.1
32.8
14.4
28.1
11.6
45.7
13.0
32.7
15.0
29.0
10.3
42.7
12.4
30.3
17.5
29.1
107
42.0
12.3
29.8
15.5
31.2
11.3
44.3
12.5
31.8
15.3
29.4
11.0
46.5
13.6
32.9
16.2
27.5
9.8
3.0
.8
1.6
.8
2.5
.8
1.5
.7
2.6
.8
1.5
.7
2.5
.8
1.4
.6
2.4
.8
1.4
.6
2.5
.8
1.4
.7
2.5
.8
1.4
.7
2.5
.8
1.5
.6
2.3
.8
1.4
.6
2.3
.7
1.4
.6
2.4
.8
1.5
.5
2.2
.9
1.5
.6
2.2
.8
1.7
.6
2.4
.8
1.6
.6
2.4
8
1.4
.5
June
July
Aug.
PERCENT OF UNEMPLOYED
Job lo s e rs ....................................................................
On la y o ff...................................................................
Other job lo s e rs .......................................................
Job le avers..................................................................
R e entran ts...................................................................
New entrants ..............................................................
PERCENT OF
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
Job losers ......................................................................
Job leavers ....................................................................
Reentrants .....................................................................
New entrants .................................................................
10.
Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Annual average
1988
1989
Weeks of unemployment
64
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Less than 5 weeks ...............................................
5 to 14 weeks ........................................................
15 weeks and o v e r ...............................................
15 to 26 weeks ...................................................
27 weeks and o v e r ............................................
3,246
2,196
1,983
943
1,040
3,084
2,007
1,610
801
809
3,158
1,956
1,636
831
805
3,116
1,896
1,568
775
793
3,059
1,835
1,554
788
766
3,117
1,935
1,502
787
715
3,029
2,039
1,495
758
737
3,181
2,081
1,512
757
755
3,247
1,865
1,304
665
639
3,055
1,821
1,310
648
663
3,090
2,034
1,426
689
737
3,041
2,017
1,313
702
611
3,309
1,999
1,258
659
599
3,149
1,927
1,472
846
626
3,071
2,011
1,305
737
567
Mean duration in w e e k s .......................................
Median duration in w e e k s ....................................
14.5
6.5
13.5
5.9
13.5
5.9
13.5
5.7
13.4
5.7
12.6
5.6
12.8
5.8
12.7
5.7
12.1
5.3
12.4
5.4
12.7
5.4
11.8
5.3
11.1
5.5
12.0
5.6
11.3
5.0
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
11. Unemployment rates of civilian workers by State, data not seasonally adjusted
July
1988
July
1989
7.5
76
71
7.4
5.9
7.8
6.1
6.1
7.5
5.8
5.3
3.3
2.5
4.2
5.1
4.8
3.4
4.1
4.9
6.0
Idaho ..................................................................
Illinois .................................................................
Indiana ...............................................................
5.8
3.7
5.0
6.2
4.6
5.4
2.4
4.6
5.3
3.9
Io w a ....................................................................
Kansas ...............................................................
K e n tu c k y ............................................................
Louisiana............................................................
M ain e ..................................................................
3.9
4.5
8.1
10.4
2.9
3.8
3.9
6.1
9.7
3.4
4.6
3.6
7.8
3.7
9.0
5.6
3.9
4.6
7.3
4.0
8.3
5.2
State
C a lifornia............................................................
Connecticut .......................................................
D elaw are............................................................
Florida ................................................................
Georgia ..............................................................
Massachusetts ..................................................
M ichigan.............................................................
M ississippi..........................................................
- Data not available.
NOTE: Some data In this
12.
table
may
differ
from
data
July
1988
July
1989
New H am pshire..............................................
6.5
3.4
4.8
2.7
5.2
3.4
5.3
3.2
New Jersey ......................................................
New Mexico .....................................................
New Y o rk ..........................................................
North Carolina ................................................
North Dakota ...................................................
4.2
8.1
4.2
3.2
4.4
4.5
6.5
4.6
3.4
3.8
Ohio ..................................................................
O k la h o m a .........................................................
O re g o n ..............................................................
Pennsylvania...................................................
Rhode Island....................................................
5.1
6.9
5.9
5.3
3.0
5.0
5.5
5.2
4.6
3.9
South C a ro lin a ................................................
South D a k o ta ...................................................
Tennessee .......................................................
Texas ................................................................
Utah ..................................................................
4.4
3.5
6.3
6.6
4.9
4.5
4.0
4.8
7.3
3.9
V e rm o n t............................................................
V irg in ia ..............................................................
Washington ......................................................
West V irg inia....................................................
Wisconsin .........................................................
2.1
3.5
6.2
10.1
3.6
3.7
3.2
5.7
7.3
4.0
5.4
6.1
State
published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the
database.
Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by State, data not seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
State
A rka n sa s............................................................
D elaw are............................................................
District of C o lum bia.........................................
Georgia ..............................................................
Idaho ..................................................................
Illinois .................................................................
Kentucky ............................................................
Louisiana............................................................
M in n e so ta ..........................................................
usspp
July 1988
June 1989
1 560 5
227 9
1 376.2
857.4
12 030 8
1,575.2
232.0
1,412.2
889.0
12,453.6
1,424.1
1 663.7
335.5
686.2
5,022.6
1,451.6
1,709.1
347.9
692.5
5,261.4
2,885.9
478.6
352.0
5,092.1
2,400.5
2,938.3
493.2
364.9
5,175.1
2,475.8
1,151.5
1,024.2
1,363.3
1,501.0
526 1
1,201.1
1,059.9
1,400.1
1,520.9
534.9
2 104 2
3,114.3
3 773 2
2^029.5
890.2
? ?an a
276 6
2.140.2
3.174.3
3,886.3
2,105.1
914.3
2,278.4
288.9
July 1989p
July 1988
State
1,569.8 N e b ra s k a ..........................................................
237.8 Nevada .............................................................
1,395.2 New H am pshire..............................................
881.6
12,365.0 New Jersey ......................................................
New Mexico .....................................................
1,439.0 New Y o rk ..........................................................
1,690.9 North Carolina ................................................
341.6 North Dakota ...................................................
699.3
5,194.4 Ohio ..................................................................
O kla h o m a .........................................................
2,932.4 O re g o n ..............................................................
493.2 Pennsylvania....................................................
361.8 Rhode Isla n d ....................................................
5.160.3
2.450.3 South C a ro lin a .................................................
South D a k o ta ...................................................
1,183.4 Tennessee .......................................................
1,042.0 Texas ................................................................
1,384.8 Utah ..................................................................
1,513.8
531.4 V e rm o n t............................................................
V irg in ia ..............................................................
2,131.9 Washington ......................................................
3,137.2 West V irg in ia ....................................................
3,834.3 W isc o n s in .........................................................
2,084.3
905.8 W yom ing...........................................................
2,262.5 Puerto Rico ......................................................
282.0 Virgin Islands ...................................................
June 1989
July 1989p
686.2
541.4
530.0
716.7
575.9
540.5
708.0
579.6
532.5
3,685.2
537.1
8,192.2
2,932.9
257.9
3,728.7
555.7
8,352.1
3,038.1
263.0
3,721.1
551.7
8,273.7
2,986.9
259.7
4,678.8
1.137.1
1.149.1
5,042.9
455.4
4,831.8
1,144.1
1,209.0
5,139.1
461.7
4,795.2
1.137.0
1.192.1
5,099.4
457.2
1,440.4
266.7
2,062.8
6,645.5
654.1
1,517.7
273.7
2,085.9
6,790.6
690.7
1,496.4
268.3
2,067.9
6,779.6
681.5
251.3
2,790.2
1,935.8
618.0
2,161.1
256.8
2,920.8
2,053.6
619.3
2,225.4
254.7
2.899.7
2.027.7
605.8
2,201.3
185.9
840.2
41.5
196.7
854.5
41.3
189.6
850.1
42.1
o = preliminary
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
65
Current Labor Statistics:
13.
Employment Data
Employment of workers on nonagricultural payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
(In thousands)
Annua average
1988
Industry
1987
1988
102 200
85 190
105,584
88,212
GOODS-PRODUCING ...
Mining ................
Oil and gas extraction ..............
24 708
717
402
25,249
721
406
Construction ..................
General building contractors..
4,967
1,320
5,125
1,368
19,024
12,970
1989
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
JulyP
Aug.p
88,578
106,207
88,736
106,475
88,991
106,824
89,299
107,097
89,574
107,442
89,897
107,711
90,124
107,888
90,291
108,101
90,475
108,310
90,623
108,607
90,884
108,791
91,030
108,901
91,083
25,303
25,313
25,384
717
400
25,460
712
396
25,513
711
394
25,626
711
393
25,629
711
394
25,646
714
397
25,671
720
400
25,672
722
401
25,648
715
402
25,683
707
404
25,724
729
404
1,372
1C3
1,374
5,162
1,363
5,191
1,375
5,213
1,380
5,267
1,404
5,270
1,398
5,252
1,380
5,279
1,377
5,283
1,388
5,283
1,384
5,317
1,392
5,325
1,403
19,403
13,254
13,270
19,431
13,263
19,505
13,324
19,557
13,365
19,589
13,385
19,648
13,423
19,648
13,426
19,680
13,442
19,672
13,430
19,667
13,426
19,650
13,400
19,659
13,415
19,670
13,424
11,194
7,439
11,437
7,635
11,462
7,658
11,464
7,653
11,509
7,690
11,545
7,717
11,565
7,730
11,605
7,758
11,594
7,749
11,604
7,749
11,600
7,744
11,594
7,735
11,567
7,706
11,554
7,699
11,567
7,712
741
516
586
747
765
530
600
774
761
529
600
776
763
530
600
779
770
531
603
783
775
532
605
784
780
532
607
785
784
532
607
786
778
534
608
786
777
535
607
788
772
537
606
788
771
534
604
787
769
534
603
787
767
535
602
786
766
531
603
787
268
1,401
277
1,431
277
1,435
1,436
1,442
277
1,445
276
1,449
276
1,458
276
1,458
276
1,457
275
1,454
276
1,452
276
1,449
276
1,446
277
1,443
2,008
2,082
2,094
2,098
2,110
2,120
2,126
2,134
2,138
2,143
2,144
2,150
2,151
2,156
2,156
2,069
2,051
867
706
2,070
2,051
857
749
2,073
2,052
859
755
2,072
2,044
859
756
2,073
2,055
865
758
2,075
2,060
867
762
2,067
2,063
867
767
2,065
2,079
882
770
2,062
2,067
871
772
2,060
2,071
869
776
2,058
2,073
875
777
2,050
2,076
876
778
2,041
2,062
861
779
2,038
2,051
848
781
2,032
2,074
873
782
371
386
387
nnr
384
387
389
390
391
390
391
392
392
392
393
Nondurable g o o d s ..............
Production w o rke rs.......
7,830
5,531
7,967
5,619
7,963
5,612
7,967
5,610
7,996
5,634
8,012
5,648
8,024
5,655
8,043
5,665
8,054
5,677
8,076
5,693
8,072
5,686
8,073
5,691
8,083
5,694
8,105
5,716
8,103
5,712
Food and kindred p ro d u cts........
Tobacco manufactures ........
Textile mill p ro d u c ts ......
Apparel and other textile
p roducts...............................
Paper and allied products ..........
1,620
55
726
1,636
56
729
1,629
55
723
1,627
55
726
1,644
55
726
1,648
56
725
1,646
56
724
1,650
56
728
1,650
56
728
1,655
56
729
1,657
54
728
1,656
53
728
1,663
52
729
1,677
53
731
1,670
52
729
1,099
680
1,092
693
694
1,085
693
1,083
695
1,088
695
1,090
696
1,092
696
1,096
696
1,101
697
1,098
696
1,095
697
1,093
697
1,096
700
1,098
700
1,506
1,026
164
1,561
1,065
162
1,568
1,071
162
1,573
1,072
162
1,577
1,074
162
1,581
1,075
162
1,588
1,079
162
1,595
1,084
160
1,595
1,085
161
1,600
1,088
161
1,601
1,090
162
1,603
1,094
162
1,607
1,096
163
1,609
1,094
163
1,614
1,094
163
811
143
829
144
144
144
836
144
839
143
840
143
839
143
843
144
845
144
843
143
843
142
841
142
842
140
843
140
SERVICE-PRODUCING ....
Transportation and public
u tilities....................
T ransportation....................
Communication and public
u tilitie s ...................
77,492
80,335
80,651
80,894
81,091
81,364
81,584
81,816
82,082
82,242
82,430
82,638
82,959
83,108
83,177
5,372
3,164
5,548
3,334
3,353
5,581
3,365
5,596
3,381
5,616
3,402
5,634
3,421
5,654
3,439
5,667
3,453
5,666
3,452
5,682
3,467
5,700
3,484
5,716
3,500
5,741
3,529
5,619
3,537
2,208
2,214
2,216
2,215
2,214
2,213
2,215
2,214
2,214
2,215
2,216
2,216
2,212
2,082
Wholesale trade ...........
Durable g o o d s .........
Nondurable g o o d s ...........
5,844
3,427
2,417
6,029
3,561
2,467
6,051
2,473
6,071
3,590
2,481
6,086
3,599
2,487
6,104
3,612
2,492
6,125
3,626
2,499
6,146
3,638
2,508
6,171
3,657
2,514
6,197
3,676
2,521
6,206
3,676
2,530
6,222
3,685
2,537
6,230
3,693
2,537
6,240
3,700
2,540
6,246
3,706
2,540
18,483
2,412
2,962
19,110
2,461
3,098
19,182
2,454
19,188
2,452
19,229
2,447
3,149
19,282
2,452
3,165
19,328
2,460
3,182
19,407
2,472
3,200
19,460
2,481
3,212
19,488
2,490
3,223
19,489
2,492
3,233
19,528
2,491
3,245
19,551
2,493
3,262
19,582
2,481
3,273
19,601
2,477
3,289
2,004
6,106
2,090
6,282
6,302
2,115
6,296
2,124
6,314
2,131
6,322
2,136
6,328
2,143
6,323
2,150
6,332
2,155
6,322
2,159
6,335
2,159
6,348
2,155
6,362
2,154
6,370
2,153
6,385
6,547
3,270
2,024
1,253
6,676
3,290
2,082
1,304
6,686
3,285
2,087
1,314
6,695
3,288
2,092
1,315
6,710
3,293
2,098
1,319
6,726
3,299
2,102
1,325
6,744
3,307
2,110
1,327
6,746
3,308
2,109
1,329
6,763
3,311
2,116
1,336
6,774
3,316
2,117
1,341
6,776
3,312
2,119
1,345
6,790
3,320
2,123
1,347
6,808
3,320
2,129
1,359
6,812
3,322
2,130
1,360
6,836
3,338
2,135
1,363
S e rv ices...............
Business se rvice s .............
Health s e rv ic e s .........
24,236
5,195
6,805
25,600
5,571
7,144
25,784
5,617
25,888
5,651
7,228
25,986
5,667
7,267
26,111
5,682
7,313
26,230
5,715
7,359
26,318
5,707
7,396
26,434
5,729
7,442
26,520
5,736
7,488
26,651
5,760
7,528
26,711
5,776
7,570
26,931
5,799
7,616
26,972
5,782
7,650
27,057
5,801
7,698
Government ...........
F e d e ra l........................
S ta te ...........................
L o c a l........................
17,010
2,943
3,967
10,100
17,372
2,971
4,063
10,339
17,376
2,967
4,079
10,330
17,471
2,985
4,088
10,398
17,484
2,986
4,081
10,417
17,525
2,983
4,085
10,457
17,523
2,981
4,085
10,457
17,545
2,978
4,084
10,483
17,587
2,982
4,095
10,510
17,597
2,982
4,102
10,513
17,626
2,982
4,111
10,533
17,687
2,999
4,119
10,569
17,723
2,995
4,136
10,592
17,761
2,999
4,161
10,601
17,818
3,004
4,176
10,638
TOTAL ...........................
PRIVATE SECTOR ..........
M anufacturing.............
Production workers ...........
Durable g o o d s .......
Production workers .................
Lumber and wood products .
Furniture and fix tu re s ...................
Stone, clay, and glass products ..
Primary metal industries ..........
Blast furnaces and basic steel
p roducts...............................
Fabricated metal products ...
Machinery, except e lectrica l........
Electrical and electronic
equipm ent.......................
Transportation equipm ent.............
Motor vehicles and equipment ....
Instruments and related products
Miscellaneous manufacturing
in d u strie s........................
Printing and publishing...................
Chemicals and allied pro d u c ts .....
Petroleum and coal products
Rubber and misc. plastics
p roducts.............................
Leather and leather products ....
Retail tra d e ....................
General merchandise stores ....
Food s to re s ....................
Automotive dealers and service
s ta tio n s ....................
Eating and drinking places .
Finance, insurance, and real
estate
F in a n c e ............................................
Insurance .........................................
Real e s ta te ......................................
408
_
p = preliminary
NOTE:
66
See notes on the data for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
14. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry,
monthly data seasonally adjusted
Annual
average
1989
1988
Industry
987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
Oct.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
Julyp
Aug.P
34.6
34.6
34.8
34.6
34.8
34.7
34.6
34.7
34.8
34.7
34.7
34.8
34.6
34.7
34.9
41.0
3.7
41.1
3.9
41.0
3.9
41.1
3.9
41.2
4.0
41.2
3.9
41.0
3.9
41.1
3.9
41.1
3.9
41.0
4.0
41.3
3.9
41.0
3.8
41.0
3.8
41.0
3.9
40.9
3.8
41.5
38
40 6
40 0
42 3
43.1
43.4
41.6
41.8
4.1
40.3
39.4
42.3
43.6
44.0
41.9
41.7
4.1
40.1
39.2
42.2
43.5
44.1
41.8
41.9
4.1
40.1
39.6
42.3
43.9
44.5
42.0
41.9
4.2
40.7
39.4
42.5
43.7
44.2
41.9
41.9
4.2
40.3
39.5
42.6
43.7
44.0
42.1
41.7
4.1
40.3
39.4
42.4
43.5
43.8
41.8
41.8
4.1
40.3
39.8
42.5
43.6
44.0
41.9
41.8
4.1
39.6
39.7
42.2
43.4
43.8
41.9
41.7
4.1
40.0
39.8
42.2
43.5
44.1
41.8
41.9
4.1
40.5
39.9
42.5
43.3
43.5
41.9
41.5
3.9
39.7
39.4
41.9
43.2
43.6
41.7
41.5
3.9
39.8
39.4
42.2
43.3
43.7
41.5
41.5
4.0
39.6
39.3
42.4
43.0
43.2
41.6
41.5
4.0
40.1
39.4
42.7
42.5
42.3
41.6
Machinery except electrical .............
Electrical and electronic equipment
Transportation equipm ent.................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent......
Instruments and related products ...
Miscellaneous m anufacturing...........
42.2
40.9
42.0
42.2
41.4
39.4
42.6
41.0
42.7
43.5
41.5
39.2
42.5
40.9
42.7
43.6
41.5
39.3
42.7
40.9
43.0
44.1
41.6
39.2
42.7
41.0
43.1
43.9
41.8
39.1
42.5
41.0
43.1
44.1
41.6
39.3
42.5
40.8
42.8
43.7
41.1
39.0
42.5
40.9
42.8
43.6
41.5
39.4
42.6
40.9
43.1
43.9
41.5
39.5
42.5
40.6
43.1
43.9
41.1
39.5
42.7
41.0
42.8
43.3
41.5
39.8
42.5
40.7
42.5
42.8
41.1
39.6
42.5
40.7
42.5
42.7
41.3
39.4
42.3
40.7
42.6
42.6
41.3
39.3
42.1
40.8
42.5
42.7
41.0
39.8
Nondurable g o o d s ...........................
Overtime h o u rs ............................
Food and kindred p ro d u c ts............
Textile mill p ro d u c ts .........................
Apparel and other textile products .
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ..............
40.2
3.6
40.2
41 8
37.0
43.4
40.1
3.7
40.3
41.1
37.0
43.2
40.1
3.6
40.3
41.0
36.9
43.2
40.2
3.7
40.3
41.0
37.1
43.2
40.2
3.7
40.4
41.0
36.9
43.2
40.2
3.6
40.6
41.0
37.0
43.1
40.0
3.6
40.2
40.5
36.8
43.2
40.1
3.6
40.1
40.9
37.0
43.1
40.2
3.7
40.3
40.8
37.1
43.2
40.1
3.8
40.4
41.1
36.9
43.3
40.4
3.8
40.7
41.7
37.6
43.4
40.2
3.7
40.5
41.4
37.1
43.3
40.3
3.6
40.7
41.4
37.1
43.3
40.2
3.8
41.1
41.2
37.0
43.1
40.2
3.7
40.8
40.9
36.9
43.3
Printing and publishing.......................................
Chemicals and allied products.........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products ..........................
38.0
42.3
41.6
38.2
38.0
42.3
41.7
37.5
38.0
42.2
41.6
37.5
38.1
42.3
41.7
37.5
38.0
42.5
41.6
37.8
37.9
42.3
41.7
37.3
37.8
42.3
41.4
37.7
38.0
42.3
41.7
38.0
38.0
42.3
41.7
38.6
37.9
42.3
41.6
38.0
37.9
42.6
41.6
38.3
37.7
42.1
41.5
37.4
37.8
42.5
41.5
37.9
37.6
42.5
41.4
37.7
37.8
42.4
41.3
38.2
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES
39.2
39.3
39.3
39.4
39.4
39.3
39.4
39.6
39.4
39.4
40.1
39.5
39.4
39.4
39.4
37.5
37.4
37.9
38.1
38.1
38.0
38.1
38.1
38.1
38.1
38.3
37.9
38.0
38.1
38.0
WHOLESALE TRADE
28.9
29.2
28.9
32.5
32.8
32.6
PRIVATE SECTOR
MANUFACTURING
Overtime hours .
Durable g o o d s ...............................................
Overtime h o u rs .........................................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ........................
Furniture and fix tu re s ...................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts .................
Primary metal industries ..............................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
Fabricated metal products ..........................
RETAIL TRADE
29.2
29.1
29.0
29.1
29.2
29.0
29.1
29.1
28.9
28.9
29.1
28.9
SERVICES ........
32.5
32.6
32.5
32.6
32.7
32.5
32.7
32.7
32.5
32.6
32.8
32.5
= preliminary
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent
p
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
benchmark adjustment.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
67
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagriculturai payrolls by industry,
seasonally adjusted
An iual
ave rage
Industry
1988
1989
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
Julyp
Aug.p
PRIVATE SECTOR (in current dollars)1 .............
$8.98
$9.29
$9.32
$9.37
$9.43
$9.42
$9.45
$9.49
$9.52
$9.54
$9.61
$9.60
$9.62
$9.70
$9.69
Construction ..............................................
Manufacturing ................................
Excluding overtime ........................
Transportation and public utilities ..........................
Wholesale tra d e ............................
Retail tra d e ........................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate ......................
S e rv ic e s ..........................................
12.71
9.91
9.48
12.03
9.60
6.12
8.73
8.49
13.01
10.18
9.72
12.32
9.94
6.31
9.09
8.91
13.03
10.21
9.75
12.37
9.95
6.33
9.09
8.95
13.07
10.25
9.78
12.37
10.03
6.36
9.18
9.00
13.08
10.29
9.80
12.41
10.14
6.38
9.35
9.07
13.10
10.30
9.83
12.39
10.06
6.40
9.26
9.05
13.15
10.31
9.85
12.36
10.11
6.43
9.35
9.10
13.18
10.33
9.87
12.45
10.19
6.44
9.40
9.15
13.22
10.37
9.89
12.48
10.18
6.45
9.35
9.19
13.26
10.40
9.92
12.50
10.21
6.47
9.36
9.24
13.33
10.40
9.92
12.52
10.36
6.51
9.54
9.32
13.32
10.42
9.97
12.54
10.28
6.49
9.45
9.33
13.32
10.45
9.99
12.54
10.33
6.52
9.53
9.34
13.42
10.49
10.01
12.60
10.44
6.54
9.67
9.46
13.35
10.53
10.05
12.53
10.39
6.56
9.57
9.43
PRIVATE SECTOR (in constant (1977) dollars)1
4.86
4.84
4.82
4.83
4.84
4.82
4.82
4.81
4.81
4.80
4.80
4.77
4.77
4.80
1 Includes mining, not shown separately
- Data not available.
p = preliminary
-
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
benchmark revision.
ind A^era^e hourly earnin9s of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagriculturai payrolls by
Annual
1989
average
Industry
1987
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
Julyp
Aug.f
PRIVATE SECTOR
$8.98
$9.29
$9.24
$9.40
$9.45
$9.46
$9.46
$9.54
$9.55
$9.56
$9.62
$9.59
$9.58
$9.63
$9.60
M IN IN G ....................
12.54
12.75
12.69
12.82
12.79
12.89
13.03
13.20
13.22
13.15
13.19
13.13
13.03
12.97
13.11
CONSTRUCTION
12.71
13.01
12.99
13.16
13.17
13.08
13.19
13.26
13.21
13.26
13.30
13.28
13.24
13.33
13.31
9.91
10.18
10.13
10.25
10.25
10.31
10.37
10.37
10.38
10.41
10.41
10.42
10.44
10.48
10.45
10.44
8.40
7.67
10.25
11.94
13.77
10.00
10.71
8.61
7.94
10.47
12.15
13.97
10.26
10.65
8.58
8.02
10.45
10.79
8.77
8.06
10.57
12.19
14.03
10.34
10.85
8.69
8.02
10.60
12.22
14.01
10.36
10.90
8.76
8.06
10.57
12.26
14.07
10.44
10.90
8.71
8.10
10.59
12.27
14.04
10.45
10.91
8.69
8.08
10.62
12.27
14.13
10.46
10.93
8.68
8.13
10.62
12.27
14.13
10.47
10.93
8.76
8.12
10.71
12.26
14.06
10.48
10.94
8.79
8.16
10.69
12.25
14.06
10.49
10.98
8.85
8.23
10.73
12.32
14.18
10.51
11.00
10.21
10.78
8.69
8.09
10.55
12.24
14.07
10.34
8.93
8.25
10.74
12.41
14.34
10.51
10.99
8.98
8.30
10.76
12.32
14.27
10.50
10.72
9.88
12.94
13.53
9.72
7.76
11.01
10.97
10.15
13.21
13.83
9.94
7.95
11.09
10.19
13.44
14.10
9.99
8.01
11.11
11.22
10.24
13.56
14.18
10.07
8.12
11.24
10.29
13.59
14.23
10.13
8.20
11.21
10.16
13.45
14.09
10.08
8.10
11.25
10.30
13.65
14.28
10.17
8.23
11.26
10.31
13.60
14.20
10.17
8.22
11.23
10.26
13.59
14.19
10.14
8.23
8.21
11.29
10.33
13.58
14.17
10.17
8.24
11.32
10.37
13.65
14.22
10.25
8.24
11.36
10.43
13.64
14.13
10.29
8.30
11.33
10.45
13.72
14.26
10.31
8.16
9.50
9.11
14.09
7.43
11.72
9.49
9.03
14.01
7.45
6.22
11.68
9.54
9.15
14.56
7.47
6.25
11.74
9.61
9.25
14.31
7.52
6.29
11.81
9.62
9.27
14.39
7.60
6.32
11.78
9.62
9.26
14.75
7.59
6.32
11.80
9.66
9.33
15.34
7.59
6.34
11.84
9.65
9.32
15.87
7.60
6.32
11.83
9.68
9.34
16.13
7.62
6.32
11.89
9.70
9.37
16.48
7.65
6.33
11.91
9.76
9.35
16.31
7.65
6.28
12.05
9.72
9.26
15.39
7.70
6.35
11.92
10.70
12.75
15.01
9.22
6.30
10.68
10.67
12.78
15.14
9.23
6.33
12.86
10.70
12.90
15.21
9.31
6.44
10.73
12.85
15.24
9.32
6.48
10.74
12.88
15.45
9.31
6.49
10.79
12.91
15.46
9.33
6.54
10.73
12.92
15.50
9.35
6.55
10.76
12.98
15.34
9.40
6.58
10.75
12.98
15.23
9.41
6.59
10.82
13.11
15.31
9.45
6.53
10.87
13.14
15.18
9.43
6.57
MANUFACTURING
Durable goods ...............................................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ........................
