Full text of Monthly Labor Review : September 1982, Volume 105, Number 9

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

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
September 1982


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

In this issue:
Job creation in industry,
Automation and the future.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner

The Monthly Labor Review is published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department
of Labor. Communications on editorial matters
should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief,
Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Washington, D C. 20212.
Phone: (202) 523-1327.
Subscription price per year
$23 domestic; $28.75 foreign.
Single copy $3.50.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the
Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-0818) and other Government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office,
an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence
on circulation and subscription matters (including
address changes) to:
Superintendent of Documents,
G overnm ent Printing O ffice,

Washington, D C. 20402
Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the
publication of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business required by
law of this Department. Use of funds for printing
this periodical has been approved by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget
through A pril 30. 1987. S econd-class
postage paid Laurel, Md.
Library of Congress Catalog
Card Number 15-26485

Regional Commissioners
for Bureau of Labor Statistics
Region I
Boston: Anthony J. Ferrara
1603 JFK Federal Building, Government Center,
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: (617) 223-6761
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Flampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Region II
New York: Samuel M. Ehrenhalt
1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N Y. 10036
Phone: (212) 944-3121
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Region III
Philadelphia: Alvin /. Marguhs
3535 Market Street
P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101
Phone: (215) 596-1154
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
Region IV
Atlanta: Donald M Cruse
1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. 30367
Phone: (404) 881^)418
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Region V
Chicago: William E. Rice
9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street,
Chicago, III. 60604
Phone: (312) 353-1880
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region VI
Dallas: Bryan Richey
Second Floor, 555 Griffin Square Building, Dallas, Tex. 75202
Phone: (214) 767-6971
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Regions VII and VIII
Kansas City: Elliott A. Browar
911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, Mo. 64106
Phone: (816) 374 2481
VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming

September cover:

"Imaginary Numbers,"
an oil painting by Yves Tanguy,
from "20th Century Masters:
the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,"
on view at the National Gallery of Art.
The six-city exhibition was arranged by
the International Exhibitions Foundation.
Cover design by Melvin B. Moxley,
Division of Audio-Visual Communications Services,
U.S. Department of Labor.


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

Regions IX and X San Francisco: D. Bruce Hanchett
450 Golden Gate Avenue. Box 36017,
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: (415) 556-4678
IX
American Samoa
Arizona
California
Guam
Hawaii
Nevada
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington

min

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
SEPTEMBER 1982
VOLUME 105, NUMBER 9
Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief
Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor

L IB H A R M

SEP 2 J 198?

Richard Greene

3

Tracking job growth in private industry
Small, young companies are very important to the process of job generation,
according to three recent studies of the behavior of individual employers

S. A. Levitan, C. M. Johnson

10

The future of work: does it belong to us or to the robots?
As the silicon chip helps chip away many factory and office tasks, prospects are bright
for robots and microprocessors, but no revolutionary loss of employment is anticipated

John R. Stepp and others

15

Helping labor and management see and solve problems
A mediator can improve an unhealthy labor-management relationship by recognizing
the symptoms, making an accurate diagnosis, and prescribing appropriate remedies

Jack Veigle, Horst Brand

21

Millwork industry shows slow growth in productivity
During 1958-80, output per hour advanced at half the rate of growth recorded
for all manufacturing, reflecting unstable demand and low capital investment

REPORTS
Philip L. Rones
Nancy F. Rytina
Francis W. Horvath
Steve Early, Matt Witt
Anne McDougall Young


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

27
29
34
36
39

The aging of the older population and labor force participation
Occupational changes and tenure, 1981
Job tenure of workers in January 1981
How European unions cope with new technology
Labor force patterns of students, graduates, and dropouts, 1981
DEPARTMENTS

2
27
39
43
44
47
53

Labor month in review
Research summaries
Special labor force reports— summaries
Major agreements expiring next month
Developments in industrial relations
Book reviews
Current labor statistics

Labor M onth
In Review
JOBS FOR COLLEGE GRADS. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics published a
report on the job outlook for college
graduates in the 1980’s. Here are ex­
cerpts from the article by Jon Sargent in
the summer issue of Occupational
Outlook Quarterly.
Supply. The number of bachelor’s
degrees awarded increased from 502,000
during the 1964-65 school year to
929,000 during the 1979-80 school year,
an increase of more than 85 percent. The
number of bachelor’s degrees awarded
annually is expected to increase slowly
during the early 1980’s, but as the babyboom cohort passes out of the typical
ages of college attendance, the number
of degrees granted annually is expected
to fall. This decline should be softened,
however, by continued increases in col­
lege attendance by older workers. By
1990, the number of bachelor’s degrees
awarded will settle back to about the
1980 level. On the average, however,
slightly more bachelor’s degrees will be
awarded annually during the 1980-90
period than in 1980.
Women college graduates were in­
creasingly likely to be members of the
labor force during the 1970’s. The pro­
portion of women with college degrees
who were either employed or looking for
work climbed from 59.6 percent in 1970
to 68.4 percent in 1980, continuing a
long-term trend. This increase primarily
stemmed from the growing tendency of
married women graduates between the
ages of 25 and 44 to combine work with
family responsibilities. The proportion
of this group in the labor force grew
from 49 percent in 1970 to 69 percent in
1980; the proportions of other women
graduates in the labor force increased
only slightly over the period. The grow­
ing labor force commitment of women
college graduates increased the impact
of the baby-boom generation on the
labor force. Their numbers were
unprecedented, as was the propor­
2

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

tion who sought jobs.
During the 1980’s, the upward trend
in the labor force participation rate of
women is expected to continue, offset­
ting somewhat the impact of fewer peo­
ple entering their twenties. Labor force
growth will nevertheless slow. Women
will account for about two-thirds of the
labor force growth between 1980 and
1990.
Demand. During the 1970’s, employ­
ment in professional and technical,
m anagerial, and nonretail sales
jobs—occupations generally requiring
substantial proportions of workers with
a degree—increased 40 percent, com­
pared to about 28-percent growth for all
workers. Between 1980 and 1990,
employment in these occupations is pro­
jected to grow more slowly. They are ex­
pected to increase between 18 and 25
percent, depending on varying assump­
tions about growth in the economy,
about as fast as the average for all oc­
cupations in the 1980’s.
Educational upgrading was projected
to occur in professional and technical,
managerial and administrative, and
nonretail sales occupations, continuing
the trend toward greater complexity and
skill requirements for many of these
jobs, as well as employers’ responses to a
greater supply. A constant, but small,
proportion of the jobs in other occupa­
tions was projected to require a college
degree.
Outlook. A surplus of between 2 and 3
million college graduates is expected to
enter the labor force during the 1980’s.
If the economy grows as slowly as it did
during the 1970’s, the surplus would be
the higher figure, an average annual
surplus of about 300,000 college grad­
uates—about 1 graduate in 5, just as
in the 1970’s. If the economy grows
more rapidly than it did in the
1970’s, the average surplus would be
about 200,000 college graduates—

about 1 in 7—each year.
Even with more rapid growth, how­
ever, the job market experienced by col­
lege graduates in the 1980’s is unlikely to
be more favorable than in the 1970’s. In
1980, a surplus of college graduates
estimated at 3.8 million was already in
the labor force, either employed in jobs
that did not require their level of educa­
tion or unemployed. Of course, many of
these have since begun satisfying careers
in occupations that do not require 4
years of college education. Others,
however, can be expected to compete for
jobs that more fully utilize their educa­
tion. The job market will be more com­
petitive to the extent that this pool of
underemployed 1970’s entrants com­
petes with 1980’s entrants for job
openings requiring a college degree.
Like college graduates in the 1970’s,
future college graduates cannot be
assured that they will find jobs in the oc­
cupations of their choice. Many may ex­
perience periods of unemployment, have
to relocate to other areas of the country,
or job-hop before finding one that
satisfies them. As in the 1970’s, some
may have to compete with nongraduates
for the more desirable jobs not pre­
viously filled by graduates, but in many
cases, their additional education will
prove to be an advantage. Even though a
college degree may not be required,
many employers prefer to hire the best
educated candidate who is qualified for
a job. In many cases, a college graduate
will also have an advantage in gaining
promotion in non-college careers over
those without degrees. Many graduates
who are forced to start work in jobs for
which they are overqualified never­
theless may gain useful experience that
will be an advantage in competing later
for more challenging jobs.
The summer Occupational Outlook
Quarterly is available from b l s regional
offices (see inside front cover) at $2.75
per copy.
□

Tracking job growth
in private industry
Small, young firm s are very important
to the process of job generation,
according to three recent studies
o f the behavior o f individual employers
R ichard G reene

*

The job generation process has been one of the most
heavily debated public policy issues of recent years.
Governments at the Federal, State, and local levels have
invested heavily in programs designed to create jobs—
including urban and general economic development
plans, tax credits and incentives, and public sector em­
ployment program s— and to improve the ability of in­
dividuals to compete effectively in the labor market by
providing basic education and training in new and
expanding fields. Much current interest centers on the
problem of matching unemployed workers from declin­
ing industries to opportunities in areas with expanding
manpower needs, such as high technology and defenserelated activities. An interesting legislative approach,
the Small Business Research Innovation A ct,1 is a pro­
posal to set aside Federal research money for small
businesses in order to spur technological innovation and
create new jobs. The success of efforts to increase em­
ployment through economic policy hinges on the ability
to understand the job creation process, identify the job
creators, and develop policy initiatives that enhance
their potential.
Aggregate data on employment levels and changes by
industry and geographic area provide meaningful infor­
mation on overall labor market trends, but are limited
for the study of job creation in that they essentially
portray net results. The employment changes reported
Richard Greene, formerly with the Office of Employment Structure
and Trends, Bureau of Labor Statistics, is now an economist with the
U.S. Department of State.


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

monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are the result
of many thousands of production-function decisions
made by individual employers, based on the relationship
between their particular output and labor requirements.
To understand the process of job creation, it is neces­
sary to go beyond the aggregated data, and examine the
multitude of business decisions at the establishment
level.
This article summarizes the findings and methodology
of some of the recent innovative labor market studies of
this type in the private sector. Emphasis is placed on
the microdata-based study of the job creation process
under the direction of David Birch, director of the Mas­
sachusetts Institute of Technology ( m i t ) Program on
Neighborhood and Regional Change.2 Similar studies by
the Institute of Urban and Regional Development of
the University of California at Berkeley, under the di­
rection of Michael B. Teitz,3and by the Brookings Insti­
tution4 will also be summarized. These efforts, with
appropriate refinement and extension, have the potential
to improve significantly the body of labor market infor­
mation used to guide the development of economic poli­
cy in this country.