Furniture and fix tu re s ...................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts .................
Primary metal industries ..............................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
Fabricated metal products ..........................
Machinery, except electrical ............
Electrical and electronic equipm ent.
Transportation equipm ent.................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent......
Instruments and related products ....
Miscellaneous m anufacturing...........
Nondurable goods ...........................
Food and kindred p ro d u c ts...........
Tobacco manufactures ...................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts ........................
Apparel and other textile products
Paper and allied products ..............
10.13
13.31
14.00
9.98
8.01
12.10
13.96
10.12
9.18
8.93
14.07
7.17
5.94
11.43
11.65
9.41
9.02
14.97
7.37
6.09
11.65
Printing and publishing......................................
Chemicals and allied products.........................
Petroleum and coal p roducts...........................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products ..........................
10.28
12.37
14.58
8.92
6.08
10.52
12.67
14.98
9.14
6.27
10.54
12.62
14.84
9.17
6.22
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES
12.03
12.32
12.35
12.40
12.42
12.46
12.42
12.47
12.50
12.46
12.51
12.49
12.48
12.57
12.52
WHOLESALE TRADE
9.60
9.94
9.91
10.04
10.10
10.07
10.14
10.23
10.23
10.21
10.36
10.28
10.31
10.40
10.35
RETAIL TRADE ..........
6.12
6.31
6.26
6.38
6.39
6.43
6.43
6.48
6.47
6.48
6.52
6.49
6.49
6.49
6.49
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE
8.73
9.09
9.03
9.14
9.29
9.27
9.32
9.46
9.47
9.43
9.59
9.48
9.48
9.58
9.50
SERVICES ................................
8.49
8.91
8.81
9.00
9.09
9.11
9.16
9.25
9.28
9.29
9.34
9.30
9.26
9.33
9.29
9.43
9.10
14.68
7.37
6.12
6.21
p = preliminary
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent
68
10.27
13.58
14.20
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
15.18
9.26
6.41
benchmark revision.
17. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
1987
PRIVATE SECTOR
Current d o lla rs ................
Seasonally adjusted....
Constant (1977) dollars
1988
1989
1988
Annual average
Industry
Sept.
Aug.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr
June
May
JulyP
Aug.p
$327.57 $328.86 $334.78 $330.86 $333.38 $338.01 $336.00
$312.50 $322.36 $323.40 $327.12 $329.81 $328.26 $330.15 $
329.39 331.04 335.39 332.16 332.85 337.56 335.27
_
322.47 325.14 328.16 326.87 327.92
167.41 165.94 165.76 167.39 164.53 165.37 167.08
169.28 167.81 167.30 168.10 168.96 167.99 168.70
532.98
541.00
544.85
540.09
557.68
551.27
552.30
564.53
551.46
555.12
566.35
539.33
555.08
531.70
557.04
M IN IN G .................
505.34
514.95
494.42
491.99
483.99
495.92
504.07
500.66
503.12
517.76
493.08
501.41
518.54
480.44
478.20
CONSTRUCTION
MANUFACTURING
Current d o lla rs ...............
Constant (1977) dollars .
418.40
217.80
414.32
214.34
423.33
217.54
423.33
216.87
427.87
218.97
432.43
220.97
425.17
216.26
423.50
214.54
426.81
215.13
426.81
213.41
426.18
211.92
429.08
212.84
424.44
209.81
426.36
406.31
220.10
Durable g o o d s ................................................
Lumber and wood p ro d u c ts ........................
Furniture and fix tu re s ...................................
Stone, clay, and glass p ro d u c ts ................
Primary metal in d u strie s..............................
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
Fabricated metal products ..........................
433.26
341.04
306.80
433.58
514.61
597.62
416.00
447.68
346.98
312.84
442.88
529.74
614.68
429.89
439.85
345.77
315.19
444.13
521.51
608.66
423.72
452.76
350.21
324.41
451.54
538.56
628.93
435.31
453.18
359.57
323.21
454.51
531.48
615 92
434.28
457.87
347.60
320.00
452.62
536.46
616.44
441.34
463.25
353.90
326.43
446.05
540.67
621.89
445.79
455.62
345.79
319.14
439.49
536.20
617.76
438.90
452.77
338.91
315.93
436.48
532.52
617.48
435.14
455.78
345.46
321.95
444.98
533.75
621.72
436.60
455.78
354.78
319.12
456.25
529.63
613.02
437.02
454.01
352.48
318.24
453.26
527.98
613.02
435.34
457.87
357.54
324.26
457.10
533.46
622.50
438.27
449.90
352.74
318.45
457.52
528.67
619.49
428.81
452.79
361.89
328.68
462.68
518.67
597.91
433.65
452.38
Machinery, except electrical .....................
404.09
Electrical and electronic equ ipm ent........
.
543.48
Transportation equipm ent..........................
.
570.97
Motor vehicles and equipm ent..............
. 402.41
Instruments and related p ro d u c ts ...........
305.74
Miscellaneous m anufacturing..................................| 305.74
469.03
415.33
568.34
609.00
414.17
313.99
460.74
412.09
552.18
583.63
409.53
310.05
473.54
417.79
577.92
621.81
415.58
314.79
473.29
416.56
579.70
619.96
420.34
320.76
480.22
423.94
591.22
632.43
422.94
323.18
488.94
430.12
591.17
633.24
425.46
325.54
477.55
422.10
582.58
619.12
420.99
323.05
477.28
416.56
584.37
621.52
420.81
322.62
479.25
417.15
591.05
631.18
419.00
324.26
478.55
419.62
584.80
620.54
420.02
325.12
477.57
417.33
579.87
613.56
414.94
324.66
482.23
423.10
581.49
611.46
423.33
324.66
474.85
418.24
567.42
584.98
418.80
320.38
471.33
424.27
570.75
588.94
419.62
323.14
.
.
.
.
.
.
369.04
358.99
548.73
299.71
219.78
496.06
378.14
366.73
584.26
302.91
226.44
503.28
378.28
368.02
600.30
304.38
225.33
499.79
384.75
371.69
580.51
307.60
230.39
512.16
382.45
367.52
578.61
306.94
230.76
505.74
386.37
374.24
586.77
309.26
233.13
509.52
389.21
377.40
570.97
308.32
233.99
519.64
383.84
369.87
546.82
309.32
232.58
508.90
382.88
366.70
557.55
307.40
233.21
506.22
385.43
372.27
556.84
311.19
233.95
509.12
386.97
372.80
604.65
313.12
234.47
509.87
387.20
377.34
637.14
313.94
233.84
512.46
390.91
381.36
660.85
318.24
236.74
514.51
390.40
383.35
616.52
310.59
230.48
515.74
390.74
381.51
580.20
317.24
234.95
512.56
.
.
..
390.64
523.25
641.52
399.76
535.94
665.11
401.57
528.78
661.86
411.95
539.33
672.45
406.91
540.59
676.76
406.53
547.84
670.96
410.88
553.41
673.80
404.52
544.84
662.94
404.90
544.82
679.80
408.94
546.09
667.87
405.59
549.10
686.65
402.42
546.46
673.43
402.05
551.65
679.26
404.67
553.24
678.23
411.97
553.19
675.51
..
..
371.07
232.26
381.14
235.13
378.72
234.49
384.47
236.25
384.89
239.91
388.92
239.73
391.95
246.65
390.51
244.94
387.30
245.32
387.20
244.60
388.03
247.59
390.10
247.41
391.46
255.03
385.56
246.83
386.63
252.95
TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC
U T IL IT IE S ..........................................
490.3C
489.80
490.59
489.68
490.59
490.07
488.75
488.43
497.90
490.86
494.21
498.30
471.58
484.18
500.29
..
376.58
382.52
385.82
382.68
387.35
387.72
386.69
395.75
389.61
392.81
394.34
365.76
378.71
398.32
..
386.96
WHOLESALE TRADE
186.91
189.51
194.05
192.75
Nondurable goods ............................
Food and kindred pro d u cts............
Tobacco m anufactures....................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts .........................
Apparel and other textile products .
Paper and allied p ro d u c ts ..............
Printing and publishing.............
Chemicals and allied products .
Petroleum and coal products ...
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics pro d u cts ....................
Leather and leather products ..
178.7C
183.6Í
186.5Í
185.68
185.95
185.18
190.33
184.03
183.10
184.68
RETAIL TRADE ..........
..
188.43
FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL
ESTATE ................................................
322.3"
327.21
334.4¿
330.9¿
333.66
341.51
339.03
337.¡
348.12
337.49
339.38
340.10
316.9C
326.3C
347.75
..
288.9"
292.5(
297.2¿
296.08
298.62
301.55
301.'
306.35
301.32
308.82
305.64
275.9Í
290.4’
302.80
...
300.67
SERVICES
.
- Data not available,
p = preliminary
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
69
Current Labor Statistics:
18.
Employment Data
Diffusion indexes of employment change, seasonally adjusted
(In percent)
Jan.
Time span
and year
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Private nonagricultural payrolls, 349 industries
Over 1-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
55.6
60.7
68.3
59.3
63.5
60.5
61.0
63.0
61.0
61.9
62.8
58.2
58.6
61.3
55.6
59.7
67.2
59.7
65.3
63.6
54.9
60.6
58.0
58.5
63.0
55.4
Over 3-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
60.7
64.8
71.6
62.0
65.6
70.1
66.6
69.5
64.5
65.2
70.2
61.9
65.8
71.1
61.6
65.9
71.9
60.7
67.8
71.2
63.2
71.1
64.2
71.2
65.3
72.3
70.1
-
70.9
73.4
65.9
74.6
Over 6-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
67.3
69.9
75.1
65.8
70.2
69.5
64.8
71.5
68.2
66.8
73.9
65.3
67.6
73.9
63.8
69.5
69.1
71.3
70.2
73.5
74.6
73.2
73.5
71.5
73.9
71.8
74.5
72.2
75.8
Over 12-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
66.6
76.2
73.5
68.2
76.1
74.2
68.2
74.8
71.8
74.6
71.9
75.8
72.5
74.9
72.2
78.1
74.1
75.5
75.4
75.5
72.5
74.8
-
73.8
74.9
-
76.9
74.1
67.8
63.9
64.5
68.2
60.7
64.6
“
Manufacturing payrolls, 141 industries
Over 1-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
44.3
58.5
62.4
53.9
56.0
53.5
54.3
55.0
53.2
55.7
59.9
49.6
55.3
58.5
46.8
54.3
61.7
48.6
62.8
59.6
48.6
59.9
51.1
52.1
63.8
49.3
59.9
62.8
_
65.6
64.9
“
56.4
58.5
Over 3-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
52.1
63.1
67.4
51.4
61.0
63.8
59.6
62.4
55.7
61.3
64.9
51.8
58.5
67.4
49.3
62.8
67.0
48.9
67.0
64.5
52.5
71.6
58.2
“
68.4
62.1
70.6
66.7
67.7
71.3
64.5
70.9
Over 6-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............................................................................
57.4
66.3
69.5
56.7
66.3
58.5
55.3
67.7
55.7
62.4
69.5
52.5
64.9
66.7
52.1
67.0
64.2
67.4
66.0
70.6
70.9
71.3
68.8
69.5
69.9
“
69.5
71.6
Over 12-month span:
1987 ............................................................................
1988 ............................................................................
1989 ............... ............................................................
55.3
73.8
63.5
58.5
70.2
65.6
58.5
70.9
”
63.5
71.6
66.3
72.0
“
67.4
69.9
69.1
70.2
“
68.4
69.9
"
- Data not available.
NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus
one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent
indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing
70
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
71.6
70.9
72.7
69.1
”
71.6
71.6
_
68.1
74.1
“
72.3
67.0
employment. Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each span are
preliminary. See the “ Definitions” in this section. See “ Notes on the data” for a
description of the most recent benchmark revision.
19.
Annual data: Employment status of the noninstitutional population
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Noninstitutional pop ulation........................................
169,349
171,775
173,939
175,891
178,080
179,912
182,293
184,490
186,322
Labor force:
Total (num ber)........................................................
Percent of pop ulation...........................................
108,544
64.1
110,315
64.2
111,872
64.3
113,226
64.4
115,241
64.7
117,167
65.1
119,540
65.6
121,602
65.9
123,378
66.2
100,907
59.6
1,604
102,042
59.4
1,645
101,194
58.2
1,668
102,510
58.3
1,676
106,702
59.9
1,697
108,856
60.5
1,706
111,303
61.1
1,706
114,177
61.9
1,737
116,677
62.6
1,709
99,303
3,364
95,938
100,397
3,368
97,030
99,526
3,401
96,125
100,834
3,383
97,450
105,005
3,321
101,685
107,150
3,179
103,971
109,597
3,163
106,434
112,440
3,208
109,232
114,968
3,169
111,800
Unemployed:
Total (num ber)................................................
Percent of labor fo r c e ...................................
7,637
7.0
8,273
7.5
10,678
9.5
10,717
9.5
8,539
7.4
8,312
7.1
8,237
6.9
7,425
6.1
6,701
5.4
Not in labor force (number) ...................................
60,806
61,460
62,067
62,665
62,839
62,744
62,752
62,888
62,944
Employed:
Total (number) .................................................
Percent of population .....................................
Resident Armed F o rce s...............................
Civilian
Total .............................................................
A g riculture................................................
Nonagricultural industries.......................
20.
Annual data: Employment levels by industry
(Numbers in thousands)
Industry
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Total em plo ym en t...........................................................................
Private s e c to r................................................................................
G oods-producing.......................................................................
M in in g ....................................................................................
Construction .........................................................................
M anufacturing.......................................................................
90,406
74,166
25,658
1,027
4,346
20,285
91,156
75,126
25,497
1,139
4,188
20,170
89,566
73,729
23,813
1,128
3,905
18,781
90,200
74,330
23,334
952
3,948
18,434
94,496
78,472
24,727
966
4,383
19,378
97,519
81,125
24,859
927
4,673
19,260
99,525
82,832
24,558
777
4,816
18,965
102,200
85,190
24,708
717
4,967
19,024
105,584
88,212
25,249
721
5,125
19,403
Service-producing......................................................................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ......................................
Wholesale trade ....................................................................
Retail trade ............................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ..................................
S e rvices..................................................................................
64,748
5,146
5,275
15,035
5,160
17,890
65,659
5,165
5,358
15,189
5,298
18,619
65,753
5,082
5,278
15,179
5,341
19,036
66,866
4,954
5,268
15,613
5,468
19,694
69,769
5,159
5,555
16,545
5,689
20,797
72,660
5,238
5,717
17,356
5,955
22,000
74,967
5,255
5,753
17,930
6,283
23,053
77,492
5,372
5,844
18,483
6,547
24,236
80,335
5,548
6,029
19,110
6,676
25,600
G overnm ent..........................................................................
F ed era l.............................................................................
State .................................................................................
Local ................................................................................
16,241
2,866
3,610
9,765
16,031
2,772
3,640
9,619
15,837
2,739
3,640
9,458
15,869
2,774
3,662
9,434
16,024
2,807
3,734
9,482
16,394
2,875
3,832
9,687
16,693
2,899
3,893
9,901
17,010
2,943
3,967
10,100
17,372
2,971
4,063
10,339
NOTE:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
See “ Notes on the data” for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
71
Current Labor Statistics:
Employment Data
21. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural
payrolls, by industry
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Private sector:
Average weekly h o u rs .................................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs ).........................................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars) .......................................
35.3
6.66
235.10
35.2
7.25
255.20
34.8
7.68
267.26
35.0
8.02
280.70
35.2
8.32
292.86
34.9
8.57
299.09
34.8
8.76
304.85
34.8
8.98
312.50
34.7
9.29
322.36
Mining:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
43.3
9.17
397.06
43.7
10.04
438.75
42.7
10.77
459.88
42.5
11.28
479.40
43.3
11.63
503.58
43.4
11.98
519.93
42.2
12.46
525.81
42.4
12.54
531.70
42.3
12.75
539.33
Construction:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
37.0
9.94
367.78
36.9
10.82
399.26
36.7
11.63
426.82
37.1
11.94
442.97
37.8
12.13
458.51
37.7
12.32
464.46
37.4
12.48
466.75
37.8
12.71
480.44
37.9
13.01
493.08
Manufacturing:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
39.7
7.27
288.62
39.8
7.99
318.00
38.9
8.49
330.26
40.1
8.83
354.08
40.7
9.19
374.03
40.5
9.54
386.37
40.7
9.73
396.01
41.0
9.91
406.31
41.1
10.18
418.40
Transportation and public utilities:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
39.6
8.87
351.25
39.4
9.70
382.18
39.0
10.32
402.48
39.0
10.79
420.81
39.4
11.12
438.13
39.5
11.40
450.30
39.2
11.70
458.64
39.2
12.03
471.58
39.3
12.32
484.18
Wholesale trade:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
38.5
6.96
267.96
38.5
7.56
291.06
38.3
8.09
309.85
38.5
8.55
329.18
38.5
8.89
342.27
38.4
9.16
351.74
38.3
9.35
358.11
38.1
9.60
365.76
38.1
9.94
378.71
Retail trade:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
30.2
4.88
147.38
30.1
5.25
158.03
29.9
5.48
163.85
29.8
5.74
171.05
29.8
5.85
174.33
29.4
5.94
174.64
29.2
6.03
176.08
29.2
6.12
178.70
29.1
6.31
183.62
Finance, insurance, and real estate:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in d o lla rs )...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
36.2
5.79
209.60
36.3
6.31
229.05
36.2
6.78
245.44
36.2
7.29
263.90
36.5
7.63
278.50
36.4
7.94
289.02
36.4
8.36
304.30
36.3
8.73
316.90
35.9
9.09
326.33
Services:
Average weekly hours ...........................................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars) ...................................
Average weekly earnings (in d o lla rs )..................................
32.6
5.85
190.71
32.6
6.41
208.97
32.6
6.92
225.59
32.7
7.31
239.04
32.6
7.59
247.43
32.5
7.90
256.75
32.5
8.18
265.85
32.5
8.49
275.93
32.6
8.91
290.47
Industry
72
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
22. Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
(June 1981=100)
Series
June
Percent change
1989
1987
Mar.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Sept.
June
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
June 1989
Civilian workers 2 ....................... Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ................
Blue-collar w o rkers....................
Service occupations..................
Workers, by industry division:
G oods-producing........................
Manufacturing ............................
Service-producing ......................
S e rvices....................................
Health se rvice s .....................
H o spitals.............................. .
Public administration 3 ...........
Nonmanufacturing......................
Private industry w o rk e rs ............................................ ...........
Excluding sales occup ations........... ................. ;................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers............................................. ...............
Excluding sales occupations..........................................
Professional specialty and technical occu p a tio n s........
Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations
Sales occup ations...............................................................
Administrative support occupations, including
c le ric a l.................................................................................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs.......... ..................... ...............——.........
Precision production, craft, and repair occu p a tio n .......
Machine operators, assemblers, and Inspectors..........
Transportation and material moving occup ations........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers .
Service o ccup ations........ ............................. .................. .
Workers, by industry division:
G oods-producing...................................... ............................
Excluding sales o ccup ations.......... ....................... ........
C o nstruction................................ .........................................
M anufacturing........ ...........*...-................................... .........
D u ra b le s..............................................................................
N ondurables........................................................................
135.9
137.5
138.6
139.3
130.1
138.5
141.2
131.3
139.9
142.2
132.5
140.8
144.2
134.7
142.9
131.1
131.5
138.9
145.8
132.2
132.7
140.8
149.2
133.5
134.1
141.7
150.6
135.8
136.8
143.6
152.8
145.5
145.7
136.2
144.3
147.9
137.2
147.2
149.7
138.2
148.5
151.9
139.6
150.0
153.4
141.3
151.2
1.0
1.2
137.3
138.1
145.1
153.8
138.2
139.0
147.6
157.7
139.3
140.1
149.2
159.7
140.7
141.9
151.4
161.8
142.3
143.5
152.9
163.1
1.1
1.1
.8
5.3
3.7
4.8
.8
3.6
3.9
5.4
6.0
1.2
6.2
1.3
.8
6.5
4.4
5.1
1.0
144.7
137.8
146.4
139.6
148.1
140.5
150.3
142.3
151.2
143.9
154.0
146.1
154.4
147.7
156.7
149.7
157.9
151.2
133.8
134.1
135.1
135.5
136.0
136.6
138.1
138.7
139.8
140.2
141.2
141.7
142.6
142.9
144.4
144.7
146.1
146.2
4.5
4.3
137.0
138.2
138.5
140.0
139.3
141.1
141.2
143.0
143.0
144.6
144.6
146.4
146.3
147.6
148.6
149.9
150.3
151.4
5.1
4.7
4.8
4.4
6.9
136.5
137.6
138.9
142.2
143.9
145.4
137.9
137.6
139.0
138.7
140.4
140.2
129.5
135.2
135.9
130.8
130.5
131.9
131.6
Service-producing .................................................................
Excluding sales o ccup ations..........................................
Transportation and public utilities.....................................
Transportation.....................................................................
Public u tilitie s ......................................................................
C om m unications..............................................................
Electric, gas, and sanitary services ............................
Wholesale and retail tra d e ...............................................
Excluding sales occupations ......................................
Wholesale tra d e ...............................................................
Excluding sales occupations....................................
Retail tra d e .......................................................................
Food s to re s ..................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te ................................
Excluding sales occupations........................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other
credit a g e n c ie s ...........................................................
Insurance ..........................................................................
S e rv ic e .................................................................................
Business s e rv ic e s ............................................................
Health se rvice s ..................................................................
Hospitals ...........................................................................
136.3
137.4
Nonmanufacturing .............................................................
135.1
137.7
139.1
133.2
132.9
138.4
140.0
135.6
135.2
137.1
136.8
136.8
138.1
139.0
140.1
140.2
141.9
142.1
143.5
143.8
145.4
145.5
146.7
1.0
3.7
3.4
4.3
3.1
4.0
4.6
142.0
141.7
1.1
1.1
1.0
141.9
143.5
1.1
1.0
1.2
147.7
148.8
149.5
150.4
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.2
3.6
3.6
3.7
3.9
3.6
4.6
5.2
4.8
3.3
3.2
3.4
1.5
.8
1.1
.8
1.5
1.1
.9
.2
1.7
1.6
4.4
3.9
5.6
3.9
3.9
7.8
5.7
1.2
1.7
1.0
1.9
1.1
1.2
147.6
136.4
5.8
5.4
6.2
6.9
1.2
161.5
State and local government workers
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rkers...........................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs.............................
4.8
144.0
147.5
141.3
151.2
143.3
152.7
144.3
154.8
145.9
155.2
145.9
164.
153
6.1
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
159.6
148.4
161.1
149
163
151
4.9
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
73
Current Labor Statistics:
22. Continued
Compensation & Industrial Relations
Employment Cost Index, compensation,1 by occupation and industry group
(June 1981 =100)
Percent change
Series
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
June 1989
Workers, by industry division:
S e rv ic e s ......................................
Hospitals and other services4
Health s e rv ic e s ......................
S c h o o ls ....................................
Elementary and secondary .
Public administration3 ...............
147.6
143.3
151.8
145.1
153.1
146.3
155.2
150.3
155.6
150.4
160.5
153.2
163.0
155.2
164.6
157.2
165.5
158.7
149.1
150.7
144.7
154.1
156.5
146.4
155.5
157.8
148.1
156.8
158.9
150.3
157.3
159.4
151.2
163.1
165.4
154.0
165.7
168.3
154.4
167.2
169.3
156.7
167.8
169.9
157.9
1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index
consists of wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consist of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
0.5
6.4
5.5
5.9
6.7
6.6
4.4
1.0
1.3
.4
.4
.8
Consist of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
- Data not available.
activities.
23. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
(June 1981=100)
1987
1988
1989
Percent change
Series
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
June 1989
Civilian workers 1 ..............
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers ..............
Blue-collar w o rkers.....................
Service occupations.........................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing..........................
Manufacturing ............................................................................
Service-producing .......................................................................
Services ...........................
Health se rvice s.................
H o spitals...........................
Public administration 2 ........
Nonmanufacturing ........................
Private industry w o rk e rs ...........
Excluding sales o ccup ations..............
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rk e rs ...............
Excluding sales occupations....................
Professional specialty and technical occupations
Executive, administrative, and managerial
occu p a tio n s ....................
Sales occupations......................
Administrative support occupations, including
c le ric a l..........................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs ................
Precision production, craft, and repair
occup ations........................
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors
Transportation and material moving occupations
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and
la b o re rs.......................
Service occupations ................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producina
.............
Excluding sales occupations ...
Construction .....................
See footnotes at end of table.
74
M onthly L abor R eview
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
O ctober 1989
133.5
137.3
127.1
134.7
139.4
128.3
136.0
128.5
129.5
136.5
143.4
130.8
138.5
146.8
132.2
139.2
148.2
141.0
135.2
142.6
0
131.7
132.1
133.0
133.6
135.4
137.1
139.1
137.0
139.1
141.2
136.4
127.1
143.4
144.6
0.8
4.3
131.6
145.2
132.5
141.8
146.8
133.4
142.9
148.6
134.6
143.9
149.8
136.0
144.8
.8
1.0
.6
4.8
3.3
3.9
133.3
140.5
149.5
134.4
141.9
150.4
134.1
135.1
144.2
154.0
”
136.3
137.4
147.5
157.4
139.0
146.4
140.5
148.9
142.7
135.1
136.2
145.8
155.7
“
”
149.4
144.1
“
150.9
145.8
137.7
138.8
148.7
158.4
151.8
147.0
1.0
1.0
.8
.6
1.0
1.1
.6
.8
3.2
3.3
4.8
5.3
5.9
6.1
3.7
4.6
136.6
137.2
137.9
138.6
139.3
139.7
140.8
141.2
142.2
142.5
1.0
.9
4.1
3.9
140.8
142.9
145.8
142.4
144.7
148.1
144.0
146.0
148.9
145.9
147.8
151.0
147.3
149.0
152.1
1.0
.8
.7
4.6
4.3
4.3
141.3
130.8
142.5
131.5
144.4
134.4
146.2
136.7
147.3
138.7
.8
1.5
4.2
6.0
146.0
147.4
1.0
4.4
I JO. 1
12G
141.9
130.4
“
142.6
140.5
144.0
f
141.2
143.2
144.1
126.6
131.9
132.9
134.0
135.4
1.0
3.3
126.7
121.5
127.5
122.3
131.2
125.4
134.0
131.9
126.7
134.9
133.3
126.9
136.1
134.5
127.8
137.8
135.9
128.7
1.2
1.0
.7
3.3
3.6
2.6
131.9
132.6
127.5
135.8
128.4
137.6
129.3
139.1
130.4
140.0
131.6
140.9
.9
.6
3.2
3.8
128.3
128.3
122.7
129.5
133.2
133.2
127.6
133.9
133.8
128.6
134.9
134.9
129.4
136.1
136.1
130.4
137.4
137.4
131.6
1.0
1.0
.9
3.2
3.2
3.1
129.2
122.9
130.8
129.9
123.7
23. Continued— Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and Industry group
(June 1981=100)
Series
Sept.
12
months
ended
3
months
ended
June
Mar.
Dec.
Sept.
June
Mar.
Dec.
Percent change
1989
1988
June 1989
Manufacturing
D u rab les.....
Nondurables
Service-producing..........................................
Excluding sales occup ations.................
Transportation and public u tilitie s ..........
T ransportation..........................................
Public utilities......... ..................................
Communications ................ ...................
Electric, gas, and sanitary services ...
Wholesale and retail tra d e ......................
Excluding sales occup ations............
Wholesale trade ....................................
Excluding sales occupations ..........
Retail tra d e .............................................
Food s to re s .........................................
Finance, insurance, and real e s ta te .....
Excluding sales occup ations............
Banking, savings and loan, and other
credit agencies........ ...........................
Insurance................................................
S e rvices.....................................................
Business se rv ic e s ...................................
Health s e rv ic e s .... ..................................
H o spitals................................................
Nonm anufacturing......................................
State and local g ove rnm ent w o rk e rs
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar w o rk e rs .................
Blue-collar w o rk e rs ...................
Workers, by industry division:
Services .......................................
Hospitals and other services 3
Health s e rv ic e s ....................
S ch o o ls...................................
Elementary and secondary
Public administration 2 ............
137.4
135.9
140.2
138.8
137.3
141.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
3.3
3.2
3.6
.9
.8
.5
.6
.5
4.7
4.3
2.1
1.9
2.5
129.5
128.7
131.0
130.8
129.7
132.8
132.2
131.1
134.1
133.3
132.1
135.6
134.4
133.1
136.7
135.1
133.7
137.6
136.2
134.6
139.1
134.3
135.5
129.3
135.7
137.3
130.0
136.2
138.1
130.2
137.5
139.4
131.3
139.3
140.8
132.5
141.0
142.7
133.5
142.6
143.9
133.4
144.5
145.7
134.6
145.8
146.9
135.3
129.9
130.5
137.2
133.3
127.1
130.6
131.7
137.8
134.9
127.8
130.7
132.3
138.5
136.0
127.7
131.9
133.4
139.0
136.8
129.2
134.6
135.2
141.7
138.2
131.7
136.0
136.5
143.2
139.6
133.2
136.9
137.8
143.6
140.4
134.3
138.6
139.2
147.5
141.8
135.1
139.9
140.0
149.0
142.9
136.3
131.5
131.5
131.8
131.8
131.6
131.6
132.9
132.9
134.9
134.9
134.9
134.9
139.9
139.9
142.7
142.7
145.2
145.2
1.0
.9
.6
1.0
.8
.9
.0
1.8
1.8
_
3.9
3.6
5.2
3.4
3.5
-
7.6
7.6
4.2
142.8
145.9
147.1
148.6
149.8
152.9
154.4
156.4
157.8
132.8
134.2
134.8
136.0
137.8
139.4
140.8
142.6
143.9
1.2
1.6
.9
1.6
.9
1.1
.9
142.8
146.1
147.4
148.7
149.1
153.0
154.5
155.8
156.6
.5
5.0
144.1
136.9
147.7
139.0
149.3
139.6
150.5
141.1
150.8
141.1
154.9
143.5
156.8
144.1
158.0
146.1
158.7
146.8
.4
.5
5.2
4.0
144.2
139.4
148.2
141.2
149.5
142.2
150.7
144.5
151.1
144.7
155.6
147.4
157.6
148.7
158.6
150.2
159.3
151.5
151.8
153.4
143.8
152.6
154.0
145.5
153.0
154.3
146.4
158.0
159.7
148.9
160.3
162.1
149.4
161.2
162.8
150.9
161.7
163.3
151.8
.4
.9
1.1
.3
.3
.6
5.4
4.7
5.9
5.7
5.8
3.7
145.6
146.6
141.0
150.3
152.0
142.6
-
5.3
5.2
5.9
6.4
4.4
3 Includes, for example, library, social and health services.
- Data not available.
1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers)
and State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
24. Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry workers by occupation and industry group
Series
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Percent change
19 39
1988
1987
Dec.
Sept.
Mar.
June
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
June 1989
139.3
140.3
141.7
146.1
148.2
149.7
151.3
154.0
156.5
1.6
5.6
Private in d u stry w o r k e r s ............................................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers .................................................................
Blue-collar workers ........................ ...........................................
136.3
137.3
143 7
138.7
147.3
144.1
149.3
146.3
150.9
147.5
152.7
148.9
156.1
150.7
158.8
152.9
1.7
1.5
6.4
4.5
141.4
137 4
143 1
136 9
142.6
138.8
144.4
138.4
143.8
144.1
148.1
144.5
147.2
146.1
150.1
146.4
149.3
147.3
151.9
147.8
150.9
148.6
153.9
149.0
152.9
150.7
157.2
152.3
155.2
152.7
160.1
154.2
158.0
1.3
1.8
1.2
1.8
4.5
6.7
5.3
5.8
Workers, by industry group:
G oods-producing........................................ ..............................
Service-producing......................................................................
Manufacturing ............................................................................
Nonmanufacturing .....................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
75
Current Labor Statistics:
25.
Compensation & Industrial Relations
E m p lo y m e n t C o s t In d e x , p r iv a t e n o n fa r m
w o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s t a t u s , r e g io n , a n d a r e a s iz e
(June 1981 =100)
1987
1988
1989
Percent change
Series
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
3
months
ended
12
months
ended
June 1989
COMPENSATION
Workers, by bargaining status1
Union ............................................................
G oods-producing...............................................
Service-producing.............................................
Manufacturing ....................................................
Nonmanufacturing ...........................................
131.2
128.7
135.2
128.7
133.5
132.C
129.5
135.9
129.5
134.3
133.4
131.3
136.7
131.5
135.1
135.6
134.1
138.0
135.0
136.2
136.9
135.3
139.4
136.2
137.5
137.9
136.2
140.5
137.0
138.6
138.6
137.2
140.9
138.2
138.9
139.7
137.9
142.6
139.9
139.5
141.1
139.4
143.9
141.3
141.0
9
10
1.1
2.5
N o nunion....................
Goods-producing ....
Service-producing ....
Manufacturing .........
Nonmanufacturing ...
134.6
131.8
136.4
133.2
135.3
136.1
133.1
137.9
134.6
136.8
136.9
134.1
138.6
135.6
137.5
138.9
136.2
140.5
137.8
139.4
140.7
137.8
142.5
139.2
141.5
142.2
138.7
144.4
140.1
143.2
143.9
139.9
146.3
141.3
145.0
146.0
141.6
148.6
143.1
147.3
147.7
143.2
150.5
144.8
149.1
12
11
13
12
1.2
5.4
138.6
133.2
130.2
134.2
140.3
134.2
131.2
135.8
141.9
135.4
131.7
136.3
143.7
137.1
134.4
138.3
145.9
139.3
135.5
139.5
147.8
140.4
136.7
140.6
150.4
141.3
138.0
141.5
153.5
142.7
139.3
143.2
155.5
144.1
140.9
144.9
13
10
11
1.2
3.9
134.4
130.2
135.8
131.3
136.7
132.0
138.9
133.6
140.5
135.5
142.0
136.2
143.6
136.8
145.6
137.5
147.4
138.3
12
.6
2.1
Workers, by bargaining status
Union ..................................................................
G oods-producing..............................................
Service-producing.............................................
Manufacturing ...................................................
Nonm anufacturing............................................
128.3
125.8
132.2
126.2
130.1
129.1
126.5
132.9
127.0
130.8
130.5
128.5
133.6
129.3
131.5
131.0
128.7
134.4
129.6
132.1
132.0
129.7
135.4
130.4
133.3
132.9
130.4
136.7
131.0
134.5
133.4
131.2
136.8
132.1
134.6
134.3
132.0
137.8
133.0
135.4
135.4
133.4
138.4
134.4
136.2
8
11
4
11
.6
2.2
N o nunion..................
Goods-producing ..
Service-producing .
Manufacturing ......
Nonmanufacturing
132.8
129.6
134.6
131.5
133.4
134.3
131.1
136.2
133.0
134.9
135.0
132.1
136.7
133.9
135.4
136.4
133.6
138.0
135.5
136.8
138.1
135.0
140.0
136.7
138.8
139.5
135.7
141.8
137.4
140.4
141.1
136.8
143.6
138.6
142.2
142.9
138.2
145.6
139.9
144.1
144.4
139.5
147.2
141.4
145.6
10
9
11
11
1.0
4.9
136.6
131.1
128.5
131.1
138.3
132.1
129.6
133.1
139.7
133.0
129.9
133.5
140.9
134.0
131.3
134.9
142.9
136.1
132.1
136.0
144.6
137.1
133.3
137.4
147.3
137.8
134.5
138.1
150.1
138.9
135.6
139.4
152.0
140.0
136.9
140.7
13
8
10
.9
3.5
132.4
127.8
133.7
129.1
134.6
129.8
135.8
130.9
137.3
133.0
138.7
133.5
140.2
133.7
141.9
134.6
143.4
135.2
11
.4
1.7
Workers, by region
N o rtheast....................................................
South ..........................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..........
W e s t...............................
Workers, by area size
Metropolitan a re a s ......................................
Other a re a s .............................
1
1
WAGES AND SALARIES
Workers, by region
N ortheast....................................................
South ..........................................................
Midwest (formerly North C e ntral)..........
W e s t..........................
Workers, by area size1
Metropolitan a re a s ......................................
Other a re a s ..........................
— ------- -----'"use iui me uuuupauon ana
industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the
76
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Technical
Employment Cost Index,” May 1982.
M o n th ly
Labor
R e v ie w
Note,
“ Estimation
procedures
for
the
26. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, private
industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
Quarterly average
Annual average
1987
1989
1988
1987
Measure
1988
III
IV
I
II
III
F
ivp
IF
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments, 2 settlements
covering 5,000 workers or more:
First year of contract ...............................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t............................
3.0
2.6
3.1
2.5
2.5
2.1
3.4
2.4
1.8
1.8
3.1
2.4
3.4
3.2
3.5
2.1
3.2
3.4
5.0
3.4
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000
workers or more:
First year of contract ...............................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t............................
2.2
2.1
2.5
2.4
2.1
2.0
2.4
1.8
2.1
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.2
3.2
3.1
3.9
3.3
3.1
.7
2.6
.7
.9
.2
.8
.3
.4
.1
.9
.3
.8
.2
.5
.1
.5
.1
1.0
.3
1.8
.5
1.3
.6
.6
.1
.3
.2
.3
.1
.5
.1
.4
.2
.2
.2
.3
.1
.5
.2
Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustment 3 ............................
From settlements reached in period .....................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier
perio ds.......................................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustments c la u s e s ..............
' Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of increases, decreases, and no changes in
compensation or wages,
3 Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
p = preliminary.
27. Average specified compensation and wage adjustments, major collective bargaining settlements in private
industry situations covering 1,000 workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
Average for four quarters ending-
I
IV
III
1989
1988
1987
Measure
II
IVP
III
|p
IF
Specified total compensation adjustments, settlements covering 5,000
workers or more, all industries:
First year of c o n tra c t...................................................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t................................................................
2.7
2.6
3.0
2.6
3.1
2.5
3.0
2.3
3.1
2.5
3.1
2.5
3.3
2.6
3.8
3.0
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.2
1.7
2.5
2.2
2.3
2.1
2.1
1.5
2.5
2.4
2.2
2.5
2.2
1.4
2.7
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.0
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.6
2.2
1.5
2.8
2.5
2.4
2.7
2.4
1.8
2.8
2.7
2.4
2.9
2.5
1.8
2.9
3.2
2.2
3.4
2.9
1.8
3.2
1.1
2.1
-.1
1.0
1.0
1.2
2.1
2.4
1.3
1.3
1.0
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.4
1.5
1.0
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.6
1.3
2.5
2.6
2.4
3.0
1.9
1.4
3.1
2.2
2.1
2.5
2.1
1.8
2.6
2.2
2.1
2.5
2.1
1.8
2.8
2.6
2.0
3.1
2.4
1.7
3.1
2.4
2.1
2.6
2.8
2.4
2.9
2.3
1.9
2.4
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.3
1.6
2.5
2.7
2.4
2.7
2.3
2.2
2.4
2.4
1.9
2.6
2.4
2.4
2.5
2.4
1.8
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.7
2.5
1.7
2.8
3.0
2.9
3.0
2.7
1.7
3.0
3.5
2.9
3.5
3.2
2.3
3.3
Specified wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or
more:
All industries:
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of contract .............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Manufacturing:
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Nonmanufacturing:
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of contract .............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Construction:
First year of contract ................................................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses .........................................................
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t.............................................................
Contracts with COLA c la u s e s ...............................................................
Contracts without COLA clauses ........................................................
1 Data do not meet publication standards.
3.0
0
(’ )
3.2
(’ )
(1)
2.9
2.9
(')
(’ )
(1)
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
2.1
(2)
(2)
(2)
2.4
(2)
2.6
2.4
(2)
2.4
2.7
2.2
2.6
2.1
2.4
(2)
2.7
2.4
2.2
(2)
(2)
2.6
2.7
3.1
3.1
(’ )
(’ )
2.6
(2>
2.4
2.9
<2)
2.7
2.9
p = preliminary.
2 Between -0.05 and 0.05 percent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
77
Current Labor Statistics: Compensation & Industrial Relations
28. Average effective wage adjustments, private industry collective bargaining situations covering 1,000
workers or more during 4-quarter periods (in percent)
Average for four quarters ending-1987
Effective wage adjustment
1988
1989
IV
I
II
III
IVP
|P
II»
For all w o rke rs :'
T o ta l................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period ......................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period ..........................
From cost-of-living-adjustments c la u s e s ...............................................
3.1
.7
1.8
.5
3.2
.8
1.8
.5
3.0
1.0
1.6
.5
2.9
1.0
1.4
.5
2.6
.7
1.3
.6
2.7
.7
1.3
.6
2.8
.7
1.3
.8
For w o rke rs receiving changes:
T o ta l................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in period ......................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier period ..........................
From cost-of-living-adjustments c la u s e s ...............................................
3.6
2.9
3.3
2.6
3.8
2.9
3.3
2.7
3.7
2.9
3.3
2.3
3.5
2.9
3.0
2.5
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.7
3.5
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.7
3.5
3.2
3.2
preliminary.
Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
29. Specified compensation and wage adjustments from contract settlements, and effective wage adjustments, State and
local government collective bargaining situations covering 1,000 workers or more (in percent)
Annual average
Measure
1987
1988
First 6 months
1989
4.9
4.8
5.4
5.3
4.3
4.4
Annual rate over life of contract ...............................................................................................................................................
4.9
5.1
5.1
5.3
47
4.7
Effective adjustments:
Total effective wage adjustm ent3 ...............................................................................................................................................
From settlements reached in p erio d.........................................................................................................................................
Deferred from settlements reached in earlier periods ..........................................................................................................
From cost-of-living-adjustment c la u s e s ....................................................................................................................................
4.9
2.7
2.2
O
4.7
2.3
2.4
(4)
1.6
.5
1.1
(4)
Specified adjustments:
Total compensation 1 adjustments, 2 settlements covering 5,000 workers or more:
Annual rate over life of c o n tra c t...............................................................................................................................................
Wage adjustments, settlements covering 1,000 workers or more:
1 Compensation includes wages, salaries, and employers’ cost of employee
benefits when contract is negotiated.
2 Adjustments are the net result of Increases, decreases, and no changes in
compensation or wages.
Because of rounding, total may not equal sum of parts.
Less than 0.05 percent.
Data not available.
30. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
1989P
1988
Annual totals
Measure
1987
Number of stoppages:
Beginning in p e rio d .......................
In effect during p e rio d .................
Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in
thousands)....................................
In effect during period (in
thousands)....................................
Days idle:
Number (in thousands)................
Percent of estimated working
tim e1 ..............................................
1988
Aug.
Sept.
Nov.
Oct.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
Aug.
July
46
51
40
43
7
18
2
14
3
9
1
5
0
1
3
4
0
2
2
4
4
8
7
13
0
5
4
9
7
11
174.3
118.3
11.7
4.0
8.6
2.3
.0
7.4
.0
30.3
6.6
54.7
.0
43.3
235.6
377.7
121.4
46.9
34.0
25.9
10.6
2.5
9.9
7.7
37.0
43.6
94.3
44.7
100.0
204.0
4,468.8
4,364.3
713.1
510.0
293.2
77.9
52.5
152.7
137.8
949.6
1,064.2
1,227.1
938.2
1,370.7
3,480.2
.02
.02
.03
.02
.01
.04
.02
.01
.01
.04
.05
.05
.04
.04
.1
' Agricultural and government employees are included in the total employed and total
working time: private household, forestry, and fishery employees are excluded. An expla
nation of the measurement of idleness as a percentage of the total time worked is found
78 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Jan.
Dec.
October 1989
in ‘“ Total economy’ measure of strike idleness,” M o n th ly L a b o r R eview, October 1968,
pp. 54-56.
p = preliminary.
31. Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
Annual
average
1988
1989
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
118.3
354.3
119.0
356.6
119.8
358.9
120.2
360.1
120.3
360.5
120.5
360.9
121.1
362.7
121.6
364.1
122.3
366.2
123.1
368.8
123.8
370.8
124.1
371.7
124.4
372.7
124.6
373.1
113.5
113.5
111.9
114.8
110.5
105.9
119.1
110.5
111.0
108.1
107.5
113.8
117.0
114.1
118.2
118.2
116.6
122.1
114.3
108.4
128.1
113.1
114.0
113.1
107.5
118.0
121.8
118.6
119.4
119.4
118.1
124.0
117.3
108.2
129.9
113.6
114.8
114.9
107.0
118.7
122.5
119.3
120.1
120.2
119.0
124.7
117.4
108.9
133.2
114.0
115.6
115.9
107.4
119.1
123.0
119.6
120.3
120.3
119.0
125.6
116.8
109.9
131.7
114.8
116.0
117.1
108.1
119.9
123.4
119.8
120.2
120.2
118.7
125.9
116.4
110.6
129.5
114.9
115.9
117.1
108.2
120.1
123.7
119.9
120.6
120.7
119.1
126.6
116.1
111.4
131.0
115.3
116.7
118.5
107.8
120.7
124.1
119.9
122.0
122.2
121.2
127.9
118.5
112.6
134.8
116.6
117.2
119.6
109.6
121.9
124.7
120.3
122.7
122.9
122.0
128.9
118.2
113.4
137.1
117.8
117.8
120.5
111.3
123.0
125.2
121.1
123.3
123.5
122.7
129.7
120.5
113.8
135.7
118.1
118.0
120.4
111.3
123.7
125.7
121.8
124.0
124.2
123.5
130.4
120.6
114.1
138.0
119.0
117.9
121.6
111.8
125.2
126.2
122.3
124.7
124.9
124.4
131.5
120.7
113.8
142.7
118.9
118.1
121.6
111.5
125.2
126.7
123.1
124.9
125.0
124.3
132.1
121.4
113.6
140.2
119.2
119.2
121.6
111.6
125.5
127.1
123.5
125.4
125.5
124.8
133.3
121.6
114.1
140.1
119.7
120.1
121.6
112.3
125.9
127.8
124.0
125.6
125.8
124.9
134.1
122.3
114.5
138.8
119.7
120.6
121.7
111.2
126.7
128.1
124.5
Fiousmg ...................................................................................................
Shelter ..................................................................................................
Renters’ costs (12/82 = 10 0 )........................................................
Rent, reside ntial............................................................................
Other renters' costs .....................................................................
Homeowners' costs ( 1 2 / 8 2 - 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (1 2 /8 2 —1 0 0 ).....................................
Household insurance (12/82 —1 0 0 )..........................................
Maintenance and re p a irs................................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..............................................
Maintenance and repair com m odities.......................................
Fuel and other u tilitie s .......................................................................
Fuels ..................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas ...................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity ..........................................................
Other utilities and public s e rv ic e s ................................................
Household furnishings and ope ratio ns...........................................
Housefurnishings .............................................................................
Housekeeping supp lie s...................................................................
Housekeeping se rvice s...................................................................
114.2
121.3
128.1
123.1
127.4
124.8
124.8
124.0
111.8
114.8
107.8
103.0
97.3
77.9
103.8
120.1
107.1
103.6
111.5
110.6
118.5
127.1
133.6
127.8
134.8
131.1
131.1
129.0
114.7
117.9
110.4
104.4
98.0
78.1
104.6
122.9
109.4
105.1
114.7
114.3
119.5
128.2
135.6
128.4
141.3
131.8
131.9
130.1
115.0
118.1
110.8
106.1
100.9
76.3
108.3
122.6
109.7
105.3
114.8
115.1
119.9
128.4
134.7
129.1
135.5
132.6
132.7
130.2
115.3
118.1
111.7
106.4
101.0
75.9
108.5
123.3
110.1
105.7
115.5
115.5
119.9
128.8
134.8
129.4
134.8
133.1
133.1
130.4
115.0
117.6
111.6
105.4
98.6
74.6
105.8
124.5
110.3
105.9
115.6
115.5
119.9
129.1
134.2
129.8
131.1
133.8
133.9
130.2
115.4
118.2
111.7
104.3
96.8
75.0
103.7
124.4
110.6
106.1
116.5
115.7
120.2
129.3
134.1
130.1
130.0
134.0
134.1
130.6
115.8
118.4
112.4
105.0
97.4
76.8
104.1
125.5
110.6
105.9
117.0
115.9
120.7
129.8
135.2
130.5
132.7
134.4
134.5
130.9
116.1
118.7
112.8
106.0
98.7
80.5
105.1
125.9
110.9
106.0
117.5
116.6
121.1
130.3
136.3
130.9
136.2
134.7
134.8
131.2
117.1
119.9
113.4
105.9
98.6
81.4
104.9
126.0
110.9
105.9
117.7
116.8
121.5
131.2
138.6
131.1
144.7
135.0
135.1
131.3
117.1
119.6
113.8
105.9
98.5
81.5
104.8
125.9
110.5
105.1
118.5
116.9
121.6
131.2
137.9
131.4
140.7
135.4
135.5
131.4
117.3
119.8
114.1
106.2
98.8
82.5
105.0
126.2
110.7
105.0
119.6
117.1
122.1
131.8
137.8
131.7
139.7
136.2
136.3
132.1
117.4
120.2
113.8
107.0
99.6
81.5
106.1
127.0
110.8
104.7
120.9
117.3
122.9
132.3
138.7
132.3
141.5
136.5
136.6
132.8
118.3
121.0
114.7
109.2
103.2
80.2
110.5
127.1
111.1
105.1
121.2
117.4
123.9
133.6
141.5
133.0
150.5
137.3
137.4
133.1
118.4
121.1
115.0
109.7
103.7
79.7
111.1
127.7
111.4
105.5
121.7
117.3
124.2
134.1
141.5
133.5
148.8
138.1
138.2
133.3
118.5
121.3
114.8
109.7
103.7
78.9
111.3
127.8
111.4
105.2
122.3
117.5
Apparel and upkeep .............................................................................
Apparel com m o dities.........................................................................
Men’s and boys’ a p p a re l............................:...................................
W omen’s and girls’ apparel ...........................................................
Infants’ and toddlers’ a p p a re l........................................................
Foo tw ear............................................................................................
Other apparel com m odities............................................................
Apparel services .................................................................................
110.6
108.9
109.1
110.4
112.1
105.1
108.0
119.6
115.4
113.7
113.4
114.9
116.4
109.9
116.0
123.7
112.6
110.7
111.6
109.9
118.2
107.4
116.2
124.0
117.8
116.2
115.2
118.1
119.0
112.2
117.4
124.4
120.7
119.3
117.6
121.9
118.1
115.9
119.4
125.5
119.9
118.4
118.2
120.2
117.2
114.5
119.5
126.3
118.0
116.3
117.3
116.5
117.3
113.5
119.1
126.7
115.3
113.3
115.1
111.6
115.6
112.2
119.2
127.3
115.3
113.3
114.2
111.4
118.8
112.7
120.4
127.8
119.3
117.5
115.9
119.4
118.5
114.1
120.4
128.5
120.9
119.3
117.2
121.5
123.6
115.3
121.5
128.9
120.4
118.6
117.8
119.5
125.4
114.9
121.7
129.9
117.8
115.8
115.9
114.8
123.9
114.0
121.6
130.0
115.0
112.9
114.7
109.6
117.9
113.4
122.5
129.4
115.0
112.8
114.7
109.5
116.7
112.6
124.1
129.5
Transportation .......................................................................................
Private transportation.........................................................................
Now ve h icle s....................................................................................
New c a rs .........................................................................................
Used cars ..........................................................................................
Motor fuel ..........................................................................................
Gaxine ..........................................................................................