The MIT program
David Birch of MIT has developed a theoretically
simple approach to the analysis of the job creation pro­
cess, based on the employment histories of nearly 6 mil­
lion individual employers. Each firm in the MIT data
base is characterized on the basis of location, size of
employment, parent company affiliation, industry, and
3

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Job Growth in Private Industry
age. By comparing changes in these characteristics over
time, Birch was able to trace in some detail the path of
economic transformation of individual firms. By aggre­
gating the changes in these characteristics for all estab­
lishments in a given sector or area, he was able to
describe the overall labor market changes in that sector
or area and, most importantly, how these changes oc­
curred.
Some highlights:
• Overall employment change in a private-sector labor
market is the result of:
— Births of new firms
— Expansions of existing firms
— Firms going out of business
— Firms reducing their work forces
— Firms moving their places of business
• The sum of the flows causing job losses (concerns go­
ing out of business or reducing their work forces) is
nearly the same in all areas. The job loss rate aver­
ages about 8 percent annually.
• The job loss rate is quite high. Every area loses about
50 percent of its jobs every 5 years.
• Differences in net employment growth are largely the
result of differences in the rates at which job losses
are replaced. This replacement rate varies greatly
from area to area.
• There are significant differences in the rates at which
net new jobs are generated in various parts of the
country.
• The establishments generating new jobs tend to be:
— Small. About two-thirds of all net new jobs be­
tween 1969 and 1976 were created by firms with 20
or fewer employees.
— Young. About 80 percent of all “replacement” jobs
between 1969 and 1976 were generated by establish­
ments in business 4 years or less.
— Volatile. Job generators tend to move through pe­
riods of expansion and retrenchment as they grow.
• Virtually none of the difference in the job generation
capability of labor markets is due to firms moving
their staffs and physical plants to different areas. Few
businesses relocate, and when they do, they move
short distances.
The MIT studies are basically a longitudinal analysis
of the individual establishment data collected by Dun
and Bradstreet (d &b). The D&B files are based on estab­
lishment reports of all businesses with commercial cred­
it ratings. The data are used by d &b for its credit rating
operation, but are commercially available to other en­
terprises for market research, mailing list preparation,
billing, and associated activities. D&B collects many use­
ful economic observations, including the year the estab­
4


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

lishment started, location, employment, sales, major
industry, and any branch or subsidiary relationships.
The information is collected by a full-time staff of 1,700
reporters, assisted by 500 part-time employees.
Files containing all D&B establishments for the years
1969, 1972, 1974, and 1976 were used by the MIT proj­
ect group to build a data base. A micro history of each
employer was developed by matching the firms from
year to year by the unique identifying number assigned
by d &b . (That number stays the same as long as the es­
tablishment is in the file, regardless of any change in lo­
cation, size, or industry.) This economic history then
allows a detailed analysis of changes in employment, lo­
cation, corporate affiliation, and life cycles. When the
data are aggregated on the basis of various characteris­
tics, it is possible to identify the types of firms that cre­
ated the greatest number of jobs.
Any review of the m i t findings must be tempered by
an understanding of both the nature of the D&B files
and the techniques used by MIT staff to build the data
base. It should be emphasized that the D&B file was not
designed as a time series or census of activity in a par­
ticular area or industry. As a result, a number of prob­
lems arise when the data are used for longitudinal
analysis.
A major problem with the MIT model is that births of
firms tend to be underreported for the years covered by
the study, d &b makes no effort to enter historical data
for each newly reported firm in its files. This means, for
example, that a firm appearing on the 1975 D&B file for
the first time might actually have started operations in
1972. Consequently, the MIT model treats any newly re­
ported firm which is known to have been established
before the period being studied as a new listing, rather
than a birth. These new listings are excluded from any
aggregate analysis of economic change during the cur­
rent and previous periods. They are, however, incorpo­
rated into the base-period employment for the analysis
of future periods.
A second problem is attributable to the 2- and 3-year
intervals between the observations forming the model’s
history. A large number of firms, particularly smaller
firms, are formed and go out of business within a year
or two. Because the MIT studies use data gathered at in­
tervals greater than the life cycles of these firms, any
aggregate measure of employment change will under­
state the actual number of business births and deaths
occurring during an interval.
A third problem involves D&B’s treatment of branch
establishments. Employment in branches is often under­
stated or even unreported because branches do not usu­
ally receive separate credit ratings. And, because D&B
does not report the year that branch offices are started,
the MIT model assumes that all new branch listings are
births. However, because a 1976 d &b study of 1,000

firms indicated that nondisaggregated headquarters
employed only 16 percent of all employees in headquar­
ters and branch establishments, the MIT team did not
consider the nondisaggregation of branch data to be a
major problem.
The D&B file also has the same general problems of

business death rates varied about 1 percent with the
direction of the business cycle during the period of this
study. This trend also holds at the State and city levels.
The following tabulation compares the rates of employ­
ment loss and gain during the 1972-76 period for 10
metropolitan areas selected to demonstrate a variety of

other large-scale employer data bases regarding geo­
graphical and industrial coding, clerical errors, and em­
ployer reporting mistakes. Errors of this type are
extremely difficult to identify or measure without the
use of costly employer validation visits. The MIT team
developed an elaborate editing process which attempts
to account for most of these deficiencies. However, an
evaluation of the results of the MIT studies should take
into account the nature of the D&B file and the prob­
lems inherent in constructing a history of nearly 6 mil­
lion employers.

overall grow th rates:

Components o f change. The extent to which an area’s
job pool expands or contracts over time depends on the
balance between those changes increasing the job pool
— business births, expansions, and inmigration— and
those decreasing the job pool— business deaths, con­
tractions, and outmigration. All of these events are oc­
curring simultaneously in every labor market. For
employment to increase over time, births, expansions,
and inmigration must be greater than those components
causing employment decreases.
The following tabulation summarizes the percentage
employment changes resulting from the different com­
ponents of employment change. Data are averaged for
all States during three periods. (The MIT project also
produced similar data by neighborhood, city, Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, region, and for individual
States.)
B irth s..............................
D e a th s ...........................
E xpansions....................
C o ntractions.................
Inm igration....................
Outmigration.................

1969-72

1972-74

1974-76

5.6
5.2
4.7
2.9
.1
.03

5.5
4.5
5.3
2.6
.1
.05

6.7
5.7
4.4
3.4
.1
.01

This tabulation reveals several im portant characteris­
tics of the employment change process. As noted, relo­
cation is not significant, contrary to popularly held
opinions. At the city level, migration of firms becomes
more important, but its net effect on total employment
remains insignificant when compared to the other fac­
tors. When firms move, they usually move short dis­
tances, as from an inner city to a suburb. Most of the
observed firm outmigrations during 1969-76 were from
New York City and Washington, D.C., to the sur­
rounding suburbs.
The rates of job loss from business deaths and con­
tractions are roughly the same from year to year. The

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

Area

H ouston ........................
C h a rlo tte ......................
Dayton ........................
R ochester......................
B o sto n ...........................
B altim ore......................
Hartford ......................
Worcester .......................
New Haven .................
Greenville......................

Percent
gain

Percent
loss

Overall
percent
change

62.7
48.0
36.4
33.7
37.4
36.5
36.6
24.6
27.0
26.9

35.7
40.4
31.4
29.3
33.7
32.9
35.5
25.1
29.5
35.1

27.0
7.5
5.1
4.5
3.8
3.5
1.1
.5
-2.6
-8.4

Perhaps even more im portant than the relatively

small range in employment loss rates is the fact that the
job loss rates were generally greater in areas with the
highest growth rates (that is, Houston and Charlotte).
It is also interesting to note that the employment loss
rate averages about 8 percent per year in most of the
areas. Compounding that employment loss rate means
that an area must replace about 50 percent of its jobs
every 5 years to maintain its employment base.
Among the 10 metropolitan areas, the range of em­
ployment gain rates is almost 2 Vi times greater than the
range of employment loss rates. The employment gain
rates were, as might be expected, highest in the fastgrowth areas. Generally, differences in employment
growth rates are the result of variations in the employ­
ment gains from new firms starting up and existing
firms expanding operations, rather than differences in
employment losses resulting from layoffs, or from firms
going out of business or migrating to other areas.
The Birch study indicates that an area must replace
an average of 8 percent of its jobs every year to main­
tain a constant employment level. And, to expand its
employment base, an area must obviously generate ad­
ditional jobs. In Phoenix, for example, nonagricultural
employment increased 2.9 percent, or from 613,000 to
631,000, in 1980. To attain that growth rate, the Phoe­
nix economy actually had to generate approximately
66,700 jobs, of which almost 75 percent replaced job
losses.
Firm size and location. Two-thirds of all net new jobs
were created by firms with 20 employees or fewer, and
about four-fifths were created by firms with 100 em­
ployees or fewer, according to the MIT model of 5.6 mil­
lion businesses between 1969 and 1976. The results here
are consistent with other research which found that,
5

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Job Growth in Private Industry
Table 1. Percent of net new jobs created and percent of
total employment by firm size and region, 1972-76
Firm size
Region

20 or
fewer
workers

21 to 50 51 to 100 101 to 500 More than
500
workers workers workers
workers

Northeast:
Percent of net jobs created
Percent of total employment

177.1
21.7

6.5
12.8

-17.4
10.5

-33.3
23.4

-32.9
31.7

North Central:
Percent of net jobs created
Percent of total employment

67.2
20.5

12.0
12.7

5.2
10.2

3.1
22.9

12.4
33.8

South:
Percent of net jobs created
Percent of total employment

53.5
22.0

11.2
12.6

5.5
10.0

9.4
23.1

20.4
32.3

West:
Percent of net jobs created
Percent of total employment

59.5
23.3

11.6
13.6

6.3
10.8

9.3
22.2

13.3
30.0

S ource : David Birch, The Job Generation Process, mimeo (MIT Program on Neighbor­
hood and Regional Change, February 1979).

over the last 10 years, small businesses created 3 million
jobs, while the 1,000 largest firms recorded virtually no
net gains in employment.5
In 1976, small firms accounted for only about 24 per­
cent of the private-sector employment in the country,
while registering 66 percent of the employment growth.
Firms with over 500 employees account for about 27
percent of employment but only 13.3 percent of job
generation. Firms in the middle range generated the
least employment growth. The relatively strong job gen­
erating capacity of small firms must be interpreted in
relationship to the behavior of larger firms, for growth
in their proportion of total employment may indicate ei­
ther an increase in employment in small firms or a de­
crease in employment in larger firms.
Table 1 shows that another important pattern of job
generation is that the slower growth areas rely more
heavily on smaller businesses to generate new jobs; larg­
er firms generate a greater percentage of net jobs in the
faster growth areas. Across regional lines, small firms
are the major creators of new jobs. Between 1972 and
1976, firms with 50 or fewer employees generated basi­
cally all net new jobs in the Northeast, almost 80 per­
cent in the North Central, and about two-thirds of the
new jobs in the South and West. The distribution of
overall employment by size of firm was roughly the
same from region to region, but there were wide dispar­
ities in the percentage of jobs generated by size class. In
the Northeast, all but the small establishments were ac­
tually net job losers during 1972-76.
Age o f firm. Another distinguishing characteristic of job
generators is their youth. According to the MIT model,
about 80 percent of the replacement jobs are created by
establishments which have been operating less than 4
years. This proportion is remarkably similar among re­
gions.
6

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

Percent of jobs created
North
Northwest
Central
South

Years
in business
Less than 4 ...........
5 to 8 ....................
9 to 12 .................
13 or more ..........