Maintenance and re p a ir..................................................................
Other private transportation ...........................................................
Other private transportation commodities ................................
Other private transportation services ........................................
Public transportation..........................................................................
105.4
104.2
114.4
114.6
113.1
80.2
80.1
114.8
120.8
96.9
125.6
121.1
108.7
107.6
116.5
116.9
118.0
80.9
80.8
119.7
127.9
98.9
133.9
123.3
109.6
108.6
115.9
116.3
119.2
84.1
84.2
120.3
128.7
99.2
134.8
123.7
109.7
108.6
116.2
116.8
119.4
83.1
83.1
120.9
129.3
99.7
135.5
124.0
110.0
109.0
117.2
117.7
119.9
81.6
81.6
121.1
131.0
99.3
137.7
124.2
110.7
109.6
118.4
118.7
119.7
81.5
81.4
121.5
132.1
99.4
139.1
125.3
110.8
109.6
119.0
119.1
120.2
80.3
80.3
121.5
132.5
100.3
139.3
126.5
111.1
109.8
119.4
119.5
120.5
79.6
79.4
122.4
133.5
101.0
140.4
127.5
111.6
110.3
119.5
119.6
120.5
80.3
80.1
123.3
134.3
101.2
141.4
128.1
111.9
110.7
119.4
119.6
120.5
81.5
81.3
123.5
134.5
100.1
141.9
128.2
114.6
113.6
119.2
119.4
120.7
92.1
92.1
123.8
34.7
100.8
142.0
128.4
116.0
115.0
119.2
119.5
121.0
96.6
96.7
124.3
135.6
101.5
142.9
128.9
115.9
114.9
118.9
119.1
121.3
96.0
96.2
124.5
135.9
101.9
143.2
129.6
115.4
114.3
118.5
118.6
121.1
94.4
94.6
124.8
135.6
101.3
143.0
129.7
114.3
113.1
117.7
117.7
120.3
91.0
91.1
125.4
135.7
102.0
142.9
130.1
Medical c a r e ...........................................................................................
Medical care com m o dities................................................................
Medical care se rvices........................................................................
Professional s e rv ic e s ......................................................................
Hospital and related services ........................................................
130.1
131.0
130.0
128.8
131.6
138.6
139.9
138.3
137.5
143.9
139.9
141.1
139.6
138.7
145.9
140.4
142.0
140.1
139.2
146.9
141.2
143.2
140.8
139.8
148.5
141.8
143.3
141.5
140.4
149.7
142.3
144.2
141.9
140.8
150.8
143.8
145.0
143.5
142.2
152.9
145.2
145.8
145.1
143.5
155.1
146.1
147.2
145.9
144.4
155.8
146.8
148.4
146.4
144.9
156.6
147.5
150.0
146.9
145.2
157.3
148.5
151.0
147.9
146.1
158.5
149.7
151.4
149.3
147.0
160.8
150.7
152.1
150.4
147.5
162.7
Entertainment ........................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ..............................................................
Entertainment se rvice s......................................................................
115.3
110.5
122.0
120.3
115.0
127.7
120.7
115.4
128.1
121.3
116.0
128.6
121.8
116.3
129.4
122.2
117.2
129.3
122.8
117.5
130.0
123.8
118.1
131.6
124.3
118.4
132.3
124.7
118.5
132.9
125.4
119.0
134.0
125.5
119.3
133.9
126.2
119.5
135.0
126.9
119.9
136.1
127.3
120.0
136.7
Other goods and services ...................................................................
Tobacco products ..............................................................................
Personal c a re .......................................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances................................
Personal care services ...................................................................
Personal and educational expenses...............................................
School books and supp lie s............................................................
Personal and educational services ..............................................
128.5
133.6
115.1
113.9
116.2
138.5
138.1
138.7
137.0
145.8
119.4
118.1
120.7
147.9
148.1
148.0
137.5
148.6
119.0
117.2
121.0
147.8
146.9
148.1
140.0
148.9
120.3
118.7
121.9
151.8
151.1
152.1
140.6
149.3
121.0
119.8
122.0
152.4
152.0
152.7
141.0
149.7
121.8
120.7
122.7
152.7
152.1
152.9
141.3
149.9
122.4
121.6
123.1
153.0
152.2
153.2
143.4
157.0
122.8
121.7
123.8
154.0
153.3
154.2
144.1
158.5
123.2
121.9
124.4
154.4
155.0
154.6
144.4
159.2
123.6
122.4
124.8
154.6
155.1
154.7
144.7
159.5
124.1
122.6
125.4
154.9
155.2
155.1
145.4
161.1
124.8
122.7
126.8
155.2
155.2
155.4
146.3
164.2
124.5
122.2
127.0
155.8
155.6
156.0
147.3
167.5
124.8
122.8
126.9
156.3
155.8
156.5
148.7
168.8
125.6
123.8
127.3
158.1
156.6
158.4
1987
1988
All items .....................................................................................................
All items (1967 = 100) .............................................................................
113,6
340.4
Food and beverages ............................................................................
F o o d ......................................................................................................
Food at home ..................................................................................
Cereals and bakery p ro d u c ts ......................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and e g g s ....................................................
Dairy p ro d u cts...............................................................................
Fruits and vegetables...................................................................
Other foods at h o m e ....................................................................
Sugar and s w e e ts ......................................................................
Fats and o ils ...............................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages............................................................
Other prepared fo o d s ................................................................
Food away from home ...................................................................
Alcoholic beverages...........................................................................
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
79
Current Labor Statistics:
Price Data
31. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Annual
average
Series
1988
Aug.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
119.8
113.0
120.1
108.5
107.1
116.2
104.9
110.6
120.2
113.5
120.3
109.2
107.8
119.3
104.5
111.1
120.3
113.5
120.2
109.4
107.7
118.4
104.6
111.8
120.5
113.5
120.6
109.0
106.9
116.3
104.5
112.2
121.1
113.9
122.0
108.9
106.4
113.3
105.3
112.5
121.6
114.3
122.7
109.1
106.9
113.3
106.1
112.4
122.3
115.2
123.3
110.1
108.9
117.5
106.9
111.9
123.1
116.7
124.0
112.2
112.5
119.3
111.5
111.8
123.8
117.5
124.7
112.9
113.6
118.6
113.6
111.9
124.1
117.2
124.9
112.4
112.7
115.8
113.7
112.1
124.4
117.0
125.4
111.7
111.6
112.9
113.6
111.9
124.6
116.7
125.6
111.1
110.9
112.8
112.5
111.4
126.7
133.1
117.0
128.8
139.6
132.8
127.3
133.4
117.4
129.3
140.1
134.9
127.6
133.8
116.6
130.6
140.8
135.5
127.8
134.1
115.6
131.6
141.5
135.7
128.1
134.3
116.2
132.1
141.9
136.2
128.9
134.8
117.0
133.0
143.5
137.3
129.4
135.4
116.9
133.9
145.1
137.8
130.0
136.3
116.9
134.3
145.9
138.2
130.2
136.3
117.2
134.5
146.4
138.8
130.8
136.9
118.0
135.2
146.9
139.2
131.6
137.4
120.1
135.6
147.9
139.8
132.5
138.8
120.6
135.5
149.3
140.4
133.1
139.3
120.7
135.7
150.4
141.5
118.3
115.9
119.5
117.0
107.7
105.8
104.0
111.8
128.3
124.3
89.3
122.3
123.4
115.8
80.8
127.9
118.9
116.5
120.3
117.8
107.7
105.9
105.5
112.4
129.4
125.3
92.3
122.8
123.8
115.2
83.4
128.8
119.7
117.5
121.1
118.6
108.9
107.7
105.6
113.7
130.3
125.9
91.9
123.8
124.7
116.9
82.5
129.3
120.2
117.9
121.5
118.9
109.5
108.3
105.2
114.2
130.5
126.2
89.9
124.4
125.5
118.0
81.0
129.9
120.3
118.0
121.5
119.0
109.7
108.2
105.4
114.1
130.6
126.3
88.9
124.7
125.8
118.2
80.9
130.3
120.4
118.1
121.6
119.1
109.4
107.5
105.3
113.9
131.1
126.6
88.7
124.8
126.0
118.0
80.1
130.6
120.8
118.7
122.3
119.7
109.2
107.1
106.0
114.3
132.1
127.3
89.0
125.5
126.4
117.9
79.9
131.4
121.3
119.2
122.9
120.1
109.5
107.6
106.8
114.9
132.7
127.8
89.3
126.0
126.9
118.1
80.6
132.0
122.0
119.9
123.7
120.8
110.5
109.4
107.6
116.2
133.0
128.3
89.8
126.7
127.6
119.0
81.7
132.7
122.9
121.0
124.7
121.7
112.5
112.8
111.7
118.4
133.4
128.5
94.9
127.1
128.0
119.6
91.2
132.9
123.5
121.7
125.3
122.3
113.2
113.9
113.6
119.3
134.0
129.1
97.4
127.6
128.3
119.7
95.0
133.4
123.9
122.0
125.6
122.6
112.8
113.1
113.8
119.0
135.2
129.9
99.0
127.7
128.5
119.3
94.4
133.9
124.2
122.0
125.9
122.9
112.1
112.2
113.7
118.7
135.8
130.8
98.5
128.2
129.0
118.8
92.9
134.8
124.3
122.0
125.9
123.0
111.6
111.5
112.8
118.4
136.3
131.3
97.0
128.5
129.3
118.8
89.8
135.4
88.0
29.4
84.6
28.2
84.0
28.0
83.5
27.9
83.2
27.8
83.1
27.7
83.0
27.7
82.6
27.6
82.3
27.5
81.8
27.3
81.2
27.1
80.8
27.0
80.6
26.9
80.4
26.8
80.3
26.8
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR URBAN WAGE EARNERS
AND CLERICAL WORKERS:
All items ..................................................................................................
All items (1 9 6 7 -1 0 0 ) .............................................................................
112.5
335.0
117.0
348.4
117.7
350.7
118.5
353.0
118.9
354.2
119.0
354.6
119.2
355.0
119.7
356.7
120.2
358.0
120.8
360.0
121.8
362.9
122.5
364.9
122.8
365.9
123.2
366.8
123.2
367.0
Food and beverages ............................................................................
F o o d ......................................................................................................
Food at home ..................................................................................
Cereals and bakery pro d u c ts ......................................................
Meats, poultry, fish, and e g g s .....................................................
Dairy p ro d u cts ...............................................................................
Fruits and vegetables...................................................................
Other foods at h o m e ....................................................................
Sugar and sw e e ts ......................................................................
Fats and o ils ...............................................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages............................................................
Other prepared fo o d s ................................................................
Food away from home ...................................................................
Alcoholic beverages...........................................................................
113.3
113.3
111.7
114.8
110.4
105.7
118.8
110.4
110.9
107.9
107.5
113.6
116.9
113.9
117.9
117.9
116.2
122.2
114.1
108.1
127.6
113.0
113.9
113.0
107.7
117.8
121.6
118.3
119.1
119.2
117.8
124.1
117.1
107.9
129.6
113.5
114.8
114.8
107.2
118.5
122.3
118.9
119.8
119.9
118.7
124.8
117.3
108.6
132.8
113.9
115.6
115.8
107.6
118.8
122.8
119.2
120.0
120.1
118.7
125.7
116.6
109.7
131.4
114.7
115.9
117.0
108.3
119.7
123.2
119.5
119.9
119.9
118.4
126.0
116.1
110.4
129.1
114.8
115.7
117.0
108.4
119.9
123.5
119.5
120.3
120.4
118.8
126.7
115.8
111.2
130.8
115.1
116.7
118.3
107.8
120.5
124.0
119.5
121.7
121.9
120.8
128.0
118.3
112.4
134.3
116.5
117.3
119.5
109.8
121.7
124.6
119.8
122.4
122.6
121.7
129.0
118.0
113.3
136.8
117.7
117.8
120.4
111.4
122.8
125.1
120.8
123.1
123.3
122.4
129.7
120.3
113.6
135.4
118.0
118.0
120.3
111.4
123.6
125.5
121.4
123.7
123.9
123.2
130.5
120.4
114.0
137.7
118.9
118.1
121.5
111.9
125.0
126.1
122.0
124.4
124,6
124.0
131.5
120.5
113.6
142.5
118.8
118.4
121.5
111.5
125.0
126.5
122.8
124.6
124.8
123.9
132.0
121.2
113.3
140.0
119.0
119.2
121.5
111.6
125.3
127.0
123.2
125.1
125.3
124.4
133.3
121.5
113.8
139.9
119.6
120.1
121.5
112.2
125.7
127.6
123.6
125.3
125.5
124.6
134.1
122.1
114.2
138.6
119.6
120.6
121.6
111.1
126.5
128.0
124.0
Housing ...................................................................................................
Shelter ..................................................................................................
R enters'costs (12/84 = 10 0 )........................................................
Rent, residential............................................................................
Other renters' costs .....................................................................
Homeowners’ costs (1 2 /8 4 = 1 0 0 ) ...............................................
Owners’ equivalent rent (12/84 = 100) .....................................
Household insurance (12/84 —1 0 0 )..........................................
Maintenance and repairs................................................................
Maintenance and repair services ..............................................
Maintenance and repair com m odities.......................................
Fuel and other u tilitie s.......................................................................
Fuels ..................................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas ...................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity .........................................................
Other utilities and public services ................................................
Household furnishings and ope ratio ns...........................................
Housefurnishings .............................................................................
Housekeeping su pp lie s...................................................................
Housekeeping services...................................................................
112.8
118.8
114.6
122.9
128.2
113.8
113.7
114.1
111.3
114.7
106.0
102.7
97.1
77.6
103.6
120.1
106.7
103.1
111.8
110.9
116.8
124.3
119.2
127.5
135.2
119.5
119.5
118.2
114.0
117.7
108.3
104.1
97.7
77.9
104.4
122.9
108.9
104.5
115.1
115.0
117.8
125.3
120.7
128.0
143.0
120.2
120.2
119.0
114.2
118.0
108.3
105.8
100.6
76.2
108.0
122.5
109.1
104.5
115.1
116.0
118.2
125.6
120.2
128.7
136.1
120.9
120.9
119.1
114.4
117.7
109.1
106.1
100.8
75.9
108.2
123.3
109.6
105.1
115.8
116.3
118.2
126.0
120.4
129.0
135.1
121.3
121.4
119.3
114.1
117.0
109.2
105.1
98.3
74.6
105.5
124.7
109.9
105.4
116.1
116.3
118.3
126.4
120.1
129.4
131.4
122.0
122.1
119.2
114.6
117.6
109.7
104.1
96.6
75.0
103.5
124.6
110.2
105.6
116.9
116.4
118.5
126.5
120.0
129.7
129.2
122.2
122.2
119.6
115.2
117.8
110.6
104.8
97.2
76.7
103.9
125.6
110.2
105.4
117.4
116.5
119.0
126.9
120.7
130.1
131.8
122.5
122.5
119.9
115.6
118.3
110.9
105.7
98.4
80.3
104.8
126.2
110.4
105.5
117.9
116.9
119.3
127.4
121.5
130.4
135.2
122.8
122.8
120.0
116.7
119.5
111.8
105.7
98.3
81.0
104.6
126.3
110.4
105.4
118.1
117.0
119.6
128.1
123.0
130.7
144.2
123.0
123.1
120.1
116.7
119.2
112.1
105.7
98.2
81.2
104.6
126.2
110.0
104.5
118.9
117.1
119.8
128.3
122.7
131.0
140.9
123.4
123.5
120.2
116.7
119.3
112.1
105.9
98.5
82.1
104.8
126.5
110.1
104.3
120.0
117.2
120.3
128.8
122.8
131.2
139.9
124.1
124.2
120.9
116.9
119.8
112.0
106.7
99.2
81.2
105.8
127.2
110.1
104.0
121.2
117.4
121.1
129.3
123.6
131.8
142.3
124.4
124.5
121.5
117.9
121.0
112.7
109.0
103.0
80.1
110.3
127.4
110.4
104.4
121.6
117.6
122.1
130.5
125.7
132.5
153.7
125.2
125.2
121.8
118.2
121.2
113.2
109.4
103.4
79.6
110.8
127.9
110.8
104.8
122.0
117.4
122.4
131.0
125.9
133.0
152.0
125.8
125.9
122.0
117.9
121.3
112.5
109.5
103.5
78.8
111.0
128.0
110.8
104.6
122.6
117.6
Apparel and upkeep .............................................................................
110.4
114.9
112.2
117.2
120.1
119.5
117.6
114.8
114.7
118.4
120.0
119.4
116.9
114.4
114.5
1987
1988
All items .....................................................................................................
C om m odities...........................................................................................
Food and beverages..........................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages..........................................
Nondurables less food and beverages .......................................
Apparel com m odities....................................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ...................
D urables.............................................................................................
113.6
107.7
113.5
104.0
101.1
108.9
99.5
108.2
118.3
111.5
118.2
107.3
105.2
113.7
103.2
110.4
119.0
111.9
119.4
107.3
105.2
110.7
104.8
110.3
S e rvices...................................................................................................
Rent of shelter (1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )...........................................................
Household services less rent of’ shelter ( 1 2 /8 2 = 1 0 0 )..............
Transportation se rvice s.....................................................................
Medical care se rvice s........................................................................
Other services ....................................................................................
120.2
125.9
113.1
121.9
130.0
125.7
125.7
132.0
115.3
128.0
138.3
132.6
Special indexes:
All items less food .............................................................................
All items less s h e lte r.........................................................................
All items less homeowners’ costs (12/82 = 10 0 )..........................
All items less medical c a re ...............................................................
Commodities less fo o d ......................................................................
Nondurables less food ......................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...............................................
Nondurables.........................................................................................
Services less rent of’ shelter (12/82 = 100) ..................................
Services less medical c a r e ...............................................................
Energy...................................................................................................
All items less energy .........................................................................
All items less food and energy ........................................................
Commodities less food and e n e rg y ................................................
Energy commodities ..........................................................................
Services less energy..........................................................................
113.6
111.6
115.1
112.6
104.3
101.8
100.3
107.5
123.1
119.1
88.6
117.2
118.2
111.8
80.2
122.0
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1982-84 —$1.00 ..................................................................................
1967 —$ 1 .0 0 .........................................................................................
80
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Sept.
1989
31. Continued— Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Series
1989
1988
Annual
average
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
115.8
114.4
117.6
121.5
112.7
116.2
123.7
118.9
116.9
121.5
120.6
116.3
117.9
124.7
118.1
117.5
119.9
120.1
115.0
118.2
125.4
116.0
116.5
116.2
120.3
114.0
117.8
125.8
113.0
114.4
111.3
118.5
112.8
117.8
126.4
112.8
113.4
110.7
121.8
113.1
119.0
126.8
116.7
115.1
118.3
121.7
114.1
118.5
127.7
118.4
116.4
120.2
126.7
115.2
119.6
128.1
117.7
116.9
118.1
128.3
115.0
119.8
128.9
115.0
115.0
113.5
126.7
114.1
119.8
129.0
112.3
113.7
108.7
121.9
113.9
120.7
128.6
112.4
113.9
108.9
120.4
113.1
122.4
128.7
109.4
108.6
115.5
116.0
119.0
84.3
84.3
120.5
126.5
98.8
132.5
123.0
109.4
108.6
115.8
116.4
119.2
83.1
83.2
121.0
127.2
99.3
133.2
123.1
109.8
109.0
116.9
117.5
119.8
81.6
81.6
121.3
128.9
98.8
135.5
123.5
110.3
109.5
118.1
118.5
119.5
81.5
81.5
121.5
130.0
99.0
136.8
124.3
110.4
109.5
118.8
118.9
120.1
80.4
80.4
121.5
130.4
99.9
137.1
125.4
110.7
109.7
119.2
119.3
120.3
79.6
79.5
122.4
131.4
100.5
138.2
126.1
111.2
110.3
119.3
119.5
120.4
80.3
80.2
123.3
132.2
100.7
139.2
126.8
111.6
110.6
119.2
119.4
120.3
81.5
81.4
123.5
132.5
99.8
139.8
126.9
114.5
113.7
118.9
119.2
120.5
92.3
92.3
123.9
132.7
100.4
139.8
127.1
116.0
115.3
119.0
119.3
120.9
96.7
96.9
124.4
133.5
101.1
140.7
127.5
116.0
115.2
118.7
118.9
121.1
96.1
96.3
124.6
133.9
101.5
141.2
128.2
115.4
114.6
118.3
118.4
120.9
94.5
94.7
124.8
133.7
101.0
141.0
128.3
114.2
113.3
117.6
117.6
120.1
91.0
91.2
125.4
133.7
101.6
140.8
129.1
139.0
139.0
139.0
137.7
143.3
140.3
140.0
140.3
138.9
145.4
140.8
141.0
140.8
139.3
146.3
141.7
142.1
141.6
139.9
147.8
142.2
142.2
142.2
140.6
148.9
142.8
143.1
142.7
141.0
150.0
144.2
143.9
144.2
142.4
151.9
145.6
144.7
145.8
143.7
154.2
146.5
146.0
146.7
144.7
154.8
147.2
147.4
147.2
145.1
155.6
147.9
148.9
147.6
145.5
156.2
148.8
149.9
148.6
146.4
157.3
150.1
150.3
150.0
147.3
159.7
151.1
150.9
151.1
147.8
161.6
114.8
110.6
121.8
119.7
115.1
127.2
120.1
115.5
127.6
120.6
116.0
128.1
121.2
116.5
128.9
121.7
117.3
129.0
122.2
117.6
129.7
123.1
118.1
131.3
123.6
118.4
131.9
124.1
118.7
132.7
124.8
119.1
133.8
124.9
119.5
133.6
125.5
119.7
134.6
126.1
120.1
135.7
126.5
120.1
136.4
Other goods and services ...................................................................
Tobacco p ro d u c ts ..............................................................................
Personal c a re ......................................................................................
Toilet goods and personal care appliances................................
Personal care s e rv ic e s ...................................................................
Personal and educational expenses...............................................
School books and s u pp lie s............................................................
Personal and educational s e rv ic e s ..............................................
127.8
133.7
115.0
113.9
116.1
138.2
137.9
138.4
136.5
146.0
119.3
118.0
120.5
147.4
147.1
147.7
137.2
148.9
119.0
117.4
120.7
147.4
146.0
147.8
139.3
149.2
120.3
118.8
121.9
151.1
150.0
151.5
139.9
149.5
120.9
119.9
122.0
151.7
150.8
152.0
140.3
149.9
121.7
120.6
122.7
152.0
150.9
152.3
140.6
150.2
122.3
121.5
123.0
152.3
151.1
152.7
143.0
156.9
122.7
121.7
123.6
153.3
152.0
153.7
143.7
158.2
123.0
121.9
124.2
153.7
153.9
154.0
144.0
158.9
123.5
122.3
124.6
153.9
154.0
154.1
144.4
159.2
123.9
122.7
125.2
154.3
154.1
154.6
145.2
160.7
124.7
122.9
126.7
154.6
154.1
154.9
146.3
163.8
124.4
122.4
126.9
155.3
154.5
155.7
147.5
167.3
124.6
122.8
126.8
155.7
154.7
156.1
148.8
168.5
125.4
123.8
127.1
157.3
155.6
157.8
All ite m s .....................................................................................................
C om m odities...........................................................................................
Food and beverages..........................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages..........................................
Nondurables less food and beverages .......................................
Apparel com m odities....................................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages, and apparel ....................
D urables.............................................................................................
112.5
107.3
113.3
103.6
100.8
108.8
99.2
106.6
117.0
111.0
117.9
106.8
104.6
113.4
102.9
108.9
117.7
111.6
119.1
107.0
104.9
110.5
104.7
108.8
118.5
112.5
119.8
108.1
106.6
115.8
104.7
109.1
118.9
113.0
120.0
108.7
107.2
118.9
104.1
109.7
119.0
113.1
119.9
108.9
107.1
118.1
104.3
110.4
119.2
113.0
120.3
108.6
106.3
116.0
104.1
110.7
119.7
113.5
121.7
108.4
105.9
113.0
104.9
111.0
120.2
113.9
122.4
108.7
106.3
112.8
105.6
111.0
120.8
114.7
123.1
109.5
108.1
116.7
106.5
110.6
121.8
116.4
123.7
111.8
112.1
118.4
111.6
110.5
122.5
117.1
124.4
112.6
113.4
117.7
113.9
110.6
122.8
116.9
124.6
112.2
112.6
115.0
114.0
110.7
123.2
116.8
125.1
111.6
111.7
112.3
113.9
110.6
123.2
116.4
125.3
110.9
110.8
112.4
112.6
110.1
S e rvices...................................................................................................
Rent of shelter ( 1 2 / 8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ..........................................................
Household services less rent of shelter ( 1 2 /8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ...............
Transportation se rvic e s .....................................................................
Medical care services........................................................................
Other services ....................................................................................
119.4
114.0
104.0
120.8
130.3
124.7
124.7
119.4
105.9
127.1
139.0
131.4
125.7
120.3
107.6
127.8
140.3
131.6
126.3
120.7
108.0
128.4
140.8
133.6
126.7
121.1
107.2
129.9
141.6
134.2
126.9
121.4
106.2
130.9
142.2
134.5
127.2
121.5
106.8
131.2
142.7
135.0
127.9
121.9
107.5
132.2
144.2
136.1
128.4
122.4
107.4
133.1
145.8
136.5
128.9
123.1
107.4
133.5
146.7
137.0
129.1
123.2
107.6
133.7
147.2
137.6
129.7
123.7
108.3
134.4
147.6
137.9
130.6
124.2
110.5
134.8
148.6
138.6
131.5
125.4
110.9
134.8
150.0
139.1
132.0
125.9
111.0
134.9
151.1
140.1
All items less homeowners’ costs ( 1 2 /8 4 - 1 0 0 ) ..........................
All items less medical c a r e ...............................................................
Commodities less f o o d ......................................................................
Nondurables less food ......................................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel ...............................................
Nondurables........................................................................................
Services less rent of shelter (12/84 = 1 0 0 )...................................
Services less medical c a r e ...............................................................
E nergy...................................................................................................
All items less energy ........................................................................
All items less food and energy ........................................................
Commodities less food and e n e rg y ................................................
Energy commodities ..........................................................................
Services less e ne rgy..........................................................................