75.5
10.4
7.5
6.6

80.8
8.4
6.0
4.8

80.4
9.9
5.1
4.6

West
80.9
8.8
5.5
4.8

The correlation between age and employment growth
was also found in a California study of additions to em­
ployer payroll during the 1976-77 period.6 This study
concluded that small firms less than a year old had
much higher rates of payroll accession than other firms,
accounting for 4.4 percent of total employment and
more than 11 percent of the total payroll accessions.
The use of age of business as a variable to study em­
ployment growth patterns is a characteristic unique to
the d &b files. No other major employer data base con­
tains the year that a business was started. (The Califor­
nia study compared unemployment insurance employer
records over 5 calendar quarters to identify new firms
and to track their subsequent movements.)
Industry developments. As would be expected, serviceproducing industries generated most of the new jobs. In
fact, the service sector was responsible for virtually all
of the employment growth during the 1972-76 period,
increasing its share of total nonfarm employment from
67.9 percent to 70.6 percent. (This employment shift to
service industries is also reflected in aggregate b l s data,
shown in table 2.) Manufacturing firms in the MIT mod­
el actually generated no net new jobs, although certain
high-technology industries showed strong employment
growth. Service industries kept employment bases relaTable 2. Employment of industry divisions characterized
by large and by small establishments, and changes,
1974-80
Employment
(in thousands)

Industry

Total, private
sector.........

Average
Percentage Percentage
size of
of total employment
March March Change, establish­
growth
change
1980 1974 1974-80 ment, 1980

73,720 63,089 10,631

Small-establishment
industries:
Trade .................. 20,068 16,537
Finance, Insurance,
and real estate ... 5,090 4,107
Services ............... 17,636 13,191
Construction........... 4,087 3,878
Total .............
Large-establishment
Industries:
Manufacturing ....... 20,722 20,027
Mining ..................
990
665
Transportation and
public utilities . . . . 5,127 4,684
Total .............

S ource

: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

17

100.0

16.9

3,531

13

21.4

983
4,445
209
9,168

13
13
18
12

23.9
33.7
5.4

695
325

62
32

443
1,463

27
49

86.2

3.3
32.8
9.5
13.8

tively stable in many areas where manufacturing indus­
tries were incurring severe losses.
Job generation is a cheaper, simpler process in the
less capital-intensive service industries. There are few
barriers to entry by new firms in most of this sector.
Because many of the industries provide “custom
designed” products, their production tends to be quite
labor-intensive. The demand for business, health, and
personal services has risen dramatically and is reflected
in the number of new jobs.

placement activities in the South, and an even greater
share in manufacturing.

Corporate structure. Job creation patterns are strongly
affected by the corporate structure of the generating
firms. Job creation resulting from the birth of new estab­
lishments increasingly reflects the branching activities of
existing firms. The share of employment created by
branching activity increased from approximately 50 per­
cent to over 70 percent in all regions between 1974 and
1976. However, after having established branches, corpo­
rations are less likely to expand them. The majority of
expansion growth is accounted for by independent firms,
that is, firms having no branches or subsidiaries. The fol­
lowing tabulation shows percentage employment gains
by region and type of establishment during 1974-76:

• Between 1978 and 1980, 55 percent of the net employ­
ment growth was in establishments with fewer than 20
employees. About 78 percent of the net 1978-80
growth was in establishments with under 100 workers.
• Approximately one half of this employment growth
represents branching or establishment of subsidiaries
by large firms.
• Small independent firms generate new jobs at a rate
about equal to their proportion of total employment.
• The proportion of employment growth accounted for
by these small firms increases in regions and indus­
tries with declining employment, and decreases in re­
gions and industries with expanding employment.

Births
Headquarters
Subsidiary Branch
Independent

The Brookings analysis of employment growth
between 1978 and 1980 both differs from and confirms
some of Birch’s major hypotheses regarding the behav­
ior of small business. Both studies confirm the turbulent
job generating behavior of establishments with fewer
than 100 employees. However, it should be noted that
the studies differ as to how to classify small branches of
larger firms. The Brookings project, for the most part,
excludes these establishments from the discussion of
small business behavior.
Like the MIT study, the Brookings project also em­
phasizes the importance of examining small business be­
havior relative to the performance of larger firms.
Finally, the Brookings project introduces a more recent
data source for the study of the job generation process
— the 1978 and 1980 United States Establishment and
Enterprise Microdata files.

Northeast . . . .
North Central
S o u th ............
West ............

23.6
19.9
25.2
24.0

2.0
1.4
1.6
1.7

1.4
1.1
1.4
1.1

72.0
77.6
71.7
72.2

Expansions
Independent Headquarters Subsidiary Branch
Northeast . . .
North Central
S o u th ............
West ............

.
.
.
.

58.2
54.5
54.2
56.9

21.1
20.9
17.4
22.2

6.7
5.0
5.7
4.6

14.0
19.6
22.7
16.3

Independent firms accounted for about 20 to 25 per­
cent of the employment gained by births of new firms
and 50 to 60 percent of the employment gained by ex­
pansion of existing firms between 1974 and 1976. Over­
all, independent firms accounted for about one-half of
the total jobs created during the 1974-1976 period.
These trends in job generation by corporate structure
are quite consistent from region to region but do vary
by industry. Independents play a more important role
in trade and services— the growing sectors of the econ­
omy. Branching tends to be more important in manu­
facturing industries. It is also noteworthy that more
than 65 percent of all manufacturing jobs generated in
the South were in branches controlled by corporations
headquartered in other parts of the country, mainly the
Northeast and North Central sections. By 1976,
branches accounted for roughly 40 percent of all job re­

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

The Brookings Microdata Project
The Brookings Institution used the United States Es­
tablishment and Enterprise Microdata files, developed
by the U.S. Small Business Administration, to examine
the components of employment change between 1978
and 1980. These files are basically updates of the D&B
files used by Birch. The major conclusions from the
Brookings project:

The University of California study
The study by the University of California Institute of
Urban and Regional Development used individual em­
ployer records from the mandatory unemployment in­
surance system to analyze the job generation process.
The study, directed by Michael Teitz, was based on rec­
ords for a sample of just over 25,000 California em­
ployers from the 1975-79 period. The Teitz study
differed from the MIT project in terms of sample size,
geographic coverage, reference period, and data source.
However, the results are remarkably similar to those
noted by Birch.
7

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Job Growth in Private Industry
• During 1975-79, establishments with fewer than 20
employees accounted for 56 percent of the net gains
in employment. (Birch estimated that such firms con­
tributed about two-thirds of the net job gains.)
• Firms less than 2 years old accounted for a much
greater share of the net employment growth than
older firms.
• More than 90 percent of the net new jobs in the
young, small firms were in the nonmanufacturing sec­
tor.
• Job losses resulting from layoffs and from firms going
out of business or undergoing ownership changes var­
ied by size class. Teitz found that at least 7 percent of
jobs existing in companies with fewer than 10 work­
ers at the beginning of their second year of business
had disappeared by the third year. This is in line with
Birch’s estimated overall job loss rate of about 8 per­
cent per year. In general, Teitz noted an even greater
degree of volatility— alternating periods of expansion
and retrenchment— in the job generation process
than did Birch.
The Teitz study provides some other interesting ob­
servations on the job generation process. In particular,
Teitz found that, while small new firms dominated the
job creating process, most of the new employment
growth was concentrated in a small percentage of these
firms. He also concluded that, in the California manu­
facturing sector, larger firms are the major generators of
net new jobs.
The Teitz study is im portant in several respects.
First, it introduces another data source— the adminis­
trative records of the unemployment insurance sys­
tem — which may be used to build a history of individu­
al employers. While these data are affected by the same
general types of problems faced by users of the D&B file,
Teitz’s discussion and treatment of these problems
should help other analysts of the unemployment insur­
ance micro data. Secondly, the study tends to confirm
some of the provocative conclusions of the Birch study
regarding the nature of the job generation process. Per­
haps just as importantly, Teitz’s study provides more
documentation on how the quality of labor market in­
formation can be improved by examining the individual
employer data. Finally, Teitz introduces an interesting
concept regarding the concentration of employment
growth in a relatively few small firms. Further study of
this characterization of the job generation process
should be an im portant part of any effort to develop
improved job generation strategies.

The future of micro research
In coming years, at least three major sources of indi­
vidual establishment data will be available to the policy
analyst: the D&B data base; unemployment insurance rec­
8

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

ords; and the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Standard
Statistical Establishment List. Each source has its re­
spective strengths and limitations for breaking down
and analyzing macro labor force movements. Each of
these important data bases is the byproduct of an ad­
ministrative record keeping system which was not
designed for time series analysis. The characteristics of
the D&B file, the basis for the MIT and Brookings stud­
ies, were described above in conjunction with the dis­
cussion of the MIT project.
The second major employer micro file is administered
at the State level by the State Employment Security
Agencies, and at the national level by BLS. The State
agencies maintain micro files of all employers covered
by unemployment insurance (ui) laws. (The California
UI micro file was the basis for the Teitz study.) For the
first calendar quarter of the year, each State Employ­
ment Security Agency submits to BLS a tape containing
the name, account number, address, SIC code, 3 months
of employment data, and total quarterly wages of each
Ul-covered establishment. This information serves as the
sampling frame for most of the major BLS surveys. The
UI universe file, in contrast to the D&B file, represents an
almost complete census of nonagricultural firms and is
updated on an annual basis.7
As previously indicated, the analytical use of the D&B
file currently is limited by its noncomprehensive nature,
a weakness in accounting for new births, the quality of
the SIC coding, and the irregular updates of employer
information. The D&B file has also been subject to irreg­
ular changes in file maintenance procedures which
makes the development of a longitudinal data base even
more difficult. These problems are, for the most part,
handled better by the UI universe file. The major
weaknesses of the UI file for micro analysis involve the
difficulties in maintaining series continuity, determining
employer affiliations, and identifying and breaking out
the employment of multi-establishment firms.
A third major employer file, the Commerce Depart­
ment’s Standard Statistical Establishment List (ssel), is
currently being developed from various Census Bureau,
Internal Revenue Service, and Social Security Adminis­
tration records. The SSEL, when complete, will include
all known multi- and single-establishment employers.
Most data will be updated on an annual basis. The SSEL
will be particularly strong in the breakout of multi­
establishment employment.
Preliminary indications are that improvements in eco­
nomic analysis could be achieved by coordinating the
efforts of the MIT and Brookings project, and from the
continued refinement and development of the UI and
SSEL files. At the moment, however, most reconciliation
work is hindered by the need to maintain confidentiality
of employer responses to government surveys. Legisla­
tion is currently being developed by the U.S. Depart-

ment of Labor to permit sharing of statistical informa­
tion among data bases under procedures which would
safeguard the confidentiality of responses, when this
sharing is feasible. Each file could then serve, at a mini­
mum, as a quality control check for the other files in

terms of employer location, size, and industrial activity.
Eventually, the attributes of these files might be com­
bined to build an employer data base that would signifi­
cantly improve the ability to trace the process of job
creation.
□

FOOTNOTES

mimeo (Berkeley, Calif., Institute of Urban and Regional
Development, University of California, March 1981).
4 Catherine Armington and Marjorie Odle, S o u rc e s o f E m p lo y m e n t
G ro w th 1 9 7 8 - 1 9 8 0 , mimeo (Washington, Business Microdata Project,
The Brookings Institution, March 1981).
5Stanley Pratt, editor of V en tu re C a p ita l J o u rn a l, in “Striking It
2
Various aspects of the MIT project are discussed in David Birch, Rich,” T im e, Feb. 15, 1982, p. 36.
6 State of California Employment Development Department, E m ­
T h e J o b G e n e ra tio n P rocess, mimeo (MIT Program on Neighborhood
p lo y m e n t S e r v ic e P o ten tia l, V o lu m e I, T h e D im e n s io n s o f L a b o r T u rn ­
and Regional Change, February 1979); C h o o sin g a P la c e to G row :
o v e r ( S e p te m b e r 1979), p. 111.
B u sin e ss L o c a tio n D e cisio n s in th e 1 9 7 0 ’s, mimeo (January 1981); C o r­
p o r a te E v o lu tio n : A M ic r o -B a s e d A n a ly sis, mimeo (January 1981); and
7 BLS is initiating a comprehensive evaluation of the UI name and
David Birch, “Who Creates Jobs,” P u b lic In te re s t, Fall 1981, pp. 3-14.
address files that will yield significant improvements in their utility for
economic analysis.
1Michael B. Teitz, S m a l l B u sin ess a n d E m p lo y m e n t G ro w th in C a li­

A c k n o w l e d g m e n t : The author would like to thank Carmen Cruz of
the Office of Employment Structure and Trends, Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics, for her assistance in the preparation of this article.
'This legislation was passed by Congress on July 12, 1982, and is
awaiting Presidential signature. See, “A Battle over R&D Funding,”
T h e W a sh in g to n P ost, Feb. 18, 1982, p. A l l .

fo r n ia ,

A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supple­
ment, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages. To be
considered for publication, communications should be factual and an­
alytical, not polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed
to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212.