112.2
111.0
106.4
111.5
103.9
101.4
100.0
107.2
110.8
118.2
88.0
116.0
116.8
110.8
80.3
121.2
116.7
115.2
110.4
115.8
107.2
105.3
103.7
111.5
115.6
123.3
88.6
121.0
121.9
114.7
80.9
127.0
117.3
115.9
111.1
116.6
107.3
105.6
105.3
112.3
116.6
124.3
91.8
121.5
122.2
114.3
83.8
127.8
118.1
116.8
111.9
117.3
108.4
107.2
105.3
113.4
117.3
124.9
91.3
122.4
123.1
115.8
82.7
128.4
118.6
117.2
112.2
117.7
109.0
107.8
104.9
113.8
117.6
125.2
89.3
123.1
124.0
116.9
81.2
129.1
118.8
117.3
112.3
117.8
109.2
107.6
105.1
113.7
117.6
125.3
88.4
123.4
124.3
117.1
81.2
129.5
118.8
117.4
112.4
117.9
108.9
106.9
104.9
113.5
118.1
125.6
88.1
123.6
124.4
117.0
80.3
129.8
119.2
118.0
113.0
118.5
108.8
106.5
105.6
114.0
119.0
126.3
88.3
124.2
124.8
116.9
79.9
130.5
119.6
118.5
113.4
118.9
109.0
107.0
106.4
114.6
119.5
126.7
88.6
124.7
125.3
117.1
80.6
131.1
120.2
119.1
114.1
119.5
109.9
108.7
107.2
115.8
119.8
127.2
89.2
125.3
125.9
117.9
81.7
131.6
121.3
120.4
115.2
120.5
112.1
112.4
111.7
118.1
120.1
127.4
94.8
125.8
126.3
118.4
91.6
131.9
122.0
121.1
115.8
121.2
112.9
113.6
113.8
119.1
120.7
128.0
97.4
126.2
126.6
118.5
95.6
132.4
122.3
121.3
116.1
121.5
112.5
113.0
114.0
118.8
121.9
128.9
98.9
126.4
126.8
118.2
94.9
132.9
122.6
121.4
116.3
121.8
112.0
112.1
113.9
118.6
122.3
129.7
98.3
126.8
127.3
117.9
93.5
133.8
122.6
121.3
116.3
121.8
111.4
111.4
112.8
118.3
122.7
130.1
96.6
127.1
127.6
117.9
90.2
134.4
Purchasing power of the consumer dollar:
1 9 8 2 -8 4 -$ 1 .0 0 ..................................................................................
1 9 6 7 -5 1 .0 0 ........................................................................................
89.0
29.9
85.5
28.7
84.9
28.5
84.4
28.3
84.1
28.2
84.0
28.2
83.9
28.2
83.5
28.0
83.2
27.9
82.8
27.8
82.1
27.6
81.6
27.4
81.4
27.3
81.2
27.3
81.2
27.2
Aug.
1987
1988
Apparel commodities .........................................................................
Men's and boys' a p p a re l................................................................
Women’s and girls’ apparel ...........................................................
Infants' and toddlers' a p p a re l.......................................................
F ootw ear............................................................................................
Other apparel com m odities............................................................
Apparel services.................................................................................
108.8
108.5
110.3
114.0
105.5
107.4
119.2
113.4
112.8
114.5
118.6
110.4
114.9
123.0
110.5
111.0
109.5
120.4
108.0
114.9
123.3
Transportation .......................................................................................
Private transportation.........................................................................
New ve h icle s....................................................................................
New c a rs .........................................................................................
Used c a r s ..........................................................................................
Motor f u e l..........................................................................................
G a soline..........................................................................................
Maintenance and re p a ir..................................................................
Other private transportation...........................................................
Other private transportation com m o dities................................
Other private transportation services........................................
Public transportation..........................................................................
105.1
104.1
114.0
114.3
113.1
80.3
80.2
115.1
119.0
96.7
123.4
120.4
108.3
107.5
116.2
116.6
117.9
80.9
80.8
119.8
125.8
98.6
131.7
122.5
Medical c a r e ...........................................................................................
Medical care com m o dities................................................................
Medical care se rvice s........................................................................
Professional s e rv ic e s ......................................................................
Hospital and related s e rv ic e s ........................................................
130.2
130.2
130.3
129.0
131.1
Entertainment .........................................................................................
Entertainment commodities ..............................................................
Entertainment se rvice s ......................................................................
Special indexes:
All items less food .............................................................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Sept.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
81
Current Labor Statistics:
32.
Price Data
Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available local area data: all items
(1982-84=100, unless otherwise indicated)
All Urban Consumers
Pricing
sche
dule2
Area'
U.S. city a v erage.....................
Region and area size3
Northeast u rb a n ........................
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ................................
Size B - 500,000 to
1,200,000 ................................
Size C - 50,000 to
500,000 ...................................
North Central urban ................
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ................................
Size B - 360,000 to
1,200,000 ................................
Size C - 50,000 to
360,000 ...................................
Size D - Nonmetro
politan (less
than 50,0000 ..........................
South u rb a n ...............................
Size A - More than
1,200,000 ................................
Size B - 450,000 to
1,200,000 ................................
Size C - 50,000 to
450,000 ...................................
Size D - Nonmetro
politan (less
than 50,000) ...........................
West u rb a n ................................
Size A - More than
1,250,000 ................................
Size C - 50,000 to
330,000 ...................................
Size classes:
A (12/86 = 1 0 0 ).....................
B ...............................................
C ..............................................
D ..............................................
Selected local areas
Chicago, ILNorthwestern IN .....................
Los Angeles-Long
Beach, Anaheim, C A ............
New York, NYNortheastern N J ......................
Philadelphia, P A -N J.................
San FranciscoOakland, C A .............................
M
1989
1988
Aug.
119.0
Sept.
119.8
1988
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Aug.
123.1
123.8
124.1
124.4
124.6
117.7
1989
Sept.
118.5
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
121.8
122.5
122.8
123.2
123.2
M
122.5
123.9
127.4
128.3
128.5
129.0
129.1
121.3
122.7
126.2
127.1
127.4
127.9
128.0
M
123.4
124.8
128.0
128.7
129.1
129.3
129.5
121.4
122.8
125.9
126.7
127.1
127.3
127.5
M
120.9
122.2
126.1
127.2
127.0
128.8
129.1
119.7
120.8
124.9
126.0
125.9
127.8
127.9
M
M
120.5
117.2
121.3
117.7
126.2
120.8
127.6
121.3
127.6
121.8
127.9
122.0
127.8
122.0
122.9
115.3
123.7
115.8
128.6
118.9
130.0
119.4
130.3
119.9
130.3
120.1
130.2
120.0
M
118.3
119.0
121.9
122.2
123.0
123.5
123.5
115.7
116.3
119.2
119.5
120.3
120.7
120.7
M
116.5
117.0
120.6
120.8
120.9
120.7
120.9
114.2
114.6
118.2
118.5
118.5
118.5
118.6
M
117.2
117.4
121.2
122.2
122.1
122.0
122.1
116.1
116.3
120.1
121.1
121.0
120.8
120.8
M
M
113.9
117.0
114.2
117.7
116.3
120.8
116.8
121.3
117.4
121.7
117.5
122.0
117.1
122.1
113.7
116.5
113.9
117.2
116.1
120.3
116.8
120.9
117.2
121.3
117.4
121.5
116.9
121.6
M
118.0
118.7
121.4
122.0
122.4
122.6
122.8
117.2
117.9
120.6
121.3
121.7
121.9
122.0
M
117.6
118.6
122.2
122.4
123.0
123.5
123.4
115.8
116.6
120.1
120.5
121.0
121.4
121.2
M
115.9
116.4
119.4
120.0
120.4
120.5
121.0
116.4
117.0
120.0
120.6
121.1
121.2
121.6
M
M
115.3
119.6
116.0
120.2
119.4
123.8
120.4
124.5
120.4
124.6
120.1
125.1
120.0
125.3
116.2
118.3
116.8
118.9
120.2
122.6
121.3
123.3
121.3
123.3
120.9
123.8
121.1
123.9
M
121.1
121.7
125.3
126.2
126.3
126.9
127.1
118.4
119.0
122.7
123.5
123.6
124.2
124.3
M
118.1
118.5
122.1
122.5
122.4
122.7
122.6
117.5
117.8
121.5
121.9
121.7
122.0
121.9
M
M
M
M
108.2
118.0
117.5
115.8
109.0
118.9
117.9
116.6
111.8
122.6
121.6
119.6
112.4
123.1
122.4
120.3
112.7
123.3
122.5
120.5
113.1
123.9
122.7
120.5
113.2
124.0
122.9
120.5
108.1
116.7
117.8
116.2
108.9
117.6
118.3
116.9
111.7
121.2
122.0
119.9
112.3
121.8
122.8
120.7
112.7
122.0
123.0
120.8
113.0
122.6
123.0
120.9
113.1
122.6
123.1
120.9
M
120.1
122.0
123.6
123.9
125.7
126.4
126.4
116.4
118.2
119.8
120.1
121.8
122.6
122.5
M
122.6
123.4
127.2
128.3
128.7
129.0
128.9
119.5
120.3
124.0
125.0
125.3
125.7
125.5
M
M
124.2
123.9
126.0
125.2
129.5
126.7
130.2
127.9
130.5
128.8
130.6
129.3
130.9
129.1
122.2
123.6
124.1
124.9
127.5
126.7
128.2
127.9
128.7
128.9
128.7
129.3
128.9
129.3
126.2
127.4
128.1
120.5
121.1
124.8
125.7
125.6
126.4
127.0
_
_
-
-
121.0
126.1
112.7
117.8
117.1
122.3
_
-
123.7
130.6
117.7
120.0
121.2
126.6
_
-
124.6
130.8
118.8
120.6
122.8
127.3
_
-
_
-
118.6
119.0
113.5
114.7
_
-
120.0
119.3
114.5
115.9
_
-
119.8
119.2
114.9
116.0
M
122.0
122.1
125.4
126.3
Baltimore, MD ...........................
Boston, MA ...............................
Cleveland, O H ...........................
Miami, F L ...................................
St. Louis, M O -IL........................
Washington, DC-MD-VA .........
M
1
1
1
1
1
_
-
121.3
126.2
117.6
118.8
117.3
122.8
_
-
124.1
130.5
122.8
120.9
121.5
127.1
Dallas-Ft. Worth, T X ................
Detroit, M l..................................
Houston, TX ..............................
Pittsburgh, PA ...........................
1
2
2
2
117.2
117.6
110.3
115.3
_
-
118.7
121.7
113.2
119.2
-
-
_
“
’ Area is the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA), ex
clusive of farms and military. Area definitions are those established by
the Office of Management and Budget in 1983, except for BostonLawrence-Salem, MA-NH Area (excludes Monroe County); and Milwau
kee, Wl Area (includes only the Milwaukee MSA). Definitions do not in
clude revisions made since 1983.
2 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all
areas; most other goods and services priced as indicated:.
M - Every month.
1 - January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2 - February, April, June, August, October, and December.
82 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Urban Wage Earners
October 1989
_
120.0
122.1
114.1
120.4
124.9
130.3
124.4
121.6
123.1
127.8
_
-
-
-
120.0
122.2
114.4
120.8
117.0
114.6
110.6
110.7
-
-
“
-
-
3 Regions are defined as the four Census regions.
- Data not available.
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI
program. Because each local index is a small subset of the national in
dex, it has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substan
tially more sampling and other measurement error than the national in
dex. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the na
tional index, although their long-term trends are quite similar. Therefore,
the Bureau of Labor Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting
the national average CPI for use in escalator clauses.
33.
Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups
(1982-84 = 100)
Series
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
113.6
3.6
118.3
4.1
113.5
4.0
118.2
4.1
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
82.4
13.5
90.9
10.3
96.5
6.2
99.6
3.2
103.9
4.3
107.6
3.6
109.6
1.9
86.7
8.5
93.5
7.8
97.3
4.1
99.5
2.3
103.2
3.7
105.6
2.3
109.1
3.3
Food and beverages:
\ .
Housing:
81.1
15.7
90.4
11.5
96.9
7.2
99.5
2.7
103.6
4.1
107.7
4.0
110.9
3.0
114.2
3.0
118.5
3.8
90.9
7.1
95.3
4.8
97.8
2.6
100.2
2.5
102.1
1.9
105.0
2.8
105.9
.9
110.6
4.4
115.4
4.3
83.1
17.9
93.2
12.2
97.0
4.1
99.3
2.4
103.7
4.4
106.4
2.6
102.3
-3.9
105.4
3.0
108.7
3.1
74.9
11.0
82.9
10.7
92.5
11.6
100.6
8.8
106.8
6.2
113.5
6.3
122.0
7.5
130.1
6.6
138.6
6.5
83.6
9.0
90.1
7.8
96.0
6.5
100.1
4.3
103.8
3.7
107.9
3.9
111.6
3.4
115.3
3.3
120.3
4.3
75.2
9.1
82.6
9.8
91.1
10.3
101.1
11.0
107.9
6.7
114.5
6.1
121.4
6.0
128.5
5.8
137.0
6.6
82.9
13.4
91.4
10.3
96.9
6.0
99.8
3.0
103.3
3.5
106.9
3.5
108.6
1.6
112.5
3.6
117.0
4.0
Apparel and upkeep:
Transportation:
Medical care:
Entertainment:
Other goods and services:
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and
Clerical Workers:
All items:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
83
Current Labor Statistics:
34.
Price Data
Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1982 = 100)
1989
1988
Annual average
Grouping
1987
Finished goods ..............................................
Finished consumer goods ...........................
Finished consumer fo o d s ..........................
Finished consumer goods excluding
foods ...........................................................
Nondurable goods less food ................
Durable goods .........................................
Capital equ ipm ent.........................................
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
com ponents...................................................
Materials and components for
manufacturing ..............................................
Materials for food m anufacturing............
Materials for nondurable manufacturing .
Materials for durable m anufacturing.......
Components for m anufacturing...............
Materials and components for
construction..................................................
Processed fuels and lubricants..................
C ontainers......................................................
S upplies...........................................................
Crude materials for further processing ...
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs ..........................
Crude nonfood m ate rials............................
Special groupings:
Finished goods, excluding fo o d s ..................
Finished energy goods ...................................
Finished goods less energy ...........................
Finished consumer goods less e n e rg y ........
Finished goods less food and energy .........
Finished consumer goods less food and
e n e rg y ...............................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and
e n e rg y ..............................................................
1988
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
July
Aug.
112.1
110.6
118.3
113.0
111.8
117.7
114.2
113.3
119.1
114.1
113.0
118.4
114.0
112.8
119.0
113.3
111.8
118.7
June
105.4
103.6
109.5
108.0
106.2
112.6
108.6
107.0
115.1
109.4
107.6
114.6
109.8
108.0
114.9
110.0
108.2
115.1
111.1
109.4
116.“’
111.7
110.1
117.2
100.7
94.9
111.5
111.7
103.1
97.3
113.8
114.3
103.0
97.6
112.8
114.3
104.1
97.7
116.4
116.0
104.6
98.4
116.1
116.1
104.8
98.7
116.1
116.4
105.8
100.0
116.6
117.1
106.6
100.9
117.0
117.5
106.8
101.3
116.6
117.5
108.8
104.2
116.4
117.6
110.4
106.1
117.1
117.9
110.3
105.9
117.2
118.6
109.7
105.3
116.7
118.6
108.4
103.5
116.8
118.8
101.5
107.1
108.7
108.6
108.9
109.4
110.6
111.0
111.5
112.4
112.7
112.6
112.6
112.1
105.3
100.8
102.2
106.2
108.8
113.2
106.0
112.9
118.7
112.3
114.9
109.5
115.2
120.3
113.2
115.5
108.3
116.0
121.8
113.5
116.2
107.7
116.8
123.2
113.8
116.8
108.6
117.5
124.3
114.1
118.0
110.4
119.2
125.5
114.9
118.3
110.1
119.7
125.3
115.3
118.7
111.4
119.8
125.7
115.7
118.9
111.1
120.3
125.9
115.8
118.9
112.4
120.5
124.9
116.1
118.4
112.1
119.6
123.6
116.3
118.2
112.9
118.9
123.0
116.5
117.9
113.2
118.1
122.2
116.7
109.8
73.3
114.5
107.7
116.1
71.2
120.1
113.7
117.1
72.6
122.3
115.6
117.5
69.7
122.4
116.0
118.1
69.0
122.6
116.2
118.7
69.8
122.7
116.2
119.4
71.6
123.1
117.2
119.9
72.1
123.9
117.4
120.5
73.2
124.4
118.0
121.1
76.7
125.1
118.0
121.5
78.1
125.5
118.0
121.4
79.3
125.8
118.0
121.5
78.7
126.0
118.4
121.4
77.3
126.0
118.2
93.7
96.2
87.9
96.0
106.1
85.5
96.7
112.0
83.0
95.9
111.9
81.9
94.5
108.0
82.0
97.3
109.5
85.4
101.4
112.5
90.0
101.2
111.0
90.7
103.2
113.7
92.2
104.4
111.6
95.3
106.3
115.0
96.2
103.9
111.4
94.6
103.7
109.7
95.3
101.0
109.5
91.2
104.0
61.8
112.3
112.5
113.3
106.5
59.8
115.8
116.3
117.0
106.4
58.8
116.7
117.5
117.2
107.7
58.7
117.7
118.3
118.8
108.1
60.0
117.8
118.5
118.9
108.3
59.2
118.2
118.9
119.4
109.2
60.8
119.2
120.0
120.1
109.9
61.8
119.8
120.6
120.7
110.0
62 3
120.1
121.1
120.7
111.4
68.4
120.0
120.9
120.8
112.6
72.0
120.8
121.8
121.3
112.7
70.1
121.1
121.9
122.0
112.3
68.4
121.2
122.1
121.9
111.5
63.6
121.3
122.3
122.3
114.2
118.5
118.9
120.5
120.6
121.2
121.9
122.6
122.6
122.7
123.3
124.0
123.9
124.4
116.3
122.0
123.3
123.6
123.9
125.0
125.9
126.8
127.1
127.4
127.9
129.0
129.2
129.9
Intermediate materials less foods and
fe e d s .................................................................
Intermediate foods and fe e d s ........................
Intermediate energy goods ............................
Intermediate goods less e n e rg y ...................
Intermediate materials less foods and
e n e rg y ...............................................................
101.7
99.2
73.0
107.3
106.9
109.5
70.9
114.6
108.3
115.5
72.3
116.3
108.3
114.7
69.4
116.8
108.7
113.4
68.7
117.3
109.2
113.0
69.5
117.8
110.4
115.6
71.2
118.9
110.8
114.0
71.8
119.1
111.4
115.2
72.9
119.6
112.3
113.7
76.4
119.9
112.6
114.2
77.7
120.0
112.6
112.7
78.9
119.7
112.5
114.3
78.3
119.7
112.0
113.1
76.9
119.4
107.8
115.2
116.7
117.3
118.0
118.6
119.6
119.9
120.3
120.7
120.8
120.5
120.3
120.0
Crude energy m aterials...................................
Crude materials less energy ..........................
Crude nonfood materials less e n e rg y..........
75.0
100.9
115.7
67.7
112.6
133.0
64.7
117.1
133.4
63.3
117.0
133.4
62.9
114.7
135.6
66.6
1 ,6.1
136.9
71.2
119.3
140.3
72.0
118.1
140.3
73.5
120.4
141.3
77.3
118.8
141.2
78.7
121.0
139.8
77.3
117.8
137.7
78.9
115.8
134.9
73.6
116.0
136.5
84 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
35.
Producer Price indexes, by durability of product
(1982 = 100)
1989
1988
Annual average
Grouping
Aug.
118.8
108.1
118.7
108.0
118.8
106.7
114.9
118.0
111.6
114.8
118.1
111.2
114.6
118.1
110.9
114.2
118.3
110.1
103.5
156.5
101.0
102.4
151.3
100.1
102.5
145.0
100.5
100.3
146.5
98.2
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
115.2
102.7
116.4
102.2
116.8
102.0
117.2
102.8
118.1
104.8
118.3
105.2
118.5
106.1
118.7
107.4
118.8
108.7
109.1
114.1
104.1
110.1
114.5
105.6
110.5
115.6
105.4
111.0
116.0
106.1
111.4
116.4
106.4
112.5
117.1
107.8
112.9
117.4
108.3
113.4
117.6
109.2
114.4
117.8
110.8
95.9
148.0
93.4
97.5
149.5
95.0
96.5
150.1
93.9
94.8
154.8
92.0
96.7
157.5
93.9
99.9
162.6
97.0
100.1
161.9
97.2
101.1
161.0
98.2
101.5
159.0
98.8
1988
Total durable goods ........................................
Total nondurable g o o d s ..................................
109.9
97.5
114.7
101.1
Total m anufactures..........................................
D u rab le............................................................
Nondurable ....................................................
104.4
109.6
99.2
Total raw or slightly processed goods ........
D u rab le............................................................
Nondurable ....................................................
94.2
122.6
92.9
36.
July
June
Oct.
1987
Sept.
Producer price indexes for the net output of major industry groups
(December 1984 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Total mining industries..................................
Metal m in in g ....................................................
Anthracite mining (12/85 — 100) ...................
Bituminous coal and lignite mining
(1 2 /8 5 - 1 0 0 ) ..................................................
Oil and gas extraction (12/85 —100) ..........
Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic
minerals, except fu e ls...................................
Total manufacturing industries...................
Food and kindred pro d u c ts ...........................
Tobacco m anufactures..................................
Textile mill p ro d u c ts .......................................
Apparel and other finished products made
from fabrics and similar m aterials...............
Lumber and wood products, except
furniture............................................................
Furniture and fix tu re s .....................................
Paper and allied products .............................
Printing, publishing, and allied
in dustries.........................................................
Chemicals and allied products......................
Petroleum refining and related p ro d u c ts ....
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products
Leather and leather products .......................
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products ..
Primary metal industries ................................
Fabricated metal products, except
machinery and transportation equipment....
Machinery, except electrica l..........................
Electrical and electronic machinery,
equipment, and supplies...............................
Transportation equipm ent..............................
Measuring and controlling instruments;
photographic, medical, optical goods;
watches, clo c k s ..............................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries
(1 2 /8 5 - 1 0 0 ) ...................................................
Service industries:
Pipelines, except natural gas (12/86=100 )
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1989
1988
Annual
Industry
SIC
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
68.1
98.1
99.8
68.7
101.4
99.9
68.3
108.3
101.5
70.8
111.1
102.7
74.6
112.7
102.8
75.5
105.9
102.7
74.9
104.8
103.0
77.2
103.9
102.5
78.6
99.5
102.4
77.2
96.1
102.4
78.1
92.1
102.4
74.1
96.4
102.6
94.6
68.5
94.3
65.4
94.4
65.9
93.9
65.2
93.9
68.3
93.8
73.0
93.0
74.5
92.9
73.8
93.4
76.7
94.1
78.7
94.0
77.0
94.9
78.2
94.8
72.9
105.1
108.0
108.7
108.8
109.1
109.1
109.9
110.8
110.9
111.3
111.7
111.9
111.6
111.5
20
21
22
100.9
102.6
126.5
102.6
104.4
107.1
141.8
106.8
105.1
109.5
145 0
107.4
105.6
109.6
145.1
107.3
106.1
109.6
145.1
107.6
106.4
109.5
153.1
107.8
107.5
110.8
154.9
108.3
107.9
110.9
155.0
108.3
108.5
111.9
155.0
108.6
109.4
111.6
155.1
108.8
110.1
112.1
155.1
108.9
110.0
111.9
163.5
108.9
109.9
112.5
163.6
109.1
109.5
112.4
164.9
109.7
23
103.9
107.2
107.8
108.0
108.2
108.5
108.9
109.3
109.3
109.5
109.5
109.6
110.1
110.5
24
25
26
105.3
106.4
104.9
109.2
111.4
113.7
109.5
112.5
116.2
109.4
112.7
116.8
109.7
112.9
117.0
109.6
113.3
117.5
110.7
113.6
118.2
112.3
114.0
119.7
113.1
114.4
120.4
114.4
114.7
120.6
115.4
115.3
121.3
115.9
115.7
121.5
117.1
115.8
121.2
116.6
116.1
121.2
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
112.2
103.6
70.5
100.9
106.6
104.5
101.0
118.2
113.0
67.7
106.7
113.4
105.8
113.0
119.0
115.4
66.7
108.2
114.6
105.8
114.1
119.8
116.0
64.5
108.4
114.8
106.0
115.8
120.1
117.2
67.2
108.5
114.9
106.2
117.5
120.5
117.8
66.8
108.7
115.1
106.3
118.5
122.6
119.6
68.5
109.3
115.8
106.5
119.7
123.2
119.9
69.3
109.6
116.6
106.7
119.4
123.6
120.6
71.5
110.2
117.0
107.2
120.1
124.0
121.0
79.9
110.5
117.2
107.9
120.1
124.2
121.0
82.9
110.5
117.1
107.9
119.5
124.4
120.6
80.4
110.4
117.2
108.2
118.4
124.8
120.4
77.6
110.2
117.8
108.4
118.4
125.2
119.5
73.0
110.2
118.7
108.3
117.9
34
35
102.1
103.2
107.4
106.4
108.8
107.2
109.3
107.4
109.6
107.8
110.0
108.1
110.6
108.9
111.1
109.3
111.5
109.7
112.0
109.8
112.4
110.2
112.5
110.6
112.6
111.0
112.7
111.2
36
37
103.3
105.9
104.6
107.8
104.8
106.7
105.1
110.7
105.2
110.3
105.3
110.9
106.0
111.4
106.4
111.7
106.4
111.2
106.6
110.9
106.9
111.5
107.1
111.8
107.5
111.0
107.6
111.1
38
105.1
107.0
106.9
107.2
107.5
107.5
108.8
109.1
109.7
110.1
110.4
110.7
110.9
111.1
39
103.8
107.5
108.3
108.3
108.6
108.9
110.1
110.6
110.9
111.2
111.5
111.8
112.1
112.4
46
97.9
94.8
94.8
94.8
94.7
94.7
94.5
94.5
94.5
94.4
94.4
94.4
94.4
94.4
1987
1988
10
11
75.0
100.1
98.9
70.6
100.7
100.2
12
13
96.0
74.3
14
Sept.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
85
Current Labor Statistics:
37.
Price Data
Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
(1982 = 100)
Index
Finished goods:
Total ...........................................................................
Consumer goods .................................................
Capital equipment ...............................................
86
1980
88.0
88.6
85.8
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
96.1
96.6
94.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.6
101.3
102.8
103.7
103.3
105.2
104.7
103.8
107.5
103.2
101.4
109.7
105.4
103.6
111.7
108.0
106.2
114.3
Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components:
Total ...........................................................................
Materials and components for
m anufacturing......................................................
Materials and components for construction ....
Processed fuels and lubricants .........................
C o nta iners.............................................................
S u p p lie s.................................................................