«►


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

9

The future of work: does it
belong to us or to the robots?
As the silicon chip helps chip away
many factory and office functions, prospects
are bright for both robots and microprocessors,
but investment and other constraints seem
to assure no revolutionary loss of employment
Sar A. L evitan

and

Clifford M. J ohnson

Today, futurists are discussing the onset of a sweeping
technological revolution, one which would rival or sur­
pass the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century in
importance. This envisioned social order has been given
many names— “postindustrial,” “technetronic,” or “in­
formation” society. At the center of this flurry of inter­
est in technological change is the microprocessor. While
computerized automation has been theoretically feasible
for more than a decade, large and expensive computer
systems could produce cost savings only in the most
massive industrial settings, and automated machinery
could not be easily adapted to serve various production
functions. Now, with the development of the micro­
processor, these obstacles have been overcome and the
potential uses of computerized machinery at the
workplace have dramatically increased.
Microprocessor technology is best symbolized by the
silicon chip, a miniaturized system of integrated circuits
which can direct electrical current and, thereby, gener­
ate vast computational power. A silicon chip the size of
one square centimeter can perform millions of multipli­
cations per second, and has the capacity to store the
texts of the Declaration of Independence, the ConstituSar A. Levitan is Professor of Economics and Director of the Center
for Social Policy Studies, The George Washington University, Wash­
ington, D.C., and Clifford M. Johnson is a research associate at the
center. This article is adapted from their forthcoming book, S e c o n d
T h o u g h ts on W o rk (Kalamazoo, Mich., W.E. Upjohn Institute, 1982).

Digitized 10
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

tion, and a few chapters of the Federalist Papers. Tech­
nological advances are expected to result in at least a
fourfold expansion of these capabilities within a decade,
so that the microprocessors of the future will be ex­
tremely powerful computers on a single silicon chip or
combination of chips. The reduction in size is astound­
ing— today’s hand-held programmable calculators have
more computational power than the first full-scale com­
puters built during World War II, computers which
could have been “hand held” only by juggling 18,000
different vacuum tubes.
This miniaturization of computer technology is par­
ticularly important because it has been accompanied by
dramatic cost reductions, making microprocessors eco­
nomically competitive in a wide range of industrial ap­
plications. Once designed, silicon chips can be mass
produced at a very low cost, and even further price de­
clines are anticipated as volumes rise. As a result, a cal­
culation which cost 80 cents to perform in the early
1950’s costs less than one cent today, after adjusting for
inflation. The combined reductions in size and cost of
microprocessor technology have triggered renewed in­
terest in prospects for automation and in the broader
possibility of a wholesale transformation of modern so­
ciety driven by these new technological capabilities.
The silicon chip is particularly im portant to economi­
cal automation because it provides the basis for fully
integrating computer and machine. In industrial set-

tings, the microprocessor makes possible the develop­
ment of manufacturing machinery with unique adapt­
ability. The great m ajority— at least 75 percent— of all
manufactured goods fall into the category of shorter,
lower-volume production runs, with only the most basic
industries continuing to fit the mass-production stereo­
type. Technological advances in microelectronics, there­
fore, were an essential precondition to widespread
automation, and the expanding use of reprogrammable
machinery has triggered today’s intense debate regard­
ing the future of industrialized societies.
The potential impact of microprocessors is heightened
by their seemingly endless number of applications. This
new technology promises to alter not only the factory,
but the office as well. Sophisticated word processors
and computerized information storage and retrieval sys­
tems are becoming increasingly cost-effective, and be­
cause this new technology does not require knowledge
of specialized computer languages, their growing use
may raise traditionally low productivity among office
workers. These office innovations are considered quali­
tatively different from previous office equipment which
“mechanized” or “automated” routine tasks. While
memory typewriters made an office worker’s tasks easi­
er, emerging computer technologies may change the
means by which information is transcribed and made
available to others. Again, only with the silicon chip
has this decentralized use of computer technology at an
affordable cost become possible.

ations of screenplay writers and science fiction authors.
Rather than some form of mechanical humanoid, indus­
trial robots are characterized by mechanical arms linked
to reprogrammable computers. An exact definition of a
robot, as distinct from other automated machinery,
eludes even •industry representatives. The Robot Insti­
tute of America, an industrial trade group, stresses that
it is the “reprogrammable and multifunctional” charac­
ter of robots which is unique, allowing them to perform
a variety of tasks.2 And the emerging versions of robots
are varied— the more extravagant include a “bureau­
cratic robot” which stamps signatures on letters, a
robot “nurse” to assist handicapped persons in wheel­
chairs, a robot “janitor and guard dog” for the home,
and “talking robots” which would advertise products or
give job training to illiterates. Microprocessors are revo­
lutionizing design methods for the development of new
manufactured goods, and have become an integral part
of nearly all modern research equipment so as to expe­
dite lengthy data analysis.3 Innovations such as voicesensitive computers which can directly transcribe dicta­
tion into written text may be marketable within just a
few years. It is this diversity of applications for
microprocessor technology which distinguishes it from
less significant innovations, and which has led futurists
to predict a societal transformation “comparable with
the agricultural revolution that began about 10,000
years ago, and with the industrial revolution.” 4

‘Robot revolution’ coming

There is little consensus as to where the “robot revo­
lution” is heading and how far it will go. The technolo­
gy itself may be refined to such an extent that most
factory work could be carried out by robots and auto­
mated machinery. For example, a study conducted at
Carnegie-Mellon University asserts that the current gen­
eration of robots has the technical capability to perform
nearly 7 million existing factory jobs— one-third of all
manufacturing employment— and that sometime after
1990, it will become technically possible to replace all
manufacturing operatives in the automotive, electricalequipment, machinery, and fabricated-metals industries.5
Yet these theoretical estimates of the potential for auto­
mation, which reach as high as 65 to 75 percent of the
factory work force, do not reflect the rate at which the
new technology will actually be introduced to the
workplace. The pace of innovation will depend on the
relative costs of labor and computerized technologies, as
well as on broader levels of supply and demand for
goods and services. Predictions of this nature are infi­
nitely more difficult than abstract assessments of future
technological capabilities.
The automobile industry offers an interesting case
study, because it is probably the first manufacturing in­
dustry to aggressively pursue the use of robots in auto-

The use of the microprocessor to automate produc­
tion functions is epitomized by the development of the
robot. Prior to the last decade, robots were confined to
the domain of children’s stories and science fiction—
their practical and efficient application in work settings
was virtually inconceivable given the state of computer
technology. The silicon chip has thrust robots from fan­
tasy to reality, and the technology is being pursued
with remarkable speed and vigor. A number of top
computer companies are now considering entry into the
robot market, and several large U.S. corporations have
made commitments to purchase robots which are al­
ready available. The use of robots in manufacturing has
nearly quadrupled between 1979 and 1981, and most
analysts expect the sales curve to shoot higher during
the next few years.1 Most importantly, microprocessors
seem to be in a prime position for the implementation
of “learning curve pricing” strategies in which firms
lower prices in anticipation of rising volumes and de­
clining unit costs. The entry of large computer compa­
nies into the robot market could ensure this aggressive
marketing stance and trigger a sharp rise in robot sales
by 1990.
Today’s robots bear little resemblance to the cre­

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

How far . . .

11

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • The Future o f Work
mated processes. The push toward automation in the
auto industry is a response to both rising labor costs
and growing concerns for quality control and competi­
tiveness in international markets. Auto manufacturers
already find it possible to operate robots for $6 per
hour, well below the $20 per hour required for the pay
and benefits of a skilled worker in 1981.6 General Mo­
tors, aware of the growing use of robots by Japanese
auto makers, predicts that by 1987, 90 percent of all its
new capital investments will be in computer-controlled
machines.7 A 1980 survey conducted by the American
Society of Manufacturing Engineers predicted that ro­
bots will replace 20 percent of existing jobs in the auto
industry by 1985, and that 50 percent of automobile as­
sembly will be done by automated machines (including
robots) by 1995.8 Even the United Auto Workers antici­
pates a 20-percent decline in membership by 1990 and
has successfully obtained advance notice and retraining
rights from auto manufacturers in a growing effort to
gain protection from sweeping automation. Yet, few of
these estimates include any consideration of the extent
to which capital shortages confronting robot manufac­
turers and purchasers may limit the speed with which
the new technology is adopted.
Projections of the impact of microprocessors on office
employment are even more problematic, with analysts
more frequently predicting the number of office jobs
“affected” rather than eliminated by automation. The
Carnegie-Mellon study argued that 38 million of 50 mil­
lion existing white-collar jobs would eventually be af­
fected by automation, while a vice president for strate­
gic planning for Xerox Corp. offered the more
conservative guess of 20 to 30 million jobs affected by
1990.9 There is general agreement that office technolo­
gies will be changing rapidly, but little indication of
whether the result will be reduced office employment,
shifts in future employment growth, or simply higher
levels of productivity in white-collar settings.
A 1982 study prepared for the International Labour
Office found that microelectronic technology has not
caused widespread displacement of office workers, but
perhaps only because of the impact of poor economic
conditions on the rate of diffusion of the new technolo­
gy in office settings. Selected case studies of the banking
and insurance industries suggested that new job oppor­
tunities were being created, but the skills made redun­
dant by new technologies were generally inappropriate
for those emerging opportunities. The report stressed
that this trend poses special threats to employment
prospects for women, and called for additional educa­
tion and training efforts to close the “skill gap” caused
by the use of microprocessors in office jobs.10
Perhaps the greatest fears that automation will lead
to widespread unemployment have been voiced, not in
the United States, but in Western Europe. For example,
12


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

two British authors have predicted nothing short of the
collapse of work as a social institution in an era of
microprocessors:11
It is impossible to overdramatize the forthcoming crisis as it
potentially strikes a blow at the very core of industrialized
societies— the work ethic. We have based our social struc­
tures on this ethic and now it would appear that it is to be­
come redundant along with millions of other people.

In West Germany, studies of the impact of automation
on future employment levels commissioned by the Bonn
government projected that the number of jobs in 1990
will at best be marginally above 1977 levels— a pessi­
mistic view in light of anticipated population growth.
The issue of technologically induced unemployment in­
creasingly is capturing the attention of West European
leaders, and unions in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere
are responding with demands for shorter workweeks to
protect employment levels. Perennial fears that ma­
chines would replace workers have never been fulfilled,
but European futurists insist that it will be different this
time.

. . . and how fast?
While the impact of automation in the past has been
offset by the emergence of new industries and by
growth in the service sector of the economy, these ave­
nues for employment growth may indeed be less open
in an era of microprocessors. The electronics industry,
which supports this computerized technology, certainly
will experience rapid growth in the coming decade, but
a 1979 survey of the world electronics industry pre­
pared for the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development revealed that the internal use of its
own technology will keep employment growth in this
sector to a minimum.12 It is this “reproductive” poten­
tial of computerized technology— the prospect of robots
building robots— which challenges traditional patterns
of employment growth through new industries. And to
the extent that the microprocessor will affect service as
well as manufacturing industries, even the recent trend
of expanding service employment may fail to provide
jobs.
In spite of these relatively unique characteristics of
microprocessor applications, predictions of immediate
and massive job losses tend to ignore the market forces
which slow the pace of technological change. As
stressed in recent research by the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics, many factors limit the speed of diffusion of tech­
nological change and thereby mitigate possible employ­
ment implications. The size of required investment, the
rate of capacity utilization and the institutional arrange­
ments within industries all can act as “economic gover­
nors” which slow the adoption of automated technolo­
gies.13

Virtually all capital-intensive industries have a
massive investment in existing plant facilities, and they
cannot afford to squander these resources through the
wholesale replacement of working machinery. More im­
portantly, the financial constraints on capital formation
necessarily limit the rate at which new technologies are
introduced. In this context, Joseph Engleberger, presi­
dent of Unimation, Inc. (the Nation’s largest robot
manufacturer), has dismissed predictions of galloping
automation, noting that even the replacement of 5 per­
cent of all blue-collar workers in Western industrialized
nations would require investments totaling $3 billion in
each of the next 40 years.14 While microprocessor tech­
nology may be promising in its flexibility and potential
efficiency, industries must be able to afford the new ac­
quisitions in order to use them.
A less tangible but perhaps equally important force
limiting the expansion of computer technology lies in
the attitudes of both workers and consumers. While a
computer may be able to diagnose medical problems, its
bedside manner may be less than comforting. Similarly,
word processors and telephone answering systems may
alter clerical roles, but most executives will not want to
forgo the convenience offered by their personal secretar­
ies. People can hear the best music in the comfort of
their homes, but flock to concert halls to hear lesser
performances. Even on the assembly line, where robots
may be perfectly suited for production processes, the
aversion of managers and workers to such unfamiliar
companions may hamper their smooth and rapid assim­
ilation at the workplace. These psychological barriers
cannot be factored into equations of economic effi­
ciency, but they are likely to slow the pace of techno­
logical change nonetheless.

Will workers become obsolete?
The picture which emerges when the functioning of
capital markets and work organizations are considered
is one of evolutionary rather than revolutionary change.
With annual sales of robots well below 10,000 in a la­
bor force of more than 100 million, it will be some time
before computerized technologies make a major dent in
aggregate employment levels. This perspective is empha­
sized by Robotics International, a professional group
which polled 100 users and manufacturers of robots.
Based on the responses, the group concluded that ro­
bots are likely to replace 440,000 rather than a million
workers by 1990, and that all but 5 percent of the dis­

placed workers would be retrained rather than
dismissed.15 The relative lack of union concern in the
United States over aggregate job losses through auto­
mation also stems from this belief that the pace of inno­
vation has been exaggerated. William Winpisinger,
president of the International Association of Machin­
ists, has argued that the replacement of human skills
with computerized machinery will occur slowly and that
a shortage of skilled workers will remain our most
pressing manpower problem.16 No doubt, unions will
continue to seek guarantees of job security in some in­
dustries, and collective bargaining may gradually extend
to include management investment decisions.
In the more distant future, no one can be sure where
new employment growth will occur. Expectations of a
workless society still linger; as described in one forecast:17
Earning a living may no longer be a necessity but a privi­
lege; services may have to be protected from automation,
and given certain social status; leisure time activities may
have to be invented in order to give new meaning to a
mode of life that may have become economically useless for
a majority of the populace.

The literature in recent decades has been replete with
speculations on how people would cope with the loss of
meaningful work roles, or how society would allocate
and distribute wealth in the absence of strong ties be­
tween work and income.18 Even for those who reject
such forebodings, the belief in continued employment
growth admittedly contains as much faith as foresight.
Still, there seems little likelihood that the worker will
become obsolete in the foreseeable future. In one sense,
past waves of automation have created dislocations, but
it has been distributed throughout the labor force in the
form of benefits and social progress— shorter work­
weeks, more vacation time, longer training and educa­
tion, earlier retirement, child labor laws, and welfare
and unemployment payments. We can expect this trend
to continue, particularly as labor seeks assurances of
job security. Assuming a healthy rate of economic
growth during a period of innovation and increasing au­
tomation, it is also likely that levels of aggregate de­
mand will support the emergence of new goods and
services. Rising expectations alone will cause Americans
to translate productivity gains into higher standards of
living instead of less work, a pattern which has held for
centuries. The period of adjustment which lies ahead
may not be painless, but it seems that work is here to
stay.
□

FOOTNOTES

1“Robots Join the Labor Force,” B u sin e ss W eek, June 9, 1980,
p. 62; and Joann S. Lublin, “As Robot Age Arrives . . .
T h e W a ll
S tr e e t J o u rn a l, Oct. 26, 1981, p. 1.
2Otto Friedrich, “The Robot Revolution,” T im e, Dec. 8, 1980,
p. 75.


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

3Gene Bylinsky, “A New Industrial Revolution is on the Way,”
Oct. 5, 1981, pp. 106-14; and Barnaby J. Feder, “The Auto­
mated Research Lab,” T h e N e w Y o r k T im es, Oct. 27, 1981, p. D l.
4 Herman Kahn, William Brown, and Leon Martel, T h e N e x t 2 0 0
Y ea rs (New York, Morrow, 1976), pp. 8; 20-24.
F o rtu n e,

13

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • The Future o f Work
Lublin, As Robot Age Arrives . . .
and “The Speedup in Au­
tomation,” B u sin e ss W eek, Aug. 3, 1981, p. 62.

and Development, in
OECD, 1980).

6 C o n g ressio n a l R e c o r d (daily edition), Dec. 10, 1981, p. S14908.
7Harley Shaiken, “Detroit Downsizes U.S. Jobs,” T h e N a tio n , Oct
11, 1980.

M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ,

Fred Reed, The Robots Are Coming, The Robots Are Coming,”
May /June 1980, p. 32.

N e x t,

“The Speedup in Automation.”
10Diane Werneke, “Microelectronics and Office Jobs: The Impact of
the Chip on Women’s Employment,” report prepared for the Interna­
tional Labour Office, 1982, pp. 115-24.
" Clive Jenkins and Barrie Sherman,
don, Eyre Methuen, 1979), p. 182.

T h e C o lla p se o f W o rk

(Lon­

T e c h n ica l C h a n g e a n d E c o n o m ic P o lic y

Richard W. Riche, “Impact of new electronic technology,”
March 1982, p. 39.
4 Reed, “The Robots Are Coming.”
1 Lublin, “As Robot Age Arrives. . . .”

16William W. Winpisinger, “Correcting the Shortage of Skilled
Workers,” T h e A F L - C I O A m e r ic a n F ed e ra tio n ist, June 1980, p. 21.
Theodore J. Gordon and Olaf Helmer, “Report on a Long-Range
Forecasting Study,” in S o c ia l T ech n o lo g y (New York, Basic Books,
1966), pp. 81-82.
James S. Albus, P eo p le 's C a p ita lis m : T h e E c o n o m ic s o f th e R o b o t
(Md., New World Books, 1976); and Colin Hines and Gra­
ham Searle, A u to m a tic U n e m p lo y m e n t (London, Earth Resources Re­
search Ltd., 1979).
R e v o lu tio n

Mich McLean, “Sector Report: The Electronics Industry,” back­
ground study prepared for the Organization for Economic Cooperation

Smoothing the transition
Union resistance to labor-saving technical change within an
industry can often be moderated by careful management of change,
which will minimize its effect in creating unemployment. This is much
more difficult in the case of interindustry effects, since an enterprise in
one industry is unlikely to be concerned with the effects of its deci­
sions on employment in another industry. Technical change often pro­
duces losses for investors who have invested in equipment and skills
that are made obsolete. Where the investment is embodied in people
rather than in machines, the human problems it causes are more se­
vere and less tractable. Those outside the union movement cannot
condone a position that blocks technical progress, but they can ap­
prove one that uses some of the fruits of progress to give reasonable
compensation to workers for the loss of their livelihood.
— A

lbert

R ees

The Economics o f Work and Pay

(New York, Harper & Row, Publishers,
Inc., 1973), p. 137.

14

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

(Paris,

Helping labor and management
see and solve problems
A mediator can help improve an unhealthy
labor-management relationship by recognizing
the symptoms, making an accurate diagnosis,
and carefully prescribing appropriate remedies
J ohn R. Stepp , R obert P. Baker ,
and J erome T. Barrett
The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has rec­
ognized that the effective promotion of labor-manage­
ment peace requires more than just an “eleventh-hour”
appearance at the bargaining table by its mediators.
Like most other professional organizations that respond
to human emergencies, the service has learned that by
blending prevention with treatment its resources are
used more efficiently.
The preventive mediation function requires the medi­
ator to be alert to symptoms of untoward labor-man­
agement relationships, to diagnose the problems
accurately, and to prescribe effective remedies.1The na­
ture and severity of the symptoms must be recognized
and traced to their source; the remedy must be suited to
the location of the symptoms in the labor or manage­
ment hierarchy, or both; and the parties must be per­
suaded that the cure is preferable to the disease and is
clearly in their own self-interests.
This article extracts from accumulated experience
those principles on which a prescriptive model for im­
proving labor-management relationships can be built.2

John R. Stepp is Director, Office of Labor-Management Relations
Services, U.S. Department of Labor; Robert P. Baker is District Di­
rector, Western Region, San Francisco, Federai Mediation and Conciliation Service; and Jerome T. Barrett is Director and Associate
Professor of Industriai and Labor Relations, Northern Kentucky Uni­
versity, Highland Heights.