90.3
98.6
100.0
100.6
103.1
102.7
99.1
101.5
107.1
91.7
91.3
85.0
89.1
89.9
98.7
97.9
100.6
96.7
96.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.2
102.8
95.4
100.4
101.8
104.1
105.6
95.7
105.9
104.1
103.3
107.3
92.8
109.0
104.4
102.2
108.1
72.7
110.3
105.6
105.3
109.8
73.3
114.5
107.7
113.2
116.1
71.2
120.1
113.7
Crude materials for further processing:
Total ...........................................................................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs ..................................
Nonfood materials except fuel ..........................
Fuel ........................................................................
95.3
104.6
84.6
69.4
103.0
103.9
101.8
84.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.3
101.8
100.7
105.1
103.5
104.7
102.2
105.1
95.8
94.8
96.9
102.7
87.7
93.2
81.6
92.2
93.7
96.2
87.9
84.1
96.0
106.1
85.5
82.1
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
38.
U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(1985 = 100, unless otherwise indicated)
Category
1974
SITC
ALL COMMODITIES ................................................................................... j.......
1986
1987
1989
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
99.0
99.9
102.2
102.8
104.9
106.5
109.5
111.9
111.6
113.3
113.2
Dec.
Mar.
1988
Food .......................................................................................................................
Meat and meat preparations............................................................................
Fish and crustaceans........................................................................................
Grain and grain preparations...........................................................................
Vegetables and fr u it...........................................................................................
Animal feeds, excluding unmilled c e re a ls .....................................................
Miscellaneous food pro d u c ts ...........................................................................
0
01
03
04
05
08
09
90.1
114.5
115.9
72.5
117.5
119.7
99.9
87.3
115.0
117.1
68.3
115.3
117.0
100.1
89.9
121.2
125.8
71.0
112.4
123.8
100.6
86.7
118.8
131.1
67.8
101.1
123.1
100.3
94.6
116.8
138.5
77.4
100.5
145.2
100.3
95.2
122.8
140.9
79.8
97.5
134.6
102.3
103.4
131.0
145.0
87.2
104.3
158.1
102.8
118.7
137.0
175.9
108.5
109.9
161.0
105.2
114.2
130.3
174.0
102.0
110.3
157.0
104.9
117.6
132.9
169.1
108.4
108.8
154.1
107.0
115.5
127.9
159.8
106.4
113.5
144.1
108.2
Beverages and tobacco ...................................................................................
Tobacco and tobacco products .................................................................. .....
1
12
102.6
102.6
102.6
102.6
105.0
105.0
105.5
105.5
107.0
107.0
109.6
109.8
110.6
110.7
112.0
112.1
111.7
111.8
117.2
117.6
117.6
117.9
Crude m aterials...................................................................................................
Raw hides and s k in s ..........................................................................................
O ilse eds...............................................................................................................
Crude rubber .......................................................................................................
W o o d ....................................................................................................................
Pulp and waste p a p e r................................................................................
Textile fib e rs ........................................................................................................
Crude m inerals....................................................................................................
Metal ores and metal s c ra p ...... ........ .............................................................
2
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
102.4
115.9
95.2
98.9
107.9
129.4
90.9
96.8
96.8
105.7
131.9
90.4
99.9
111.2
144.2
97.8
94.4
98.8
114.5
149.6
101.6
101.0
116.2
149.9
112:4
94.0
107.0
118.7
147.7
95.1
102.8
141.7
153.0
116.5
91.6
117.4
125.2
157.1
109.6
105.3
146.0
160.4
111.6
91.6
125.9
130.0
171.4
115.6
104.5
150.2
171.2
107.5
92.8
131.8
139.9
166.8
143.0
106.1
149.6
179.5
109.9
94.2
146.0
140.8
156.7
154.7
109.1
150.0
181.7
100.8
94.8
145.0
135.8
136.8
135.7
109.9
148.6
182.1
103.6
94.8
150.4
142.6
146.7
139.3
111.1
157.3
192.9
106.7
98.8
163.5
142.9
150.0
129.8
112.2
171.2
193.6
115.8
99.3
156.9
Fuels and related products .............................................................................
Coal and coke ....................................................................................................
Crude petroleum and petroleum p ro d u c ts .....................................................
3
32
33
77.8
92.0
“
81.3
92.6
82.8
88.2
84.6
91.0
82.5
89.8
100.0
79.3
90.6
90.8
82.1
92.0
97.2
79.5
92.9
89.2
79.4
93.4
88.4
81.7
93.7
94.5
86.0
94.4
105.3
Fats and o ils .........................................................................................................
Animal oils and fats ..........................................................................................
Fixed vegetable oils and fa ts ...........................................................................
4
41
42
71.8
79.9
64.6
73.9
81.1
67.3
78.8
86.7
71.9
78.5
86.7
71.2
81.6
88.7
75.4
92.7
101.3
85.7
97.3
101.6
93.7
101.5
104.3
99.1
91.5
95.7
87.1
90.3
91.8
88.2
87.1
89.6
84.1
Chemicals and related p ro d u c ts ....................................................................
Organic chem ica ls..............................................................................................
Dyeing, tanning, and coloring m a te ria ls.........................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products (12/85 = 100) ...............................
Essential oils, polish, and cleaning preparations.........................................
Fertilizers, manufactured ..................................................................................
Artificial resins, plastics and c e llu lo se ............................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s..........................................................
5
51
53
54
55
56
57
58
95.2
92.4
101.4
100.8
104.2
77.4
99.5
97.3
99.6
101.9
103.6
101.0
105.5
85.6
104.8
97.5
106.7
118.4
104.2
101.4
105.7
91.6
111.9
97.7
107.7
116.1
105.5
102.2
107.3
100.9
116.4
97.1
112.9
123.5
108.5
105.4
108.4
106.5
124.8
98.2
117.9
135.1
109.1
109.3
111.2
110.6
129.4
100.3
121.6
144.6
110.1
106.3
113.6
109.8
137.5
101.7
124.9
153.3
111.5
105.9
120.2
116.4
138.2
104.1
125.5
150.8
113.0
107.5
122.4
119.9
132.5
105.4
125.5
149.6
115.5
109.0
125.3
119.4
125.8
108.4
121.7
144.2
116.2
108.8
124.6
108.7
118.0
109.4
Intermediate manufactured products ...........................................................
Leather and furskins ..........................................................................................
Rubber manufactures .......................................................................................
Paper and paperboard products .....................................................................
T extiles.................................................................................................................
Non-metallic mineral manufactures (9 /8 5 = 1 0 0 ) .........................................
Iron and s te e l......................................................................................................
Nonferrous m e ta ls ..............................................................................................
Metal manufactures, n.e.s..................................................................................
6
61
62
64
65
66
67
68
69
104.2
107.8
100.9
110.8
101.8
108.0
101.9
102.6
100.8
106.4
123.6
102.0
114.7
103.3
106.8
102.9
106.6
101.5
107.9
126.9
102.5
117.0
103.7
108.7
102.9
113.0
101.3
110.3
128.7
103.9
120.1
104.1
110.4
100.7
123.0
102.3
111.2
118.0
104.1
122.4
105.2
111.3
102.9
124.4
103.4
114.4
125.7
105.2
126.2
106.5
113.4
106.1
134.0
104.5
117.7
125.1
108.8
129.0
107.9
114.1
110.8
143.5
107.6
119.6
128.6
109.4
130.2
108.6
115.6
111.4
149.1
109.9
120.6
125.0
110.4
131.1
111.6
116.8
112.1
150.0
110.9
122.6
118.3
113.0
132.5
113.9
120.4
116.0
151.7
112.6
123.1
120.7
113.1
133.7
115.2
122.6
116.7
146.0
114.0
7
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
101.6
103.7
100.6
104.2
103.3
98.2
101.3
100.3
103.3
101.7
104.6
100.0
105.8
104.2
96.0
101.9
101.7
103.1
101.8
103.7
100.1
106.7
104.5
96.1
101.4
102.1
103.5
102.1
104.8
100.5
107.8
104.6
95.7
101.4
102.5
103.8
102.4
105.2
100.9
108.2
105.4
95.5
101.9
101.8
104.6
103.2
107.0
102.1
109.3
106.7
95.8
102.8
103.1
104.5
104.0
108.4
103.6
110.8
108.1
95.7
104.6
103.4
104.9
104.8
108.5
104.7
111.0
109.3
96.8
104.1
105.3
105.4
105.8
109.3
106.0
114.4
110.3
96.4
105.1
105.7
106.8
106.7
111.8
107.3
115.7
112.7
95.8
106.7
106.1
107.2
107.2
112.3
108.7
117.4
113.3
94.9
107.9
106.4
107.8
79
103.5
104.5
105.5
105.8
106.6
107.4
109.6
109.7
111.9
113.5
114.9
Miscellaneous manufactured articles............................................................
Furniture and p a rts .............................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
app ara tus..........................................................................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
c lo c k s ................................................................................................................
8
82
103.8
103.5
104.6
106.7
105.2
107.6
105.4
107.6
105.6
110.0
106.9
111.2
108.1
111.4
108.9
111.7
110.5
114.2
111.4
114.3
112.9
118.1
87
103.5
104.4
105.5
106.3
107.1
110.0
111.1
112.5
113.9
115.5
118.3
88
102.1
102.7
102.5
99.0
97.9
97.6
100.1
99.4
99.9
98.5
99.3
Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s....................................................
89
104.9
105.2
104.8
105.9
105.8
105.4
106.5
106.5
108.7
110.2
110.0
Machinery and transport equipment, excluding military and
commercial a irc ra ft......................................................................................
Power generating machinery and equipment ...............................................
Machinery specialized for particular industries.............................................
Metalworking m achinery...................................................................................
General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.................................................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipment .....................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing equ ipm ent........
Electrical machinery and equipm ent...............................................................
Road vehicles and parts ..................................................................................
Other transport equipment, excluding military and commercial
a via tio n ..............................................................................................................
-
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
87
Current Labor Statistics:
39.
Price Data
U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification
(1985=100, unless otherwise indicated)
Category
1974
SITO
ALL COMMODITIES ............................................................................................
ALL COMMODITIES, EXCLUDING FU E LS .................................................
1988
1989
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
110.0
116.5
110.9
117.5
112.5
120.8
113.8
123.7
116.8
126.7
115.3
126.1
117.6
129.1
119.7
129.6
120.7
128.6
Food and live anim als........................................................................................
Meat and meat preparations.........................................................................
Dairy products and eggs ...............................................................................
Fish and crustaceans......................................................................................
Bakery goods, pasta products, grain, and grain preparations................
Fruits and vegetables.....................................................................................
Sugar, sugar preparations, and h on ey.........................................................
Coffee, tea, c o c o a ...........................................................................................
0
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
108.3
108.0
122.3
126.0
126.2
110.1
109.6
87.0
109.1
114.4
121.7
130.4
124.8
110.0
109.0
85.1
112.5
113.4
125.1
131.0
130.7
116.2
107.0
90.6
114.1
111.5
125.6
132.5
135.8
115.4
109.6
94.3
114.0
107.0
125.0
129.3
139.8
120.3
110.0
93.3
112.7
111.2
122.2
125.9
136.9
123.7
112.1
87.4
114.3
108.7
125.8
126.7
142.2
127.7
110.8
90.6
114.1
111.2
124.0
127.0
140.4
123.4
109.8
91.2
111.4
109.3
120.1
123.0
140.1
123.3
111.8
85.3
Beverages and tobacco ....................................................................................
B everages.........................................................................................................
1
11
112.8
114.2
112.2
114.8
113.5
116.2
116.0
118.7
116.2
120.0
115.3
118.9
116.2
119.9
117.0
120.7
117.2
120.7
Crude m aterials...................................................................................................
Crude rubber (including synthetic and reclaim ed).....................................
Cork and wood ................................................................................................
Pulp and waste p a p e r....................................................................................
Textile fib e rs .....................................................................................................
Crude fertilizers and crude m in e ra ls ............................................................
Metalliferous ores and metal s c ra p ..............................................................
Crude animal and vegetable materials, n.e.s..............................................
2
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
116.2
103.7
110.2
132.0
118 4
99.6
124.5
109.0
120.3
110.7
117.4
133.4
128.1
99.2
128.7
107.6
122.1
120.1
108.8
141.0
135.2
99.9
137.9
118.3
129.2
121.7
112.4
151.0
137.8
100.4
151.2
135.8
137.8
151.1
111.4
160.5
145.5
101.0
167.6
148.2
135.4
133.3
109.7
169.6
141.9
97.2
172.2
122.0
143.2
121.5
107.8
174.7
145.6
100.2
205.4
139.5
146.2
123.0
112.1
184.7
151.5
103.3
204.3
138.5
144.2
103.4
112.4
190.2
145.3
104.3
212.3
110.1
Fuels and related pro d u cts............................................................................
Crude petroleum and petroleum pro d u c ts...................................................
3
33
74.1
74.4
74.3
75.2
67.2
67.8
60.6
60.4
63.4
63.6
57.7
57.7
56.4
56.1
66.8
67.3
78.8
80.3
Fats and o ils .........................................................................................................
Fixed vegetable oils and fats (9 /8 7 = 1 0 0 ) ................................................
4
42
87.9
-
96.4
100.0
102.1
105.7
106.4
111.1
111.2
116.1
114.0
119.2
112.3
117.4
112.5
117.3
117.4
122.6
Chemicals and related p ro d u c ts ....................................................................
Organic ch em ica ls...........................................................................................
Inorganic chem icals.........................................................................................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical p ro d u c ts ......................................................
Essential oils and p erfum e s..........................................................................
Manufactured fertilizers..................................................................................
Artificial resins and plastics and cellulose ..................................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s.......................................................
5
51
52
54
55
56
58
59
104.8
99.8
89.8
123.4
117.8
94.6
114.7
117.7
105.6
98.2
89.8
124.3
119.2
109.3
114.4
120.6
110.1
103.0
90.1
126.3
123.0
133.6
117.6
124.8
114.2
105.8
92.0
135.3
125.7
133.7
121.6
138.7
116.4
107.3
92.3
140.3
126.2
136.3
124.3
148.5
119.2
111.3
93.0
145.4
127.5
136.5
127.6
153.4
122.2
115.1
96.1
146.4
130.5
139.9
129.5
156.5
123.6
117.6
93.1
154.9
130.3
143.5
129.5
154.8
120.3
114.0
86.6
153.5
130.4
142.1
129.8
149.8
Intermediate manufactured p ro d u c ts ...........................................................
Leather and furskins .......................................................................................
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s............................................................................
Cork and wood m anufactures.......................................................................
Paper and paperboard p roducts...................................................................
T e xtile s..............................................................................................................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s......................................................
Iron and s te e l...................................................................................................
Nonferrous m e ta ls ...........................................................................................
Metal m anufactures.........................................................................................
6
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
112.5
116.6
104.6
124.3
104.9
111.8
126.7
106.6
112.4
112.7
116.3
117.8
103.2
128.3
110.3
114.6
130.4
109.4
120.9
114.6
119.8
124.4
104.6
128.2
112.3
118.6
133.4
114.0
125.8
117.8
124.4
131.8
106.0
133.8
117.2
120.0
137.4
120.0
132.7
121.1
132.2
137.0
107.7
138.2
118.3
120.6
142.5
127.2
159.7
126.9
132.3
136.6
109.1
136.1
119.5
119.1
139.7
129.9
158.9
127.5
135.0
134.9
111.1
134.1
119.9
120.5
141.9
130.7
169.1
130.7
137.3
134.6
111.7
136.9
120.6
120.5
147.5
132.6
172.8
132.4
136.3
134.6
112.2
139.8
120.9
122.3
149.6
133.9
159.1
132.5
Machinery and transport equipment ...........................................................
Machinery (including SITC 71-77) ................................................................
Machinery specialized for particular Industries..........................................
Metalworking m achin ery................................................................................
General industrial machinery and parts, n.e.s.............................................
Office machines and automatic data processing equipm ent...................
Telecommunications, sound recording and reproducing app a ra tu s......
Electrical machinery and equ ipm ent............................................................
Road vehicles and p a rts ................................................................................
7
7hyb
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
119.9
119.1
136.1
128.1
130.8
114.0
110.3
115.8
120.5
119.9
118.7
134.3
130.2
130.1
114.8
110.2
115.1
120.6
123.1
122.6
142.1
135.5
137.0
118.3
112.1
118.2
122.6
125.4
124.6
146.8
139.9
140.4
118.1
112.8
122.2
125.5
127.3
126.4
149.8
142.4
143.7
119.5
113.8
124.2
127.6
126.7
125.9
143.7
139.7
139.6
118.7
113.9
125.9
127.1
129.9
128.7
150.8
144.1
144.2
118.7
115.5
129.3
130.8
130.1
129.2
149.1
142.9
144.7
119.6
115.7
130.5
130.5
129.3
128.4
145.7
139.7
143.0
119.1
115.5
129.8
129.7
Miscellaneous manufactured articles............................................................
Plumbing, heating, and lighting fix tu re s .......................................................
Furniture and p a rts ..........................................................................................
Travel goods, handbags, and similar goods (6 /8 5 = 1 0 0 ) .......................
C lo th in g .............................................................................................................
F oo tw ear...........................................................................................................
Professional, scientific, and controlling instruments and
app a ra tu s.......................................................................................................
Photographic apparatus and supplies, optical goods, watches, and
c lo c k s ...............................................................................................................
Miscellaneous manufactured articles, n.e.s.................................................
8
81
82
83
84
85
117.8
117.0
119.8
99.8
109.2
119.8
118.5
116.2
119.0
98.2
111.9
119.0
121.8
121.0
124.3
103.0
112.3
124.3
124.2
123.4
125.4
105.8
115.6
125.4
125.7
126.9
129.6
107.3
114.9
129.6
124.2
124.5
128.0
111.3
116.7
128.0
126.6
127.2
129.1
115.1
117.2
129.1
126.6
130.0
127.2
117.6
118.5
127.2
126.7
131.5
128.0
114.0
120.5
128.0
87
135.9
132.7
138.7
140.0
142.5
135.8
141.9
141.1
136.9
88
89
126.0
121.1
122.1
122.3
127.3
127.3
129.2
129.2
129.3
132.1
125.4
128.2
130.6
131.4
130.2
131.7
127.9
131.4
-
88
1987
Data not available.
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
40.
U.S. export price indexes by end-use category
(1985 = 100 unless otherwise indicated)
1989
1988
1987
Category
June
41.
Sept.
88.0
109.1
101.8
104.0
106.9
104.6
107.3
92.1
104.9
91.5
106.1
101.6
103.6
106.3
104.3
106.6
95.0
103.6
Foods, feeds, and beverages..........................................................................
Industrial supplies and m ate rials.....................................................................
Capital g o o d s ......................................................................................................
Automotive ..........................................................................................................
Consumer goods ................................................................................................
Consumer nondurables, manufactured, except r u g s ................................
Consumer durables, manufactured ..............................................................
Agricultural (9 /8 8 -1 0 0 ) ................................................................................
All exports, excluding agricultural (9/88 —1 0 0 )...............................................
Mar.
Dec.
98.5
114.2
103.4
104.3
110.1
107.4
110.4
101.1
107.7
96.6
111.8
102.1
104.5
108.0
106.3
107.9
99.3
106.2
Sept.
June
110.1
118.3
104.3
104.8
110.6
108.7
110.4
110.9
109.7
Mar.
Dec.
120.8
120.7
106.7
108.1
115.3
111.4
115.4
117.7
112.9
117.4
118.6
105.7
107.7
112.9
110.0
112.6
114.0
111.6
124.5
118.7
104.9
106.5
111.3
109.3
110.7
120.6
110.8
June
117.2
120.7
107.4
108.6
115.6
111.6
115.3
116.0
113.1
U.S. import price indexes by end-use category
(1985 = 100)
1987
1988
1989
Category
June
116.1
107.8
93.5
74.1
109.7
122.2
118.4
116.9
115.0
117.7
All imports, excluding petroleum (6 /8 8 -1 0 0 ) ................................................
Foods, feeds, and beverages..........................................................................
Industrial supplies and m ate rials.....................................................................
Petroleum and petroleum products, excluding natural g a s ......................
Industrial supplies and materials, excluding p etroleu m ............................
Capital goods, except autom otive...................................................................
Automotive vehicles, parts and engines .......................................................
Consumer goods except autom otive..............................................................
Nondurables, manufactured ..........................................................................
Durables, m anufactured.................................................................................
42.
Sept.
Mar.
Dec.
117.0
109.0
95.3
74.7
112.6
121.9
118.4
118.2
116.8
117.9
120.3
112.1
93.7
67.6
115.6
126.6
120.6
121.4
120.2
121.0
June
123.2
113.7
92.7
60.3
119.6
128.6
123.7
124.2
123.3
123.5
Sept.
Dec.
125.4
112.7
95.2
57.5
126.4
129.0
126.0
125.0
123.8
124.5
126.2
113.7
97.8
63.5
126.4
131.0
125.8
126.3
124.2
125.5
Mar.
128.3
114.2
96.4
56.2
129.6
132.3
129.2
127.4
125.4
127.4
June
129.0
113.8
102.1
67.2
131.2
132.4
129.1
128.7
126.5
127.9
128.0
111.7
106.8
79.7
129.4
131.0
128.3
129.3
127.9
127.9
U.S. export price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification 1
(1985 = 100)
1989
1988
1987
Industry group
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Sept.
Dec.
Mar.
June
Manufacturing:
Scientific instruments; optical goods; c lo c k s .......................
107.4
116.2
108.6
112.3
107.6
80.5
117.2
99.4
102.1
106.7
106.8
107.1
138.9
108.7
115.5
108.7
81.4
122.3
99.4
102.5
106.9
106.6
116.3
142.5
111.2
119.3
113.8
78.8
126.6
99.7
102.2
107.8
107.1
120.8
146.1
112.5
124.6
118.4
73.0
126.9
100.6
102.9
108.1
109.2
125.1
145.4
112.9
129.8
122.3
77.8
133.8
101.3
103.7
109.1
110.8
128.9
146.1
112.9
133.1
125.4
73.7
133.5
102.2
104.9
109.4
112.0
123.5
144.0
115.3
135.6
125.5
75.4
133.6
102.8
105.4
110.9
113.4
124.5
151.7
115.2
139.9
125.9
79.8
130.8
103.4
106.3
111.8
114.5
122.8
164.8
116.0
141.4
122.3
86.5
125.7
103.6
106.8
112.7
116.7
SIC-based classification.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
89
Current Labor Statistics:
43.
Price efe Productivity Data
U.S. import price indexes by Standard Industrial Classification '
(1985 = 100)
1987
Industry group
June
Manufacturing:
Food and kindred products
Textile mill products ....
Apparel and related products .
Lumber and wood products, except furniture.......................
Furniture and fixtures . .
Paper and allied products ..
Chemicals and allied products
Petroleum refining and allied products
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products .
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products
Primary metal products ....
Fabricated metal products
Machinery, except electrical
Electrical machinery and supplies.........................
Transportation equipment....
Scientific instruments: optical goods; clocks........................
Miscellaneous manufactured commodities
1988
Sept.
106.3
116.1
109.4
115.0
117.0
105.9
106.2
136.4
113.6
113.3
130.0
110.4
117.5
127.4
110.7
122.1
132.5
118.1
Dec.
108.4
119.4
112.3
120.3
118.3
110.9
107.2
138.4
112.3
113.3
129.6
115.2
119.8
127.8
110.2
122.5
128.8
121.4
Mar.
110.6
124.3
113.4
115.4
118.9
113.6
112.2
127.4
115.7
118.4
133.9
120.0
123.2
133.9
112.5
124.6
134.0
123.8
June
114.0
127.4
116.6
119.5
122.2
119.1
116.8
114.5
117.2
120.8
138.2
122.6
127.3
135.9
114.7
127.3
135.8
127.7
1989
Sept.
114.4
128.9
115.8
120.3
124.0
121.3
121.3
119.2
119.0
124.6
141.5
137.0
133.3
138.2
116.1
129.5
137.0
133.1
Dec.
115.0
127.0
117.0
118.6
124.8
123.8
123.5
110.8
117.7
123.7
140.5
136.2
133.0
135.0
116.7
129.3
132.2
130.6
Mar.
115.4
127.8
117.5
117.0
128.0
125.2
130.6
111.6
122.6
124.0
144.3
140.2
136.3
138.4
119.0
132.8
137.7
132.2
114.9
139.0
118.9
120.5
126.3
127.4
130.7
121.3
122.3
122.8
145.1
140.6
138.9
138.6
119.7
132.6
136.7
136.6
1 SIC - based classification.
44.
Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted
(1977=100)
Quarterly Indexes
Item
1986
IV
1987
I
II
1988
III
IV
I
111.7
191.8
101.7
171.6
168.9
170.7
112.5
195.2
102.6
173.5
167.2
171.3
113.C
196.5
102.3
1 /3.5
168.9
171.9
112.7
199.C
102.7
176.9
168.8
174.1
109.5
190.5
101.0
173.9
170.3
172.6
110.3
193.9
101.9
175.Ö
168.7
173.4
111.1
195.1
101.6
175.7
170.2
173.8
II
1989
III
IV
I
113.6
202.2
102.9
178.1
171.7
175.8
113.6
204.8
103.1
180.2
173.6
177.9
113.9
207.2
103.0
181.9
174.7
179.4
114.3
210.6
103.1
184.3
175.9
181.4
110.7
197.8
101.9
178.7
169.8
175.6
111.6
200.5
102.1
179.6
172.0
177.0
112.1
203.3
102.4
181.3
176.2
179.6
111.8
205.7
102.3
184.1
174.6
180.8
112.0
208.6
102.1
186.3
176.2
182.8
114.8
191.2
99.6
171.9
166.6
187.8
127.0
166.5
166.5
115.0
193.6
99.7
173.6
168.4
188.9
129.1
168.0
168.2
115.4
196.0
99.8
175.2
169.9
191.0
127.5
168.8
169.5
115.3
198.3
177.5
172.1
193.3
131.6
171.7
172.0
114.7
200.7
99.7
180.4
174.9
196.9
119.6
169.8
173.1
114.7
203.3
99.5
183.5
177.3
202.1
112.0
170.5
175.0
136.3
137.5
197.1
101.5
143.3
139.2
199.5
101.5
143.2
140.0
202.3
101.9
144.5
140.7
203.9
101.3
144.8
141.7
205.1
100.4
144.7
II
Business:
Output per hour of all persons ..
Compensation per hour
Real compensation per hour
Unit labor costs .......
Unit nonlabor payments ...
Implicit price deflator ...
109.8
187.4
102.8
109.9
188.2
101.9
i nn ^
ini
160.7
167.1
Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per hour
Real compensation per hour
Unit labor costs.......
Unit nonlabor payments ..
Implicit price deflator
107.6
186.4
102.2
107.7
101.3
inn n
161.6
169.2
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees
Compensation per hour.