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

This empirical model is erected on the perceptions and
experiences of the authors, all of whom are or have
been Federal mediators.3

Recognizing the symptoms
Mediators are uniquely positioned to detect the dan­
ger signals emanating from a poor labor-mangement re­
lationship. When involved at the collective bargaining
table in dispute mediation, the mediator can make a
reasoned judgment as to the nature of the relationship
behind the conflict. This is done by examining the is­
sues, assessing each side’s internal relationships, and
testing and verifying these impressions through indepth
private discussions with both parties.
Numerous issues, especially noneconomic or language
items, are often symptomatic of underlying problems
which are being addressed in a circuitous manner.
When this is the case, a contractual agreement may be
no more than a bandage on a festering wound. The un­
derlying problems have neither been identified nor ad­
dressed and certainly have not been resolved.
Every mediator, at one time or another, has entered a
negotiation shortly before a strike deadline, only to be
confronted with many unresolved issues. In private dis­
cussions with the moving party, usually the union com­
mittee, the mediator learns that these issues are an
attempt to send the other party “a message.” The mes­
sage is that there is enormous dissatisfaction with “busi15

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Helping Labor and Management Solve Problems
ness as usual” on the shop floor and that problems are
not getting resolved. Resentment is bubbling over onto
the bargaining table in the form of contract issues. The
bargaining table is an ill-equipped forum for the effec­
tive resolution of these underlying problems. During
crisis negotiations it is very difficult to negotiate an im­
provement in attitudes or a better labor-management re­
lationship.
Faced with a rapidly approaching deadline, the best
the mediator can hope for is that some issues can be re­
solved through catharsis and others quietly dropped be­
cause they are not strike-related. If a tentative
agreement is reached, the mediator’s relief may be brief
because the membership’s frustrations may surface
again in their refusing to ratify the agreement. Even
with ratification, there remains a strong suspicion that
all is not well and that the administration of this con­
tract and the negotiation of the next are likely to be
fraught with difficulty. This perception is often shared
by negotiators, too.
The mediator may also become aware of a deteriorat­
ing labor-management relationship through ways other
than his or her personal involvement in contract negoti­
ations. Through such professional and community orga­
nizations as the Industrial Relations Research
Association, the mediator can learn of problems. Also,
in monitoring dispute cases, he or she has daily contact
with representatives of labor and management; through
casual conversation, there is much opportunity to learn
of labor relations problems in a particular plant or loca­
tion.
Similarly, relationships plagued by frequent, long, or
bitter strikes; wildcat strikes; high grievance levels; nu­
merous arbitrations; or other obvious signs such as job
losses in a declining business enterprise, are symptoms
which will catch the mediator’s attention. Once alerted,
he or she can seek confirmation from the labor and
management representatives at the site.
Another means of mediator awareness is through
communiqués from the affected parties. Because the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is annually
involved in more than 1,000 technical assistance en­
deavors, the awareness of the availability of this service
among labor-management practitioners assures numer­
ous requests. When contacted, the mediator will begin
exploratory meetings with the parties to determine the
nature, location in the organization, and extent of the
problems.

Diagnosing the problem
Having detected danger signals, the mediator must
guide both parties through a joint analysis of the prob­
lems in order to determine their seriousness and exact
location. Until this diagnosis is completed, no remedy
can be prescribed. The character of a labor-management
16

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

relationship may be viewed along a simple continuum
consisting of three benchmarks: conflict, detente, and ac­
commodation.4
An employer at the conflict end of the continuum
never really accepts the union: “ . . . he does not yield
to the union even a narrow, restricted scope until he lit­
erally has to; and he looks for the first opportunity to
get rid of the intruder. His acceptance of joint dealings
is an ‘imposed acceptance,’ imposed by law and by
union power.” 5
Under detente, the midpoint of the continuum, each
side accepts the other’s institutional legitimacy but exer­
cises its relative strength to obtain the best deal. Each
adopts a “win some, lose some” approach. They fight,
but the conflict is held within accepted limits; there is a
conscious effort to avoid pain and serious injury to one
another. Parties at the accommodation end of this scale
strive to reduce the level of contention. When differ­
ences do occur, they are processed with minimum emo­
tion through agreed-upon procedures with equity being
a realistic and desired goal for both. “They have proved
themselves willing to compromise whenever possible, to
conciliate whenever necessary, and to tolerate at all
times.”6
The three benchmarks can be used by the mediator
to determine the severity and types of problems the
parties have. Relationships characterized by conflict will
have the most serious problems, reflecting distrust, hos­
tility, and suspicion; those characterized by accommoda­
tion will have the least severe problems, arising from
human failures in communications, consistency, and
concern for the points of view of others.
The next segment of the model directs the mediator’s
diagnosis to a determination of the location of the prob­
lem within the respective organization. One inhibitor to
accurate diagnosis is the diffusion of authority in com­
plex, multilayered, and interdependent labor-manage­
ment organizational structures. A systematic exam­
ination of the various intraorganizational dimensions
and their interrelationships is needed to locate and ad­
dress the source of the problem. Because the structures
of most labor organizations are reactive to and thus
closely parallel the management structure to which they
relate, more attention will be given to the structure of
management in labor relations matters.
Management can generally be regarded as conducting
labor relations on three levels. (On occasion these levels
may be extended or compressed.) The top level is one of
decisionmaking, usually personified by either a vice
president of labor relations or a labor relations director.
This level formulates, delivers, and implements corpo­
rate policy on its own initiative or as an operating arm
of higher-level management policymakers. The union
counterpart of this level is usually an international rep­
resentative.

The mid-level can be characterized as one of imple­
mentation for labor relations decisions and policies.
Within management, this level would generally be
staffed by either a plant manager or a department head
who formulates very little policy but has, instead, the
important responsibility of supervising and coordinating
the implementation of policies established at the top
level. Business agent or local president are usually the
titles of union officials at this level.
The lowest management level is populated by firstline supervisors. They face the difficult task of confront­
ing the real world armed only with the policies supplied
and precedents established. Here are discovered both
the flaws and strengths of overall policy. The union
counterpart at this level is the steward.
A thorough examination of the parties’ relationship
requires a look at the relationships between levels with­
in each structure, as well as across the table, which
symbolizes the classic area of contention. Given three
existing levels of labor-management interaction within a
bargaining unit, each level having 1 of 3 possible char­
acters, a diagnosis may theoretically yield 27 possibili­
ties.7
In this article, we will not attempt to deal with 27
different variations, several of which have only a theo­
retical existence and are not plausible outcomes. For ex­
ample, this would be true when accommodation existed
at the supervisor/steward level, but at all higher levels
the parties were locked in conflict. Accommodation
could not realistically exist between foreman and stew­
ard, except momentarily, if conflict were the prevalent
mode between plant manager and business agent. Two
corporals in opposing armies cannot wage peace while
their generals are waging war, lest they risk dismissal
for treasonous behavior.8 More importantly, to examine
all 27 possibilities would emphasize detail over the more
generic and fundamental concepts.

Prescribing a remedy
Having diagnosed the relationship and the possible
location of the problem, the model’s remaining segment
concerns the prescribing of remedies. Labor-manage­
ment relations improvement remedies are few— there
are presently three primary items: Relationships by Ob­
jectives programs, labor-management committees, and
joint training programs. Variations exist of each, espe­
cially the latter two.
Relationship by objectives. In the Relationships by Ob­
jectives program, mediators provide the expertise for
guiding labor and management toward basic changes in
their relationship.9 Both are brought together by media­
tors to analyze their problems, to decide what their
common objectives should be, and to reach agreement
on goal implementation. Since the program was intro­

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

duced by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Ser­
vice ( f m c s ) in 1975, 100 Relationships by Objectives
projects have been completed in some of the most diffi­
cult labor relations situations in American industry.
Currently, the program is being used almost exclu­
sively in situations following protracted strikes or where
there are volatile labor-management histories. The crite­
ria established by the FMCS as a prerequisite for con­
ducting such programs are that both parties must be
sufficiently concerned about their divisive relationship
and committed at all levels to do something about it. In
return, the FMCS commits itself to assist the parties in
rebuilding their relationship and thus to reduce the
prospects of strikes in subsequent negotiations. (A Rela­
tionships by Objectives program may result in the
parties identifying a need for a labor-management com­
mittee or for training.)
Labor-management committees. In recent years, more
than 300 labor-management committees have been
formed annually by employers and unions with the as­
sistance of FMCS mediators. The structure and goals of
labor-management committees vary greatly, but most
share the essential need for representatives of labor and
management to join together and talk about mutual
problems. These committees complement the traditional
collective bargaining relationship. They are an implicit
recognition that the parties have much in common and
that their relationship need not be totally adversarial.
Through effective committees, joint problem-solving can
take place which strengthens mutual credibility and
tends to improve relationships.
Joint training programs. Successful labor-management
relations are less a function of the quality of negotia­
tions than of the day-to-day implementation and admin­
istration of the labor agreement. The majority of this
work is done by the first-line supervisor and the union
steward. If their performance is below standard, rela­
tions suffer. Consequently, most of FMCS’ preventive ac­
tivities have been directed toward this group.
Supervisor-steward training does have considerable
value in the development of a work atmosphere which
is conducive to labor peace and the quick and effective
resolution of labor-related problems. Training sessions,
which use a variety of instructional techniques and fo­
cus on subjects such as communications, leadership,
and grievance handling, are a vehicle whereby adversar­
ies can set aside their stereotyped images and view one
another in a nonthreatening light, thus seeing, perhaps
for the first time, their commonalities. The FMCS con­
ducts 400 to 500 such joint training programs annually.
These training programs are tailored to the perceived
needs of the supervisor-steward audience, and are struc­
tured to encourage class participation. Using a combi17

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Helping Labor and Management Solve Problems
nation of lecture, audio-visual materials, and workbooks
for the participants, the mediator leads discussions into
such areas as:
•
•
•
•

understanding the supervisor-steward relationship;
making the supervisor-steward relationship work;
providing effective leadership; and
handling problem situations.

These programs are not intended to provide instant
solutions to complex problems. They are designed to
enable the participant, working with others in the group
and under the guidance of a mediator, to come up with
his/her own insights which, it is hoped, will be wisely
applied over time to improve their relations.

Setting priorities
In selecting a remedy, order is important. One must
focus first at the highest level in need of attention.
Higher-order problems must be resolved or neutralized
before those of a lower level are addressed.
If the labor-management problems are severe, and are
located in the top or middle levels of the respective or­
ganizations, then the Relationships by Objective pro­
gram should be considered as a possible remedy.
Through the program, the parties have an opportunity
to recast their relationship or to start anew, provided
there is mutual acknowledgment of serious problems
impairing the relationship, and genuine commitment to
change.
Once the program has been successfully applied, de­
tente, and rarely, accommodation, would be expected in
lieu of conflict. Assuming the most likely, detente, the
parties are now in a position to build together a better
relationship. To assure further positive momentum and
continued improvement, a labor-management committee
is usually needed.
If nurtured and sustained, labor-management commit­
tees have demonstrated their capability for improving
labor relations. The most visible level of improvement is
likely to be between the top plant management and the
business agent or local union president. If the commit­
tee is really working, it will also affect the plant floor.
Consequently, through effective applications of such
committees, all mid-level outcomes have the potential of
being elevated to the accommodation mode.
In many cases involving labor-management commit­
tees, a problem that is often identified as an impediment
to a good relationship is the inability of stewards or su­
pervisors, or both, to dispose of grievances successfully.
This can generally be attributed to some combination of
three factors: (1) an unwillingness to reach an agree­
m ent— a preference for sustaining the conflict, (2) the
absence of perceived authority to settle the problem, or
(3) the lack of knowledge or technical ability to handle
grievances. Each of these causes can be successfully
18


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

tackled by the labor-management committee. The first
two can be addressed through separate consultations
within each party, so that agents at the lower level real­
ize their superiors are expecting most problems to be re­
solved at that level.
If the remaining problem is simply a technical inabili­
ty to meet labor relations responsibilities, the most ef­
fective antidote is training. Through joint training of
supervisors and stewards, the groundwork may be laid
for a better relationship. Effective joint training usually
emphasizes the building of problem-solving and inter­
personal skills, and better understanding of respective
roles and the benefits of working together.
Equipped with an improved understanding of their
roles and the prerequisite skills for doing their jobs, and
encouraged by support from the top and middle levels,
discord and discontentment at the lower level can be
converted to accommodation.