Real compensation per hour
Total unit costs.....
Unit labor costs .....
Unit nonlabor costs...
Unit profits..........
Unit nonlabor payments ...
Implicit price deflator ...
110.6
183.0
100.4
110.4
165.4
183.7
161.5
164.1
113.0
186.9
99.1
170.8
165.3
186.9
129.3
166.7
165.8
113.6
189.7
99.6
172.1
167.0
187.2
122.0
164.4
166.1
134.3
190.4
100.9
141.8
135.1
192.2
101.0
142.3
99.9
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons
Compensation per hour..
Real compensation per hour
Unit labor costs....
90 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
130.1
187.8
103.0
144.3
131.3
102.0
143.5
141.8
.
October 1989
195.5
101.8
143.5
June
113.9
139.3
121.0
122.2
126.0
128.3
130.0
139.8
122.6
123.6
144.8
135.6
140.1
136.5
119.4
132.0
133.9
137.9
45.
Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years
(1977=100)
Item
1960
1970
1973
1977
1979
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
Private business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t.............. ...........................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services .......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................
67.3
103.7
78.5
55.3
88.4
102.7
93.1
80.2
95.9
105.6
99.2
93.0
100.0
10Ò.0
100.0
100.0
99.5
99.7
99.6
107.9
100.6
92.3
97.6
108.9
100.3
86.6
95.2
105.4
103.0
88.3
97.6
109.9
105.6
92.7
100.9
119.2
107.9
92.9
102.4
124.3
110.3
93.0
103.9
128.7
111.2
93.7
104.7
133.4
82.2
53.3
70.5
64.9
90.8
78.1
86.1
86.1
96.9
88.0
93.7
90.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.4
108.2
108.3
99.8
108.2
117.9
111.5
108.9
105.2
121.8
110.7
115.8
106.7
124.4
112.6
116.6
112.9
128.6
118.1
113.9
115.2
133.8
121.4
116.1
116.7
138.5
123.9
118.7
120.0
142.4
127.4
118.6
70.7
104.9
81.2
54.4
89.2
103.5
93.8
79.9
96.4
106.3
99.7
92.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.2
98.9
99.1
107.9
99.6
91.0
96.7
108.4
99.1
85.1
94.1
104.8
102.5
87 3
97.0
110.1
104.7
91.3
99.9
119.3
106.2
91.0
100.7
124.0
108.3
90.8
102.0
128.3
109.1
91.5
102.7
133.2
77.0
51.9
67.1
67.4
89.6
77.2
85.2
86.2
96.3
87.3
93.2
90.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.8
109.1
108.9
100.3
108.8
119.1
112.2
109.4
105.7
123.3
111.4
116.6
107.4
126.1
113.5
117.4
114.0
130.6
119.4
114.6
116.8
136.3
123.1
116.7
118.5
141.3
125.8
119.3
122.0
145.5
129.6
119.2
62.2
103.0
72.0
52.5
80.8
99.1
85.3
78.6
93.4
112.0
98.0
96.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.4
99.5
100.9
108.1
103.6
89.0
99.7
104.8
105.9
81.6
99.2
98.4
112.0
86.7
105.0
104.7
118.1
95.5
112.1
117.5
123.6
97.3
116.4
122.0
127.7
98.4
119.5
124.7
131.9
102.0
123.6
130.1
84.4
51.0
72.9
60.4
97.3
79.3
92.1
81.5
103.1
86.0
98.3
83.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.5
108.6
107.1
101.9
101.1
117.8
105.1
116.5
92.9
120.5
99.2
129.8
93.5
120.8
99.7
129.3
99.5
123.0
104.8
123.7
98.7
125.4
104.8
127.1
97.7
126.8
104.4
129.8
98.6
127.6
105.3
129.4
Private nonfarm business
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons .............................
Output per unit of capital se rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services .......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u t.........
Capital per hour of all persons................................
Manufacturing
Productivity:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............................
Output per unit of capital se rv ic e s .......................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
O u tp u t..........................................................................
Inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services .......................................................
Combined units of labor and capital in p u ts .......
Capital per hour of all persons................................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
91
Current Labor Statistics:
46.
Productivity Data
Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years
(1977 = 100)
Item
1960
1970
1973
1977
1979
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
Business:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .................
Compensation per h o u r............
Real compensation per hour ...........
Unit labor costs ........................
Unit nonlabor payments ...................
Implicit price deflator ...................
66.1
32.9
67.3
49.7
46.4
48.5
87.6
57.2
89.4
65.3
59.4
63.2
95.2
70.3
96.0
73.8
72.6
73.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.7
119.3
99.5
119.6
112.3
117.0
101.0
144.1
96.1
142.7
134.4
139.8
100.2
154.9
97.3
154.5
136.3
148.1
102.6
160.8
97.8
156.7
146.2
153.0
105.2
167.4
97.6
159.1
156.4
158.2
107.3
174.8
98.4
162.8
160.9
162.2
109 8
183 8
101.7
167.5
162.1
165.6
191 0
101 9
171 9
166 3
170.0
Nonfarm business:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s.............
Compensation per h o u r...............
Real compensation per hour .....
Unit labor costs ...............................
Unit nonlabor payments ..............
Implicit price deflator ...........................
69.5
34.5
70.7
49.7
46.3
48.5
88.4
57.6
90.0
65.2
60.0
63.4
95.8
70.7
96.4
73.8
69.4
72.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.4
119.0
99.3
119.8
110.3
116.5
100.0
144.0
96.0
144.0
133.2
140.3
99.1
154.7
97.1
156.1
136.1
149.2
102.0
160.8
97.8
157.6
148.1
154.3
104.2
167.2
97.5
160.4
156.3
159.0
105.6
174.0
98.0
164.9
161.9
163.8
107 7
182.9
101.1
169 8
163.3
167.6
108 9
189 8
101 2
174 2
167 7
172.0
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all em plo yees............
Compensation per h o u r...................
Real compensation per h o u r ..................
Total unit c o s ts ............................
Unit labor costs ............................
Unit nonlabor c o s ts .............................
Unit p ro fits ..............................
Unit nonlabor payments ...........................
Implicit price deflator ..........................
71.9
36.1
74.0
49.4
50.2
47.0
59.8
51.5
50.7
90.2
58.6
91.6
64.8
65.0
64.2
52.3
60.1
63.3
96.8
71.0
96.9
72.7
73.4
70.7
65.6
68.9
71.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.9
118.9
99.3
118.2
119.0
115.8
94.5
108.4
115.4
99.9
143.7
95.8
147.7
143.8
159.1
98.1
137.8
141.7
100.2
154.1
96.8
159.5
153.8
176.4
78.5
142.1
149.8
103.0
159.1
96.8
159.5
154.5
174.3
110.9
152.1
153.7
105.5
165.0
96.3
160.8
156.5
173.6
136.5
160.6
157.9
107.2
171.6
96.7
164.1
160.2
175.8
133.0
160.8
160.4
109 6
179.9
99.5
168.5
164.1
181.7
123.1
161.2
163.1
112 1
186 1
99 3
171 2
166 1
186.4
123 0
164 2
165.4
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all p e rs o n s .............
Compensation per h o u r..............
Real compensation per h o u r ...............
Unit labor costs ..........................
Unit nonlabor payments ..............................
Implicit price deflator .............................
60.7
35.6
73.0
58.7
60.0
59.1
80.2
57.0
89.0
71.0
64.1
69.0
92.6
68.2
93.1
73.7
70.8
72.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.6
118.9
99.2
117.0
98.9
111.7
104.0
145.7
97.1
140.1
111.7
131.8
106.6
158.7
99.6
148.8
113.7
138.6
112.2
162.7
99.0
145.1
128.3
140.2
118.2
168.1
98.1
142.3
138.5
141.2
123.5
176.3
99.3
142.7
130.3
139.1
128 2
184.3
101.9
143.8
135.2
141.3
132 9
189 2
100 9
142.3
137 6
141.0
-
Data not available.
92 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
1988
102 7
170 8
174.9
198 9
101 9
172 2
176.5
194
99
174
169
190
5
7
6
3
3
169.1
197 8
101 3
143 6
-
47.
Annual productivity indexes for selected industries
(1977 = 100)
Industry
SIC
1970
1973
1975
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Iron mining, crude o r e ..........................................
Iron mining, usable ore ........................................
Copper mining, crude o r e ....................................
Copper mining, recoverable m e ta l.....................
Coal m in in g .............................................................
Bituminous coal and lignite mining .................
Nonmetallic minerals, except fu e ls .....................
Crushed and broken stone ...............................
1011
1011
1021
1021
111,121
121
14
142
99.9
111.1
84.8
85.5
141.1
142.3
89.7
83.1
113.2
122.6
92.0
85.8
125.5
126.3
97.2
94.0
112.7
117.8
87.2
77.2
105.3
105.2
90.6
91.4
122.7
122.8
109.1
98.2
99.4
99.6
102.7
106.9
124.7
123.2
99.5
91.6
112.5
112.6
96.5
101.3
132.8
130.6
102.0
97.7
122.2
122.7
94.7
96.7
100.9
98.2
106.4
116.2
119.2
120.0
89.3
94.1
139.0
138.6
129.9
130.9
136.1
136.9
98.2
103.9
173.3
171.7
140.3
155.4
151.3
152.3
105.5
105.8
187,9
187.9
164.2
193.1
154.0
154.6
107.5
104.5
200.3
197.8
195.4
228.9
167.3
168.2
108.2
104.9
267.5
262.0
193.1
209.8
179.7
180.6
107.9
102.7
_
Meatpacking p la n ts ...............................................
Flour and other grain mill p ro d u c ts ....................
Rice milling .............................................................
Raw and refined cane s u g a r...............................
Beet sugar ..............................................................
Malt beverages.......................................................
Bottled and canned __it d rin k s ...........................
Cigarettes, chewing and smoking to b a c c o .......
Cigars ......................................................................
2011
2041
2044
2061,62
2063
2082
2086
2111,31
2121
78.7
76.6
82.0
86.1
92.9
56.7
70.0
85.3
88.4
88.7
80.4
81.5
93.4
100.0
73.7
79.0
88.7
89.5
88.6
85.8
90.4
90.8
98.1
86.1
89.5
93.3
93.7
104.6
97.3
96.3
101.5
104.6
109.9
103.4
102.4
101.4
108.9
94.8
111.8
99.3
102.1
116.0
106.9
101.8
106.4
113.9
96.7
117.9
98.8
98.7
118.3
110.6
99.6
107.3
119.5
104.1
104.5
87.6
94.8
122.6
114.1
99.5
111.4
123.4
110.4
103.3
100.0
94.5
131.3
121.5
104.1
112.3
125.6
114.9
93.2
94.7
108.8
137.9
131.0
107.2
141.4
130.1
122.9
103.2
108.7
100.7
130.3
136.7
111.7
129.3
126.2
130.6
112.6
109.6
111.8
152.3
146.6
115.5
133.1
124.1
129.0
118.4
118.5
142.6
154.8
157.3
121.2
111.1
Hosiery ....................................................................
Nonwool yarn mills ...............................................
Sawmills and planing mills, general ..................
Household furniture ..............................................
Paper, paperboard, and pulp m ills ......................
Folding paperboard b o x e s ...................................
Corrugated and solid fiber boxes .......................
Synthetic fib e rs ......................................................
Pharmaceutical preparations...............................
Paints and allied products ...................................
Petroleum re fin in g .................................................
2251,52
2281
2421
251
2611,21,31,61
2651
2653
2823,24
2834
2851
2911
65.5
84.3
90.0
82.2
77.5
77.4
73.1
53.8
74.8
74.9
73.8
74.6
85.0
100.2
97.3
91.5
92.8
86.1
79.5
84.8
82.2
93.6
94.3
101.2
98.8
97.5
86.7
98.5
96.2
84.5
92.5
94.2
88.7
107.9
103.8
106.3
101.5
105.4
104.6
106.9
115.0
105.3
104.8
94.9
107.4
99.7
104.2
99.9
105.2
101.6
111.0
115.7
106.0
100.8
94.2
122.0
103.1
107.9
103.0
104.4
104.5
109.8
120.9
104.2
99.8
83.7
114.2
118.2
115.1
104.7
111.3
104.2
111.9
103.6
107.0
106.5
79.4
118.0
128.5
126.8
110.1
119.5
104.5
114.0
126.2
114.3
113.8
81.8
119.9
129.6
132.3
112.2
121.0
102.4
118.9
125.3
116.4
121.5
92.5
118.5
134.5
139.2
112.5
123.1
99.6
122.5
135.8
118.1
125.6
102.6
121.0
141.1
155.1
118.5
133.5
101.4
126.7
146.2
121.8
125.2
113.8
121.1
142.8
151.6
115.9
141.8
98.1
128.9
155.7
124.0
128.5
118.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
Tires and inner tubes ...........................................
F o o tw e a r.................................................................
Glass containers ...................................................
Hydraulic cement ..................................................
Structural clay products .......................................
Clay construction p ro d u c ts ..................................
Brick and structural clay tile .............................
Clay refractories....................................................
3011
314
3221
3241
325
3251,53,59
3251
3255
87.6
100.3
87.2
84.8
78.2
77.4
81.1
82.1
95.1
98.5
92.6
99.7
91.1
90.6
90.1
93.6
91.8
101.3
98.5
84.7
91.0
89.1
93.1
95.5
107.3
100.2
102.4
96.0
95.9
91.6
85.4
110.2
102.4
99.1
105.2
87.0
97.6
94.0
84.9
109.6
118.1
95.6
110.1
91.1
100.7
97.3
84.3
111.1
128.2
106.4
105.8
94.0
102.6
103.3
88.6
100.0
136.1
103.9
108.5
108.4
105.4
101.1
85.7
121.6
146.8
105.7
128.0
125.3
111.3
110.4
93.4
115.1
146.7
107.3
127.0
128.3
112.8
112.6
100.4
114.1
151.4
109.5
138.9
135.5
115.6
114.5
98.9
122.9
167.8
104.5
143.0
142.2
118.7
116.2
102.9
131.4
Steel ........................................................................
Gray iron fou n d rie s ...............................................
Steel foundries ......................................................
Primary copper, lead, and zinc ...........................
Primary copper ...................................................
Primary alum inum ..................................................
Copper rolling and drawing .................................
Aluminum rolling and drawing .............................
Metal cans ..............................................................
331
3321
3324,25
3331,32,33
3331
3334
3351
3353,54,55
3411
87.6
79.8
90.6
78.1
79.8
92.5
76.8
66.0
78.8
106.6
94.5
101.9
94.8
90.6
99.4
93.2
94.0
81.6
93.3
97.0
107.5
85.3
83.0
96.2
76.8
87.5
87.0
106.9
96.8
100.6
106.5
113.3
99.7
98.1
100.3
103.6
102.9
90.8
99.8
103.7
105.3
100.0
94.1
100.0
102.6
112.0
92.7
91.6
118.6
124.4
103.8
97.9
96.8
108.1
90.9
93.7
89.0
128.0
128.5
103.0
106.0
99.2
118.5
116.8
98.3
89.9
141.2
138.3
111.5
121.1
110.4
120.5
131.3
106.8
98.8
148.0
151.9
125.4
128.1
116.2
123.0
139.5
104.2
95.6
181.5
189.8
125.4
122.0
115.9
125.6
141.8
107.4
100.3
210.8
229.2
134.0
127.2
125.0
126.0
151.7
104.8
94.3
221.1
228.2
143.5
139.8
141.6
134.3
_
-
Farm machinery and equipment .........................
Lawn and garden equipm ent...............................
Construction machinery and equipment ...........
Metal cutting machine tools ................................
Metal forming machine to o ls ...............................
Ball and roller b ea rings........................................
Transformers .........................................................
Switchgear and switchboard app ara tus............
Motors and generators.........................................
3523
3524
3531
3541
3542
3562
3612
3613
3621
83.4
89.5
98.5
85.5
89.1
83.3
87.8
95.6
89.8
94.0
105.5
114.1
103.1
96.9
101.5
100.7
98.8
89.6
93.9
102.9
104.0
97.5
89.3
93.4
93.0
98.3
113.5
100.3
103.0
99.2
105.8
108.4
102.8
99.3
91.3
106.5
97.4
100.6
93.5
95.4
110.6
103.2
96.7
94.1
101.0
96.1
98.9
89.4
94.3
106.9
99.5
100.4
92.6
106.9
88.9
89.2
85.0
83.3
99.6
101.3
102.4
92.0
111.8
88.2
81.1
87.6
86.3
99.1
106.1
104.3
104.6
111.3
102.6
93.3
93.7
94.4
97.6
107.4
107.9
98.6
115.7
104.1
96.4
96.6
92.1
99.3
110.6
110.5
95.5
132.1
107.1
105.1
97.1
95.6
99.4
110.7
112.3
_
.
99.3
100.2
104.6
101.2
94.6
109.3
115.9
Household cooking equipm ent............................
Household refrigerators and freezers ...............
Household laundry equipm ent.............................
Household appliances, not elsewhere
classified................................................................
Electric la m p s .........................................................
Lighting fixtures .....................................................
Motor vehicles and equipm ent............................
3631
3632
3633
68.7
71.7
70.7
84.9
95.6
88.5
97.8
94.5
93.6
108.9
112.3
108.1
103.9
114.4
102.1
105.7
117.4
103.9
112.6
116.1
105.4
120.8
127.1
112.2
131.9
127.5
117.5
135.6
136.8
118.2
158.4
133.5
123.1
168.1
131.6
133.0
_
70.4
88.3
78.1
70.5
85.2
90.1
93.8
85.7
88.8
96.4
89.2
87.7
102.6
105.2
94.6
97.8
99.1
103.2
93.3
90.8
100.4
106.9
88.7
93.1
94.7
108.4
91.0
96.9
103.7
124.8
96.3
109.6
109.8
131.9
102.2
115.7
110.0
126.9
107.0
121.2
113.1
131.1
113.8
121.7
117.3
146.9
116.5
125.2
_
3639
3641
3645,46,47,48
371
-
Railroad transportation, revenue tra ffic .............
Railroad transportation, car m ile s .......................
Petroleum pipelines ..............................................
Telephone com m unications.................................
Electric utilities ......................................................
Gas u tilitie s .............................................................
401
401
4612,13
4811
491,93 pt.
492,93 pt.
77.7
89.1
79.5
62.1
77.1
102.1
96.4
101.4
97.8
74.6
88.4
104.5
89.5
98.3
95.7
85.9
92.9
101.4
104.7
102.9
101.7
110.8
95.4
103.4
107.3
107.9
93.0
118.1
94.0
102.1
111.5
107.6
86.0
124.4
93.0
98.1
115.8
110.1
89.2
129.1
89.5
89.0
141.9
128.9
94.3
145.1
90.9
81.1
152.6
137.7
104.5
143.0
94.4
83.6
162.1
138.9
104.9
149.8
93.5
82.1
178.6
148.2
107.0
161.3
96.2
73.0
208.3
166.8
106.6
166.1
101.0
74.8
Retail food stores .................................................
Franchised new car d e a le rs ................................
Gasoline service sta tio n s.....................................
Apparel and accessory stores ............................
Men’s and boys clothing stores .......................
Women’s ready-to-wear stores ........................
54
5511
5541
56
5611
5621
107.0
86.1
74.6
81.3
82.7
76.5
102.3
96.3
86.2
99.5
103.4
94.2
98.8
95.0
85.3
105.0
102.3
106.5
98.3
97.7
107.4
112.9
108.6
116.0
100.3
99.6
105.1
117.9
107.1
117.9
97.1
98.1
106.7
123.9
116.4
127.8
95.5
100.4
111.8
126.4
116.6
142.0
95.5
109.4
122.5
132.9
120.6
151.3
96.1
110.4
129.1
141.0
127.4
158.3
96.6
109.7
134.3
146.5
135.0
162.8
94.6
110.7
143.9
153.7
139.5
176.4
92.8
105.3
145.7
146.4
135.0
171.9
-
_
_
-
_
-
-
-
-
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
93
Current Labor Statistics:
Productivity Data
47. Continued—Annual productivity indexes for selected industries
(1977 = 100)
Industry
SIC
Family clothing sto re s ........................................
Shoe s to re s..........................................................
1973
1975
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
5651
5661
75.2
95.3
109.1
100.5
109.5
95.1
108.2
112.8
123.7
110.3
132.4
114.2
140.7
110.2
149.2
107.6
145.8
110.1
138.5
117.4
136.0
125.8
130.9
124.0
-
Furniture, furnishings, and equipment
store s.....................................................................
Furniture and home furnishings stores ..........
Appliance, radio, television, and music
stores ....................................................................
Eating and drinking places ..................................
Drug and proprietary s to re s.................................
Liquor s to re s ...........................................................
57
571
80.1
79.3
95.3
96.3
91.9
90.1
107.6
104.8
107.4
98.0
112.6
101.2
109.2
97.6
118.4
104.1
129.4
113.1
133.5
108.7
144.6
115.5
145.2
116.0
572,73
58
5912
5921
81.2
100.6
83.4
“
94.1
103.4
97.1
100.9
94.8
100.8
94.2
96.3
112.4
99.5
103.8
96.6
124.0
99.8
107.0
102.2
132.4
97.3
107.6
104.0
128.7
96.9
107.9
108.1
143.4
95.3
111.4
101.6
155.1
91.1
106.2
98.7
180.0
87.9
106.5
107.1
199.5
89.7
105.6
98.0
199.8
90.4
105.9
91.6
Hotels, motels, and tourist co u rts .......................
Laundry and cleaning services ...........................
Beauty and barber shops ....................................
Beauty s h o p s ......................................................
7011
721
723,24
723
85.1
94.7
92.1
98.6
100.7
100.7
89.7
96.6
98.7
98.7
100.0
97.7
107.4
107.4
95.0
91.0
102.9
102.9
91.6
88.4
109.2
109.2
88.8
90.6
108.3
108.3
95.4
90.4
114.0
114.0
102.1
92.3
103.9
103.9
97.5
87.3
98.6
98.6
92.8
85.0
97.3
97.3
88.0
84.0
99.2
99.2
-
94
1970
Data not available.
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
-
“
_
_
_
-
_
_
-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48. Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts, in nine countries, quarterly data
seasonally adjusted
1989
1988
Annual average
Country
Total labor force basis
United S ta te s .....................
Canada ...............................
Australia .............................
ja pan ..................................
France ................................
G erm any.............................
Italy
2 ...............................
Sweden ..............................
United Kingdom ................
6.1
8.8
8.0
2.9
5.4
7.7
7.2
2.5
5.8
8.1
7.9
2.7
5.6
7.8
7.5
2.7
5.4
7.6
7.4
2.5
5.4
7.8
6.9
2.6
5.3
7.7
6.8
2.4
5.1
7.5
2.4
5.2
7.6
6.1
2.3
10.2
10.1
6.6
10.2
10.3
6.3
7.8
1.6
8.2
10.3
6.3
7.9
1.7
9.4
10.3
6.3
7
1.7
9.0
10.3
6.3
7.8
1.6
8.6
10.4
6.3
7
1.6
8.0
10.2
6.1
7.8
1.4
7.5
5.8
7.6
1.4
7.0
5.7
7.8
1.3
6.5
6.2
8.8
8.1
2.9
5.5
7.8
7.2
2.5
5.9
8.1
8.0
2.7
5.7
7.8
7.6
2.7
5.5
7.7
7.5
2.5
5.5
7
7.0
2.6
5.3
7.7
6.8
2.4
5.2
7.6
6.6
2.4
5.3
7.6
6.1
2.3
10.8
6.4
7.9
1.9
10.5
6.4
7.9
1.6
8.3
10.6
6.4
8.1
1.7
9.5
10.6
6.4
7.9
1.7
9.0
10.5
6.4
7.9
1.6
8.6
10.6
10.4
6.3
7.9
1.4
7.6
10.4
5.9
7.7
1.4
7.0
10.4
5.8
8.0
1.3
6.6
10.5
6.3
7.7
1.9
Civilian labor force basis
United States
Canada .........
Australia .......
Japan ............
France ...............
G erm any............
Italy', 2 ...............
Sweden .............
United Kingdom .
10.2
' Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
2 Many Italians reported as unemployed did not actively
seek work in the past 30 days, and they have been ex
cluded for comparability with U.S. concepts. Inclusion of
such persons would about double the Italian unemployment
rate in 1985 and earlier years and increase it to 11-12 per
6.4
cent for 1986 onward.
NOTE: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, and the
United Kingdom are calculated by applying annual adjust
ment factors to current published data and therefore should
be viewed as less precise indicators of unemployment under
U.S. concepts than the annual figures.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
95
Current Labor Statistics: International Comparisons Data
49. Annual data: Employment status of the civilian working-age population, approximating U.S. concepts,
10 countries
(Numbers in thousands)
Employment status and country
1979
1980
Labor force
United States ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
F ra n ce ..........................................................................
G e rm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n ........................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,660
26,250
20,850
5,630
4,262
26,350
106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,800
26,520
21,120
5,860
4,312
26,520
Participation rate'
United States ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
63.7
63.4
61.6
62.7
57.5
53.3
48.0
54.1
66.6
62.6
Employed
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
G e rm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n ........................................................................
United Kingdom ..........................................................
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
108,670
11,899
6,810
56,320
22,950
26,650
21,320
6,080
4,327
26,590
110,204
11,926
6,910
56,980
23,160
26,700
21,410
6,140
4,350
26,720
111,550
12,109
6,997
58,110
23,140
26,650
21,590
6,170
4,369
26,750
113,544
12,316
7,135
58,480
23,300
26,760
21,670
6,260
4,385
27,170
115,461
12,532
7,300
58,820
23,360
26,970
21,800
6,280
4,418
27,370
117,834
12,746
7,588
59,410
23,440
27,090
22,290
6,370
4,443
27,540
119,865
13,011
7,758
60,050
23,520
28,360
22,350
6,490
4,480
27,860
121,669
13,275
7,974
60,860
23,620
28,550
22,660
6,560
4,530
28,110
63.8
64.1
62.1
62.6
57.2
53.2
48.2
55.3
66.9
62.5
63.9
64.8
61.9
62.6
57.1
52.9
48.3
56.6
66.8
62.2
64.0
64.1
61.7
62.7
57.1
52.6
47.7
56.5
66.8
62.2
64.0
64.4
61.4
63.1
56.6
52.3
47.5
56.1
66.7
61.9
64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.4
47.3
56.2
66.6
62.5
64.8
65.3
61.8
62.3
56.3
52.6
47.2
55.7
66.9
62.6
65.3
65.7
63.0
62.1
56.1
52.6
47.8
55.9
67.0
62.6
65.6
66.2
63.0
61.9
55.8
55.0
47.9
56.3
67.3
63.0
65.9
66.7
63.3
61.9
55.7
55.2
48.4
56.4
67.8
63.3
98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
19,930
5,340
4,174
24,940
99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,330
25,750
20,200
5,510
4,226
24,670
100,397
11,001
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,560
20,280
5,540
4,219
23,800
99,526
10,618
6,415
55,620
21,240
25,140
20,250
5,510
4,213
23,720
100,834
10,675
6,300
56,550
21,170
24,750
20,320
5,410
4,218
23,610
105,005
10,932
6,494
56,870
20,980
24,790
20,390
5,490
4,249
23,990
107,150
11,221
6,697
57,260
20,920
24,960
20,490
5,640
4,293
24,310
109,597
11,531
6,974
57,740
20,950
25,230
20,610
5,730
4,326
24,460
112,440
11,861
7,129
58,320
20,990
26,550
20,590
5,840
4,396
25,010
114,968
12,244
7,398
59,310
21,130
26,730
20,870
5,900
4,458
25,780
Employment-population ratio 2
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
Germany ......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w eden........................................................................