Third party audits
The model that we have evolved consists of: three or­
ganizational levels within labor and management; three
characterizations of the relationship which determine
the type and severity of the problem; and three remedial
approaches. However, it has not been suggested in any
detail how to analyze a labor-management problem
when applying the model; rather we have spoken of the
mediator recognizing danger signals and observing is­
sues and relationships, all of which implies an intuitive,
ill-defined, and artistic process. This method usually
provides a sufficiently accurate diagnosis in cases in
which the mediator knows the parties well, or the prob­
lems are relatively obvious, or both; but in other situa­
tions a more rigorous approach is needed to apply the
model. For this purpose, we will describe a diagnostic
process used in organizational development and human
resources development (training needs assessment).10
Discussion will center on joint training at the
supervisor/steward level, but with minor modifications,
the process could be used at other levels or when other
remedies are proposed.
The diagnostic procedure, developed by Geary
Rummler, focuses on a “human performance” audit."
For him, human performance is composed of: (1) the
job situation or occasion to perform; (2) the performer;
(3) the behavior (action or decisions) that is to occur;
and (4) the consequences of that behavior to the per­
former.12The advantage of using a performance audit is
that it forces the specific source of the undesirable be­
havior to be identified.
A second feature of Rummler’s audit is the determi­
nation of the economic consequence of poor
performance. In other words, having determined by the
audit model that undesirable performance is a result of
a lack of feedback to a supervisor about his or her

work, for example, the question is asked: does it really
make any difference or enough difference to require
change? The result of this questioning will be to consid­
er first those performance problems which are most eco­
nomically important to the organization.
A very sophisticated or extremely simple audit can be
used, depending upon the amount of time available, the
complexity of the organization, and the functions being
audited. This audit of performance can be used on all
three levels of labor relations concurrently, but we will
apply it only to the lower level.
The basic components of the Rummler approach can
be retained in a streamlined audit by using this series of
questions to identify sources of the problems and to an­
alyze them:
I.

General lead-in questions
1. How do you know you have a problem?
2. How will you know when the problem is solved?
3. How long has this been a problem?
4. How general is the problem?

II.

Questions on the job
1. What is the desired performance?
2. What are the job standards?
3. Who says that these are the standards?
4. Does everybody agree on these standards?

III. Questions on the performer
1. What are the specific differences between actual and
expected performance?
2. Has anyone ever performed as expected?
3. Who?
4. When?
5. How many individuals are now performing below
standard?
IV. Questions on behavior
1. Did the steward or first-line supervisor ever perform
properly?
2. Could they perform properly if their lives depended
upon it?
3. If they could perform properly, would they?
V.

'V

Questions on the consequences of performance
1. Does the steward or first-line supervisor whose perfor­
mance is below standard know:
a. What is expected of him or her?
b. What he or she is not performing correctly and
exactly how far he or she is from expected per­
formance?
c. How to perform correctly?
d. When to perform?

VI. Questions on feedback
1. What positive or negative consequences, or both, of
performing correctly or incorrectly can the first-line
supervisor or steward expect from:
a. Higher ranking officials within the company or or­
ganization?
b. Subordinates?
c. Associates at the same level?
VII. Questions on economic costs and priorities
1. What does it cost the employer or union not to reme­

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

dy the performance problem?
2. What is the priority on remedying any performance
problem?
A few examples will illustrate how these questions
produce relevant information on performance and eco­
nomic priorities:

• Under II, questions 1, 2, and 3 could lead one to discover
that the union policy is unclear on whether a steward is
expected to anticipate and solve problems before they be­
come formal grievances.
• Under III, question 5 could disclose that first-line supervi­
sors in only 2 departments in 20 have performance
problems.
• Under IV, questions 2 and 3 could reveal that motivation
and interest are the source of the performance problem, not
knowledge or skill.
• Under V, question 1 could divulge that the first-line super­
visor is aware of only one-third of the tasks expected of
him or her.
• Under VI, question 1 might reveal that the steward gets no
positive feedback on his or her performance.
• Under VII, question 1 might show that the failure to prop­
erly investigate a grievance, prior to committing it to writ­
ing, doubled the length of time required to process it
through the first two steps of the grievance procedure.
When the audit is completed, the mediator will have
a complete list of the performance problems in the area
under study, which will include an identification of the
sources of the problems, and economic priorities based
on the cost of the problem to the organization.
Following an analysis of this list, the mediator could
act as an adviser to labor and management in determin­
ing the appropriate remedy. Some problems are more
susceptible to a training solution, others to a labormanagement committee or a Relationships by Objec­
tives program, and some will require structural and pol­
icy changes. In each instance, the mediator will work
with the parties to resolve the performance problem and
improve their relationship.

Conclusions
Before any labor-management relationship can be im­
proved, the parties to that relationship must both be
dissatisfied with the status quo and have before them
some blueprint which, if followed, has a reasonable
chance of succeeding.13 14 In many cases, labor-manage­
ment relationships are operating at a suboptimal level.
This can happen for many reasons; for example, one or
both sides prefer it that way, they are not prepared to
incur the political or economic costs they attach to im­
provement, they do not know how to gain the necessary
credibility to move jointly forward, or they simply do
not know what to do.
19

M O N T H L Y LA BO R REV IEW September 1982 • Helping Labor and Management Solve Problems
Often a trusted third party can diplom atically allow
the parties to focus on shortcom ings in a relationship,
by minimizing political and economic costs of change,

prom oting trust and cooperation, and assisting both
sides in developing a roadm ap which, if followed,
should lead to a positive, constructive relationship.
□

--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------Section 203 (A) of the Taft-Hartley Act states: “It shall be the
duty of the Service, in order to prevent or minimize interruptions, of
the free flow of commerce growing out of labor disputes, to assist
parties to labor disputes in industries affecting commerce to settle
such disputes through conciliation and mediation.”
During the discussion on the floor of the Senate of Bill S.1126 (sub­
sequently compromised to become the Taft-Hartley Law), Senator Ir­
ving Ives of New York made the statement: “A great lack at the
present moment in the field of mediation is measures by which we
may prevent industrial strife as well as cure it after it has begun.
That, of course, is contemplated under the new title.” ( C o n g ressio n a l
R e p o r t, p. 4,590, 5-6-47.)
: It is interesting to note that the Federal Mediation and Concilia­
tion Service Preventive Mediation function started during the same
period (late 1940’s) as the early applications of contemporary behav­
ioral science to organization and management. But there is little evi­
dence that the service benefited in any systematic way from
developments within behavioral science until the 1970's. The introduc­
tion of the Relationships by Objectives program in 1975 (see discus­
sion on p. 17 of this article) was influenced by the work of Blake and
Mouton, particularly Robert R. Blake, Herbert A. Shepard, and Jane
S. Mouton, M a n a g in g I n te rg r o u p C o n flict in I n d u s tr y (Houston, Gulf
Publishing Co., 1964), p. 210; and Robert R. Blake, Jane S. Mouton,
and Richard L. Sloma, “The Union-Management Intergroup Labora­
tory: Strategy for Resolving Intergroup Conflict,” in Warner Burk
and Harvey A. Hornatein, eds., T h e S o c ia l T ech n o lo g y o f O rg a n iza tio n
D e v e lo p m e n t (Fairfax, Va., NTL Learning Resources Corporation,
1972), pp. 101-26.
This lack of behavioral science influence on preventive mediation
during these 30 years is understandable because Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Service mediators are pragmatic individuals caught
up in practicing their art; they are not inclined to seek help or guid­
ance from theorists and academics. Moreover, even the behavioral sci­
entist makes limited claims for the application of his work to the
practitioner. See George Strauss and others, eds., O r g a n iz a tio n a l B e ­
h a vio r: R es e a rc h a n d Issu e s (Madison, Wis„ Industrial Relations Re­
search Association Series, 1974), p. 2, which quotes with approval
Harold L. Wilensky, writing on the same subject in 1957: “Not every­
thing done by the social scientist can or should help the practitioner . . . .
the social scientist s job is basically different from the executive’s job
. . . . much of what he comes up with is of limited use to the practi­
tioner.”
Writing 5 years later on the question, “Can Social Psychology Con­
tribute to Industrial Relations?” Strauss said, “From 1960 on,
psychological contributions to industrial relations were almost
nonexistent . . . ” See Geoffrey M. Stephenson and Christopher J.
Brotherton, eds., I n d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s : A S o c ia l P s y c h o lo g ic a l A p p ro a c h
(Chicheston, England, John Wiley & Sons, 1979), p. 371.
' The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Federal
Mediation and Conciliaton Service.
A similar continuum of labor-management relations consisting of
armed truce, working harmony, and union-management cooperation
was proposed in Frederick H. Harbison and John R. Coleman, G o a ls
a n d S tr a te g y in C o lle ctive B a rg a in in g (New York, Harper & Brothers,
Publishers, 1951), p. 19.
Another more complex model for analyzing labor-management rela­
tions is described in Leon Meggison and C. Ray Gullett, “A Predic­
tive Model of Union-Management Conflict,” P e rso n n e l J o u rn a l, June
1970, pp. 495-503.
See Benjamin M. Selekman, Sylvia K. Selekman, and Stephen H.

20


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

Fuller, P r o b le m s
Co., 1950), p. 7.

in L a b o r R e la tio n s

(New York, McGraw-Hill Book

6 “Problems,” p. 8.
D = LG where D is the number of diagnostic outcomes, L is the
number of levels in the organization (3), and G is the number of pos­
sible characterizations of the relationship between the parties (3).
Hence, D = 33 or 27.
However, it should be noted that a very bad relationship (conflict)
may exist at a lower level even though there is a very good one at the
next higher level (accommodation). Two generals can be pursuing
peace while the battle rages.
For more background on Relationships by Objectives program,
see John J. Popular, “Labor-Management Relations: U.S. Mediators
Try to Build Common Objectives,” W o rld o f W o rk R e p o r t I, Septem­
ber 1976, pp. 1-3; Thomas A. Kochan, C o lle ctive B a rg a in in g a n d I n ­
d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s { Homewood, 111., Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1980); and
Anthony V. Sinicropi, David A. Gray, and Paula Ann Hughes, E v a l­
u a tio n o f th e F e d e r a l M e d ia tio n a n d C o n c ilia tio n S e rvic e 's T e c h n ica l A s ­
s ista n c e P r o g r a m in L a b o r -M a n a g e m e n t R e la tio n s h ip s b y O b je ctive s
(R B O ), unpublished, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service,