United K ingdo m .........................................................
59.9
58.7
57.8
61.4
54.0
51.7
45.9
51.3
65.3
59.2
59.2
59.3
58.3
61.3
53.5
51.7
46.1
52.0
65.6
58.1
59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
45.9
51.6
65.1
55.7
57.8
57.1
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
45.2
50.7
64.7
55.2
57.9
56.8
55.3
61.4
51.8
48.6
44.7
49.2
64.4
54.7
59.5
57.5
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
44.5
49.3
64.5
55.2
60.1
58.5
56.6
60.6
50.4
48.7
44.4
50.0
65.0
55.6
60.7
59.4
57.9
60.4
50.2
49.0
44.2
50.2
65.2
55.6
61.5
60.4
57.9
60.1
49.8
51.5
44.1
50.6
66.0
56.6
62.3
61.6
58.7
60.4
49.8
51.7
44.6
50.7
66.7
58.0
Unemployed
United States ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
F ra n ce ..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n ........................................................................
United K ingdo m .........................................................
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,360
780
920
290
88
1,420
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
920
350
86
1,850
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,750
1,090
1,040
540
108
2,790
10,678
1,308
495
1,360
1,920
1,560
1,160
630
137
3,000
10,717
1,434
697
1,560
1,970
1,900
1,270
760
151
3,140
8,539
1,384
641
1,610
2,320
1,970
1,280
770
136
3,180
8,312
1,311
603
1,560
2,440
2,010
1,310
640
125
3,060
8,237
1,215
613
1,670
2,490
1,860
1,680
640
117
3,080
7,425
1,150
629
1,730
2,530
1,810
1,760
650
84
2,850
6,701
1,031
576
1,550
2,490
1,820
1,790
660
72
2,330
Unemployment rate
United S ta te s ..............................................................
Canada ........................................................................
A u stralia.......................................................................
Japan ...........................................................................
France ..........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Italy ...............................................................................
N etherlands.................................................................
S w e d e n ........................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
4.4
5.2
2.1
5.4
7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
4.4
6.0
2.0
7.0
7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.6
4.1
4.9
8.9
2.5
10.5
9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.8
5.4
10.3
3.1
11.2
9.6
11.8
10.0
2.7
8.5
7.1
5.9
12.3
3.5
11.7
7.5
11.2
9.0
2.8
10.0
7.4
5.9
12.3
3.1
11.7
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.5
6.0
10.2
2.8
11.2
7.0
9.5
8.1
2.8
10.6
6.9
7.5
10.0
2.6
11.2
6.2
8.8
8.1
2.9
10.8
6.4
7.9
10.0
1.9
10.2
5.5
7.8
7.2
2.5
10.5
6.4
7.9
10.1
1.6
8.3
' Labor force as a percent of the civilian working-age population.
2 Employment as a percent of the civilian working-age population.
96 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
1981
NOTE: See “ Notes on the data” for information on breaks in series
for Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden.
50.
Annual indexes of manufacturing productivity and related measures, 12 countries
(1977 = 100)
Item and country
1960
1970
1973
1976
1977
1978
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
62.2
50.7
23.2
33.0
37.2
37.4
40.3
37.2
32.4
54.3
42.3
55.9
80.8
75.6
64.8
60.4
65.6
71.4
71.2
69.8
64.3
81.3
80.7
80.3
93.4
90.3
83.1
78.8
83.3
83.8
84.0
83.4
81.5
94.4
94.8
95.4
97.1
94.8
94.3
95.3
98.2
94.4
96.4
97.9
95.8
100.4
101.7
99.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
101.5
101.1
108.0
106.1
101.5
104.6
103.1
106.5
106.4
101.2
102.8
101.4
101.4
98.2
122.7
119.2
112.3
110.6
108.6
122.1
113.9
107.5
112.7
101.9
103.6
102.9
127.2
127.6
114.2
113.9
111.0
125.4
116.9
108.0
113.2
107.1
105.9
98.3
135.0
135.2
114.6
122.0
112.6
128.5
119.4
109.2
116.5
113.5
112.0
105.4
142.3
148.1
120.2
125.1
119.2
135.3
127.9
117.2
125.5
123.1
118.1
114.4
152.5
155.0
119.6
127.5
123.7
148.8
139.2
124.1
131.0
129.9
123.6
117.3
161.1
158.6
120.3
132.7
128.4
156.8
145.1
126.8
136.1
134.1
127.7
117.7
163.7
164.5
116.2
135.2
128.3
158.3
144.8
125.9
136.0
138.6
132.0
120.5
176.5
170.5
117.2
136.8
129.9
162.3
145.9
132.2
141.8
147.6
136.2
124.3
190.0
"
117.2
144.1
135.9
167.1
153.2
145.0
154.9
52.5
41.3
19.2
41.9
49.2
36.5
50.0
33.0
44.8
54.8
52.6
71.2
78.6
73.5
69.9
78.6
82.0
75.5
86.6
69.0
84.4
86.5
92.5
94.9
96.3
93.5
91.9
96.4
95.9
90.5
96.1
83.5
95.8
99.2
100.3
104.7
93.1
96.5
94.8
99.7
99.6
95.6
98.0
96.5
99.0
102.1
106.1
98.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.0
104.6
106.7
101.4
99.7
102.3
101.8
104.9
102.8
97.7
97.3
100.6
103.2
103.6
124.1
106.8
110.1
104.6
106.6
121.9
106.6
99.5
104.0
91.8
104.8
107.4
129.8
105.6
106.6
102.9
104.9
119.9
106.7
98.6
100.6
86.3
98.4
93.6
137.3
110.1
108.3
104.0
102.4
118.7
105.0
96.8
100.1
86.4
104.7
99.6
148.2
114.7
115.6
103.8
103.6
119.7
107.0
97.2
105.2
88.8
117.5
112.5
165.4
118.0
121.0
102.6
106.4
125.3
113.3
102.7
111.5
92.5
122.0
118.8
177.0
119.6
124.9
103.0
110.0
129.0
116.7
106.5
115.3
94.8
124.7
121.9
177.8
121.4
125.9
102.8
110.8
131.9
118.1
106.9
114.7
95.6
130.1
128.5
190.8
123.3
121.1
101.8
111.6
137.3
118.7
108.3
119.2
101.0
138.1
136.0
212.3
118.4
105.7
116.3
145.3
123.8
84.4
81.4
82.7
127.1
132.4
97.6
123.8
88.9
138.4
101.1
124.4
127.3
97.3
97.2
107.9
130.2
125.1
105.7
121.7
98.9
131.2
106.4
114.6
118.1
103.1
103.6
110.7
122.3
115.2
107.9
114.4
100.1
117.6
105.1
105.7
109.8
95.9
101.8
100.6
104.6
101.4
101.3
101.6
98.6
103.3
101.7
104.3
99.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
104.4
103.4
98.8
95.5
98.3
97.8
98.7
98.5
96.6
96.5
94.6
99.1
101.7
105.5
101.2
89.6
98.0
94.6
98.1
99.8
93.6
92.6
92.3
90.1
101.1
104.3
102.0
82.8
93.4
90.3
94.6
95.6
91.2
91.3
88.9
80.6
92.9
95.2
101.7
81.4
94.5
85.2
91.0
92.4
88.0
88.6
85.9
76.2
93.5
94.5
104.2
77.5
96.2
83.0
86.9
88.5
83.6
82.9
83.9
72.2
99.5
98.3
108.5
76.1
101.2
80.4
86.1
84.2
81.4
82.8
85.1
71.2
98.7
101.2
109.8
75.4
103.8
77.6
85.7
82.3
80.5
84.0
84.7
70.7
97.7
103.6
108.6
73.8
108.4
76.1
86.4
83.3
81.5
84.9
84.3
69.0
98.6
106.6
108.1
72.3
103.3
74.4
85.9
84.6
81.3
81.9
84.0
68.5
101.4
109.4
111.7
36.5
27.5
8.9
13.8
12.6
15.0
18.8
9.2
12.5
15.8
14.7
15.2
57.4
47.9
33.9
34.9
36.3
36.3
48.0
27.1
39.0
37.9
38.5
31.4
68.8
60.0
55.1
53.5
56.1
51.9
67.5
41.2
60.5
54.6
54.2
47.9
92.1
90.3
90.7
89.5
90.4
87.8
91.2
84.5
91.9
88.9
91.5
88.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
108.2
107.6
106.6
107.8
110.2
113.0
107.8
115.2
108.4
110.0
111.4
116.7
132.4
131.3
120.7
130.2
135.9
148.5
125.6
163.7
123.6
128.0
133.6
168.6
145.2
151.1
129.8
144.5
149.7
172.0
134.5
197.9
129.1
142.8
148.1
193.4
157.5
167.0
136.6
150.7
162.9
204.0
141.0
233.3
137.5
156.1
158.9
211.7
162.4
177.2
140.7
159.8
174.2
225.2
148.3
273.1
144.5
173.5
173.3
226.6
168.0
185.6
144.9
173.1
184.1
244.9
155.5
313.3
148.6
188.3
189.7
242.3
176.4
194.4
151.4
183.6
196.5
265.4
164.6
352.0
156.9
204.3
212.4
258.8
183.0
203.5
158.9
190.8
203.5
278.7
171.5
367.4
162.2
224.2
228.7
277.8
186.9
214.0
162.5
194.7
225.9
291.4
178.1
391.2
167.0
257.4
244.8
295.7
193.5
227.1
171.3
230.1
301.9
185.5
416.3
172.8
58.7
54.2
38.4
41.7
33.8
40.2
46.6
24.7
38.5
29.2
34.8
27.2
71.0
63.4
52.3
57.8
55.4
50.8
67.4
38.8
60.7
46.6
47.7
39.1
73.7
66.5
66.4
67.9
67.4
62.0
80.3
49.4
74.3
57.8
57.2
50.2
94.9
95.3
96.2
93.9
92.1
93.0
94.6
86.3
96.0
88.5
90.0
89.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.6
106.5
98.7
101.6
108.6
108.0
104.5
108.1
101.8
108.7
108.4
115.0
130.6
133.7
98.4
109.2
121.0
134.3
115.7
134.0
108.5
119.1
118.6
165.5
140.1
146.7
102.0
113.2
131.1
151.0
121.2
157.8
110.4
132.2
130.9
180.6
148.7
170.0
101.2
111.5
142.2
167.2
125.2
181.6
115.2
142.9
136.3
186.5
145.0
168.1
98.9
107.9
144.9
179.9
124.4
201.9
113.0
148.0
138.1
184.1
142.2
162.3
95.0
111.7
153.9
192.0
125.8
210.6
106.8
151.8
144.8
186.5
142.7
165.7
94.0
115.8
163.3
200.0
128.3
224.5
108.1
161.1
156.1
193.0
143.3
172.8
97.1
116.0
175.1
206.2
133.7
232.0
112.0
178.1
168.2
200.4
141.7
177.5
92.1
114.2
192.8
213.0
137.1
241.0
114.4
194.7
172.6
200.4
142.1
182.7
90.2
196.3
209.6
136.4
249.1
112.8
180.0
206.2
58.7
59.4
28.5
30.0
29.5
40.3
25.9
35.1
25.1
21.8
30.1
43.7
71.0
64.5
39.1
41.7
44.4
45.2
42.9
54.7
41.2
34.7
41.1
53.7
73.7
70.6
65.6
62.7
67.2
68.6
70.4
75.0
65.6
53.5
58.7
70.5
94.9
102.7
86.9
87.2
91.5
95.8
87.3
91.8
89.1
86.4
92.3
92.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
106.6
99.3
126.8
115.8
118.4
117.9
121.0
112.4
115.7
110.4
107.2
126.5
130.6
121.5
116.8
134.0
129.0
156.4
147.9
138.4
134.1
128.4
125.3
220.6
140.1
130.0
123.8
109.6
110.3
136.4
124.9
122.4
108.9
122.5
115.4
209.6
148.7
146.3
108.8
87.2
102.3
124.9
119.7
118.4
105.8
117.8
96.9
186.8
145.0
144.9
111.5
75.6
95.1
116.1
113.1
117.3
97.1
107.9
80.4
160.0
142.2
133.2
107.2
69.3
89.3
108.1
102.6
105.9
81.6
99.0
78.2
142.9
142.7
128.9
105.6
69.9
92.5
109.5
101.2
103.8
80.0
99.8
81.1
143.5
143.3
132.1
154.4
93.1
129.9
146.3
143.0
137.4
112.2
124.7
105.4
168.6
141.7
142.3
170.5
109.5
169.0
174.2
177.0
164.0
138.6
153.7
121.5
188.3
142.1
157.8
188.4
Output per hour
Japan ...........................................................................
B e lgium ........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N orw ay.........................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
Output
Japan ...........................................................................
B e lgium ........................................................................
G erm any .......................................... ...........................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N o rw ay............. ...........................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
Total hours
B e lgium ........................................... ............................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
N o rw ay.........................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
Compensation per hour
Japan ...........................................................................
B e lgium ........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ..............................................................................
United K ingdo m ..........................................................
Unit labor costs: National currency basis
B e lgium ........................................................................
Ita ly ...............................................................................
United K ingdo m ............................................... ..........
Unit labor costs: U S. dollar basis
Japan ...........................................................................
B e lgium ........................................................................
G erm any......................................................................
Ita ly ..............................................................................
N o rw ay........................................................................
United K ingdo m .........................................................
-
124.0
108.2
101.0
73.4
85.5
87.0
80.8
85.5
69.8
261.1
319.3
174.8
172.9
180.3
168.8
139.9
131.1
210.5
Data not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
97
Current Labor Statistics:
Injury & Illness Data
51. Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Industry and type of case1
PRIVATE SECTOR
Total c a s e s ..............
Lost workday cases
Lost w o rkdays.........
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing 3
Total c a s e s .........................................................................
Lost workday cases .......................................... .
Lost w o rkda ys................................................................
Mining
Total c a s e s ..............
Lost workday cases
Lost w o rkda ys.........
Construction
Total c a s e s ...............................
Lost workday cases ...............
Lost w o rkda ys.............. ...........
General building contractors:
Total c a s e s ................... ............
Lost workday c a s e s ................
Lost w o rkdays...........................
Heavy construction contractors:
Total c a s e s ....... ........................
Lost workday cases .... ............
Lost w o rkda ys...........................
Special trade contractors:
Total c a s e s ................................
Lost workday c a s e s ................
Lost w o rkdays...........................
Manufacturing
Total c a s e s ..............
Lost workday cases
Lost w o rkda ys.........
Durable goods
Lumber and wood products:
Total c a s e s ........................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................
Lost w o rkda ys...................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total c a s e s ........................................................
Lost workday cases .........................................
Lost w o rkda ys...................................................
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Total c a s e s .........................................................
Lost workday cases .........................................
Lost w o rkdays...................................................
Primary metal industries:
Total c a s e s .... .......................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total c a s e s .........................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................
Machinery, except electrical:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................
Electric and electronic equipment:
Total c a s e s .........................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................
Lost w orkdays....................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................
Lost w o rkda ys......................................... ...........
Instruments and related products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................
Lost workday cases ................. .........................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries:
Total c a s e s ...........................................................
Lost workday cases ...........................................
Lost w o rkdays......................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
98
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
October 1989
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers1“
51.
Continued— Occupational injury and illness incidence rates by industry, United States
Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers2
Industry and type of case'
1979
Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products:
Total c a s e s .................. .......................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.................................................................... ................................
Tobacco manufacturing:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ...............................................................1..........................
Lost w o rkdays...................................................................... ••••■................... ......
Textile mill products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Apparel and other textile products:
Total c a s e s ........................................................................... ..............................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.............. ....................... ..............................................................
Paper and allied products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.......................................................................... ■■—■■■..................
Printing and publishing:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkdays............... ..................».......................................... -.......••••..........
Chemicals and allied products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rxda ys.....................................................................................................
Petroleum and coal products:
Total c a s e s ................................................................................ ................. ........
Lost workday cases ............................................................................ ..............
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................................... .............................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.................................... ................................................................
Leather and leather products:
Total c a s e s ............................................................................... ..........................
Lost workday c a s e s ................................................................................:.........
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................................................................
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
19.9
9.5
141.8
18.7
9.0
136.8
17.8
8.6
130.7
16.7
8.0
129.3
16.5
7.9
131.2
16.7
8.1
131.6
16.7
8.1
138.0
16.5
8.0
137.8
17.7
8.6
153. !
9.3
4.2
64.8
8.1
3.8
45.8
8.2
3.9
56.8
7.2
3.2
44.6
6.5
3.0
42.8
7.7
3.2
51.7
7.3
3.0
51.7
6.7
2.5
45.6
8.6
2.5
46.4
9.7
3.4
61.3
9.1
3.3
62.8
8.8
3.2
59.2
7.6
2.8
53.8
7.4
2.8
51.4
8.0
3.0
54.0
7.5
3.0
57.4
7.8
3.1
59.3
9.0
3.6
65.9
6.5
2.2
34.1
6.4
2.2
34.9
6.3
2.2
35.0
6.0
2.1
36.4
6.4
2.4
40.6
6.7
2.5
40.9
6.7
2.6
44.1
6.7
2.7
49.4
7.4
3.1
59.5
13.5
6.0
108.4
12.7
5.8
112.3
11.6
5.4
103.6
10.6
4.9
99.1
10.0
4.5
90.3
10.4
4.7
93.8
10.2
4.7
94.6
10.5
4.7
99.5
12.8
5.8
122.3
7.1
3.1
45.1
6.9
3.1
46.5
6.7
3.0
47.4
6.6
2.8
45.7
6.6
2.9
44.6
6.5
2.9
46.0
6.3
2.9
49.2
6.5
2.9
50.8
6.7
3.1
55.1
7.7
3.5
54.9
6.8
3.1
50.3
6.6
3.0
48.1
5.7
2.5
39.4
5.5
2.5
42.3
5.3
2.4
40.8
5.1
2.3
38.8
6.3
2.7
49.4
7.0
3.1
58.8
7.7
3.6
62.0
7.2
3.5
59.1
6.7
2.9
51.2
5.3
2.5
46.4
5.5
2.4
46.8
5.1
2.4
53.5
5.1
2.4
49.9
7.1
3.2
67.5
7.3
3.1
65.9
17.1
8.2
127.1
15.5
7.4
118.6
14.6
7.2
117.4
12.7
6.0
100.9
13.0
6.2
101.4
13.6
6.4
104.3
13.4
6.3
107.4
14.0
6.6
118.2
15.9
7.6
130.8
11.5
4.9
76.2
11.7
5.0
82.7
11.5
5.1
82.6
9.9
4.5
86.5
10.0
4.4
87.3
10.5
4.7
94.4
10.3
4.6
88.3
10.5
4.8
83.4
12.4
5.8
114.5
10.0
5.9
107.0
9.4
5.5
104.5
9.0
5.3
100.6
8.5
4.9
96.7
8.2
4.7
94.9
8.8
5.2
105.1
8.6
5.0
107.1
8.2
4.8
102.1
8.4
4.9
108.1
8.0
3.4
49.0
7.4
3.2
48.7
7.3
3.1
45.3
7.2
3.1
45.5
7.2
3.1
47.8
7.4
3.3
50.5
7.4
3.2
50.7
7.7
3.3
54.0
7.7
3.4
56.1
8.8
4.1
59.1
8.2
3.9
58.2
7.7
3.6
54.7
7.1
3.4
52.1
7.0
3.2
50.6
7.2
3.5
55.5
7.2
3.5
59.8
7.2
3.6
62.5
7.4
3.7
64.0
7.7
3.1
44.7
7.1
2.9
44.5
7.1
2.9
41.1
7.2
2.9
42.6
7.3
3.0
46.7
7.5
3.2
48.4
7.5
3.1
47.0
7.8
3.2
50.5
7.8
3.3
52.9
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Total c a s e s ......................................................................... ................................
Lost workday cases .............. ...........................................................................
Lost w o rkdays....... ..................... ........................ ,..i.......................................
2.1
.9
13.3
2.0
.8
12.2
1.9
.8
11.6
2.0
.9
13.2
2.0
.9
12.8
1.9
.9
13.6
2.0
.9
15.4
2.0
.9
17.1
2.0
.9
14.3
Services
Total c a s e s .........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases .......................................... ................. ..................••••••.....
Lost w o rkda ys....................................................................................................
5.5
2.5
38.1
5.2
2.3
35.8
5.0
2.3
35.9
4.9
2.3
35.8
5.1
2.4
37.0
5.2
2.5
41.1
5.4
2.6
45.4
5.3
2.5
43.0
5.5
2.7
45.8
Transportation and public utilities
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday c a s e s ..........................................................................................
Lost workdays ........................................................................................ ..........
Wholesale and retail trade
Total c a s e s ................................................. .............. ..........................................
Lost workday c a s e s ........................................... ...............................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Wholesale trade:
Total c a s e s ................................................................................. .....................•••
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
Retail trade:
Total c a s e s ..........................................................................................................
Lost workday cases ..........................................................................................
Lost w o rkda ys.....................................................................................................
’ Total cases include fatalities.
2 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost
workdays per 100 full-time workers and were calculated as:
(N/EH) X 200,000, where:
N = number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
EH = total hours worked by all employees during calendar year.
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per
week, 50 weeks per year.)
3 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
Monthly Labor Review
October 1989
99
BLS Periodicals
BLS periodicals
provide timely information
on employment, occupations,
wages, and prices.
Monthly Labor Review
Current Wage Developments
the oldest and most authoritative
Government research journal in
economics and social sciences
Regular features include current
labor statistics and developments in
industrial relations
reports monthly on specific wage and
benefit changes from collective
bargaining agreements. Includes
data on strikes or lockouts, major
agreements expiring, and compensa
tion changes
$20 a year
$15 a year
Occupational Outlook
Quarterly
CPI Detailed Report
is the most comprehensive report on
monthly consumer price indexes and
rates of change
helps students and guidance
counselors learn about new occupa
tions, training opportunities, salary
trends, and career counseling
programs. Written in nontechnical
language and illustrated in color
$21 a year
$5 a year
Employment and Earnings
Producer Price Indexes
gives current monthly employment
and earnings statistics for the Nation
as a whole, for States and for more
than 200 areas. Included are
household and establishment data
seasonally and not seasonally
adjusted. Includes annual supplement
includes monthly price movements
of both farm and industrial com
modities, by industry and stage of
processing. Includes annual supplement.
$29 a year
$25 a year
Superintendent of Documents Subscriptions Order Form
Order processing code:
*6194
□ YES, please send me the following indicated subscriptions:
□
□
□
□
□
□
Monthly Labor Review
Occupational Outlook Quarterly
Employment and Earnings
Current Wage Developments
CPI Detailed Report'
Producer Price Indexes
□ -j y e a r $20
□ -| year $ 5
□ 1 year $25
□ 1 year $15
□ 1 year $21
□ 1 year $29
1. The total cost of my order is $_____ . All prices include regular
customers please add 25%.
or
□
□
□
□
□
□
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
$40
$10
$50
$30
$42
$58
omestic postage and handling and are subject to change. International
Please Type or Print
2 . ______________________________
(Company or personal name)
3. Please choose method of payment:
□ Check payable to the Superintendent of Documents
(Additional address/attention line)
(Street address)
(City, State, Zip Code)
□ GPO Deposit Account
□ VISA
□
MasterCard Account
(Credit card expiration date)
i__________ )
(Daytime phone including area code)
(Signature)
4. Mail To: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D C. 20402-9371
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I I I I I I I I ~l I
Thank you for your order'
The Board of Trustees of the
Lawrence R. Klein Award
announces
A Special
Competition
to mark the 75th year of the
Monthly Labor Review
1.
A prize of $1,000—separate from the annual Lawrence R. Klein A w ardwill be awarded for the best article manuscript submitted to this
competition before May 1, 1990.
2.
Entries will be judged on the basis of quality of writing and adherence
to criteria of professional research and analysis.
3.
The manuscript should not exceed 3,500 words, must be written
exclusively for the Monthly Labor Review and must not have been
submitted to or appeared in any form in any manner of publication
prior to its submission to this competition.
4.
The competition will be open to anyone except members of the
Lawrence R. Klein Board of Trustees and members of their immediate
families.
5.
Manuscripts must be based on original research or analysis in a subject
germane to the interests of the Monthly Labor Review.
6.
To be eligible, entries must be submitted to the trustees with the entry
form shown below, or a reproduction thereof.
7.
The Board of Trustees of the Lawrence R. Klein Award will have first
publication rights.
Charles D. Stewart, President,
Ben Burdetsky, Secretary-Treasurer,
The Lawrence R. Klein Award
Mail to:
Entry Form M o n th ly L a b o r Review 75th A nniversary C om petition
Board o f T rustees,
L aw rence R. K lein Award
M onthly L abor Review
75th A nniversary
C om p etition
c /o Monthly L abor Review
441 G Street, N W .,
R oom 2 8 2 2
W ashington, D C 20212
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I submit the attached manuscript, titled
as my entry in the Monthly Labor Review’ 75th Anniversary Competition.
I am aware of the contest rules and agree to abide by them.
Signature
Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip
LI.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, DC 2021£
Second Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
ISSN 0008-1818
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
Schedule of release dates for bls statistical series
Period
covered
Period
covered
Period
covered
Productivity and costs:
Nonfarm business and manufacturing
November 2
3rd quarter
Nonfinancial corporations''
December 6
3rd quarter
Employment situation
November 3
October
December 8
November
January 5
December
Producer Price Indexes
November 9
October —d-
December 15
November
January 12
December
Occupational injuries and illnesses
November 15
1988
Consumer Price Index
November 21
October
December 19
November
January 18
December
Real earnings
November 21
October
December 19
November
January 18
December
U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes
November 22
October
December 21
November
January 25
4th quarter
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MLR table
number
@FedFRASER