1978.
In the field or in organizational developments there are a number
of diagnostic processes for searching out and assessing organizational
problems. See for example: Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton,
C o rp o r a te E x c e lle n c e D ia g n o sis: T h e P h a se 6 I n s tr u m e n t (Austin, Tex.,
Scientific Methods, 1968); J. Richard Hackman and Greg R. Oldhan,
“Development of the Job Diagnosis Survey,” J o u r n a l o f A p p lie d P s y ­
c h o lo g y, 1975, vol. 60, pp. 159-70; Ralph H. Kilmann and Kenneth
W. Thomas, “Four Perspectives on Conflict Management: An Attributional Framework for Organizing Descriptive and Normative Theo­
ry,” A c a d e m y o f M a n a g e m e n t R e v ie w , 1978; vol. 3, pp. 59-68; John P.
Kotter, O rg a n iza tio n D y n a m ic s : D ia g n o sis a n d In te rv e n tio n (Reading,
Mass., Addison-Wesley, 1978); Paul R. Lawrence and Jay W. Lorsch,
D e v e lo p in g O rg a n iza tio n s: D ia g n o sis a n d A c tio n (Reading, Mass., Addi­
son-Wesley, 1969); Harry Levinson, O r g a n iz a tio n a l D ia g n o sis (Cam­
bridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1972); and Rensis Likert,
T h e H u m a n O rg a n iza tio n : I ts M a n a g e m e n t a n d V a lu e (New York,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967).
" Geary A. Rummler, “The Performance Audit,” in Robert L.
Craig, ed„ T ra in in g a n d D e v e lo p m e n t H a n d b o o k (New York,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976, 2d ed.).
1 Rummler, “The Performance Audit.”
Dissatisfaction with the status quo is found in organizational de­
velopment efforts: “The fundamental reason some crisis or pressure
seems to be so important in setting the stage for change is that it cre­
ates a state of readiness and motivation to change. Kurt Lewin called
this the ‘unfreezing stage’ at which old beliefs, values, and behaviors
lose strength in the face of data that disconfirm the manager’s (union­
ist’s) view of his (their) organization’s effectiveness.” Michael Beer,
O rg a n iza tio n C h a n g e a n d D e v e lo p m e n t: A S y s te m s V iew (Santa Monica,
Calif., Goodyear Publishing Co., 1980), p. 48.
4
The need for a plan in order to facilitate change is also found in
the Organizational Development literature: “Successful change efforts
require new models for looking at organizational problems and/or
new ideas for structuring or managing the organization. New models
may come in the form of a new organizational design, accounting sys­
tem, planning systems, or personnel policy.” (See Beer, “Organiza­
tional Change,” p. 50.)

Millwork industry shows
slow growth in productivity
During 1958-80 , output per hour
advanced at half the rate of growth for
all manufacturing industries,
reflecting unstable demand
and low capital investment
J a c k V e ig l e a n d H orst B r a n d

Labor productivity in the millwork industry rose at an
average annual rate of 1.4 percent from 1958 to 1980,1a
modest advance when compared with total manufactur­
ing. Over this period, output in millwork increased at a
rate of 2.7 percent annually and employee hours at 1.3
percent. The productivity rise partly reflected low
growth in capital investment, particularly over the past
decade, and evidently slow diffusion of modernized pro­
duction technologies. These factors, combined with in­
stability in demand for the industry’s products, retarded
productivity. Industry demand depends mostly upon
residential construction, where fluctuations have been
frequent and substantial.
The overall rate of increase in the productivity of the
millwork industry reflects basically two periods in each
of which the productivity movements differed signifi­
cantly. Between 1958 and 1972, productivity rose at an
average annual rate of 2.6 percent, rising 42 percent by
1972, to a high for the period (107.2 on a 1977=100
basis). However, from 1972 to 1980, productivity de­
clined at a rate of 1.4 percent a year, or by 13 percent.
By contrast, productivity in the private nonfarm busi­
ness economy continued to advance, although at a
slower rate than earlier. The following tabulation shows
the pertinent comparisons (average annual rates, in per­
cent):
1958-80 1958-72 1972-80
Millwork industry ...............
Private nonfarm business . . .
M anufacturing......................

1.4

2.6

1.8
2.8

2.1
3.1

-1.4
0.9

1.8

Jack Veigle and Horst Brand are economists in the Division of Indus­
try Productivity Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

Year-to-year changes in millwork productivity were
quite volatile, ranging from a 12-percent rise (in 1967)
to a 9-percent drop (in 1974). Productivity declined in 8
of the 22 years surveyed. In such years, output either
fell more than employee hours or rose less. In 10 of the
years of rising productivity, output gains exceeded em­
ployee hour increases. But in the other years of rising
productivity, productivity improvements were associated
with output declines being smaller than employee hour
reductions.

Output and demand
The millwork industry manufactures wood window
units, including sashes; window frames; doors and door
frames; moldings; and stairs. In 1977, one-quarter of
the industry’s output consisted of window units and re­
lated items; and close to two-fifths of doors, including
garage doors. Moldings represented another fifth of out­
put. Approximately three-fourths of the industry’s out­
put was used in residential housing, including additions
and alterations; small amounts of output were used in
commercial and educational buildings, prefabricated
wooden buildings, and in trailers and other transporta­
tion equipment. Millwork output is thus linked mainly
to residential construction markets.
Output of millwork products rose at an average an­
nual rate of 2.7 percent between 1958 and 1980, about
in line with the trend in the deflated value of new resi­
dential housing units plus additions and alterations.
Output movements during the period were characterized
by differences in average annual rates of change between
1958-72 and 1972-80, which were similar to the varia­
tions in productivity movements noted above. During
21

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Productivity in Millwork Industry
1958-72, output rose 3.6 percent annually, in 1972-80
it declined 0.9 percent a year. Millwork output fluctuat­
ed generally less on a year-to-year basis than residential
building activity. The lesser amplitude of millwork out­
put fluctuations may partially relate to inventorying
practices of jobbers through whom much of industry
sales are conducted.
Millwork output was strengthened, particularly dur­
ing the 1960’s, by increases in the square foot area of
single-unit housing— indicating more rooms as well as
larger room size, hence more doors, windows, and
moldings. During the study period, square foot area per
housing unit rose more than 20 percent.2 While the
number of 1 to 3 room housing units being added to
the housing stock declined between the 1960’s and
1970’s, additions to 4- and 6-room units grew strongly;
the increment in 5-room units remained roughly the
same. Units with 7 rooms or more recorded particularly
strong increases during the 1970’s. However, multi-unit
dwellings gained in relative importance during the early
and mid-1970’s, when apartment construction rose to
37 percent of all private housing starts, up from 33 per­
cent in the 1960’s. Because only a relatively small pro­
portion of millwork output is used in such construction,
the sharp increase in multi-unit starts probably offset
somewhat the demand from single-unit residential
starts. (For example, more than 80 percent of window
units installed in apartment buildings are of aluminum,

Table 1.

as against 50 percent for 1- and 2-unit residences.)3
There were other factors pertaining to housing which
sustained millwork output during most of the period
studied. For example, the number of homes built with
two stories or more, 17 percent of total starts in 1964,
rose to 28 percent in 1978, indicating a greater demand
for stairs, moldings, and other millwork items. The pro­
portion of homes built with 1- and 2-car garages grew
from 63 percent in 1963 to 74 percent in the late 1970’s
— spurring the demand for garage doors, an estimated
85 percent of which are made of wood.4
The demand for window units has of course fluctuat­
ed with housing starts. On balance, it rose substantially
during the 1960’s, and fell off somewhat in the 1970’s.
Demand in the 1970’s was also crimped by a decline in
the number of windows per dwelling unit, partially as­
sociated perhaps with builders’ efforts to make homes
more energy efficient; and by competition from alumi­
num and steel windows. Currently, the millwork indus­
try accounts for one-third of all residential window
installations, aluminum and, to a small extent, steel,
making up the other two-thirds. Except for 2 years in
the mid-1970’s, when aluminum window prices rose rel­
ative to wooden ones, the industry’s share of the win­
dow market has steadily declined from roughly one-half
of the total in the late 1950’s.5
Growth in the industry’s output of doors has also
been slowed by competitive materials. The industry

Productivity and related indexes for millwork industry, 1958-80

[1977 = 100]
Output per hour
Year

Employee hours

All
employees

Production
workers

Nonproduction
workers

Output

1958 ........................
1959 ........................
1960 ........................

75.6
71.7
73.2

77.0
72.4
74.8

70.7
69.7
67.7

58.5
61.2
55.7

1961
1962
1963
1964
1965

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

76.9
78.1
86.0
86.0
85.8

78.1
78.8
86.0
85.9
86.1

72.6
76.3
86.5
87.2
85.2

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

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

82.7
92.6
93.9
96.3
95.9

84.0
93.3
93.7
96.6
97.6

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975

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

95.9
107.2
102.3
92.7
100.2

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

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

99.1
100.0
91.5
93.9
93.7

All
employees

Production
workers

Nonproduction
workers

77.4
85.3
76.1

76.0
84.5
74.5

82 8
87 8
82.3

56.6
59.7
68.1
69.2
70.2

73.6
76.4
79.2
80.5
81.8

72.5
75.8
79.2
80.6
81.5

78 0
78 2
78 7
79 4
82.4

78.4
90.1
96.0
95.7
89.7

66.6
72.6
78.7
80.4
77.1

80.5
78.4
83.8
83.5
80.4

79.3
77.8
84.0
83.2
79.0

84 9
80 6
82 0
84 0
86.0

95.3
104.5
101.6
94.4
102.6

99.3
121.6
106.7
85.5
90.9

84.0
103.6
104.7
84.6
84.1

87.6
96.6
102.3
91.3
83.9

88.1
99.1
103.1
89.6
82.0

84 6
85 2
98 1
99 0
92.5

99.6
100.0
91.5
95.2
97.2

97.3
100.0
92.0
88.2
80.4

92.5
100.0
96.2
96.2
87.1

93.3
100.0
105.1
102.5
93.0

92.9
100.0
105.1
101.1
89.6

95 1
100.0
104.6
109 2
108.4

13
2.2

14
3.6

Average annual rates of change (in percent)

1958-80 ..................
1975-80 ..................

Digitized22
for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1.4
-1.7

1.4
-1.4

1.3
-2.8

2.7
0.7

1.3
2.4

accounted for close to three-fifths (by value) of all doors
installed in new residential dwelling units in 1977, a
slight decrease from earlier years.
Inroads into millwork’s share of residential door in­
stallations have come chiefly from the wider use of steel
for front and other exterior doors. In 1979, wood flush
and panel doors accounted for 44 percent of all front
door installations, compared with 68 percent in 1974
(the earliest year for which data are available). Dis­
placement of wood by steel was similarly marked in the
case of other exterior doors.6These tendencies have been
somewhat offset by a slight but steady rise in recent
years in the number of doors installed per dwelling.7
Whether industry output benefited from a continued
shift from onsite carpentry of millwork items to factory
production over the period cannot be readily deter­
mined. According to a BLS survey conducted in 1969,
preassembled windows were installed in 78 percent of
surveyed single-family houses built that year; and in
1968, prehung doors in 64 percent, and prefabricated
staircase units in 25 percent.8 No other such survey is
available for the period examined here.
Window sashes and doors have been manufactured
for more than a century, but most work was done
onsite. Large-scale offsite production did not get under­
way until the 1930’s and early 1940’s, when a shift from
onsite carpentry of millwork occurred.9 Mass production
of millwork was subsequently spurred by the large post­
war demand for residential housing. Such product inno­
vations as prehung doors (a door hinged on its frame,
and delivered ready to be placed in the openings of the
unit under construction) furthered the trend to factory
production of items heretofore carpentered or finished
at the site.10 But no definitive data are available indicat­
ing the extent to which these developments raised the
output of the millwork industry.

Employment increases moderately
Employment in the millwork industry, currently
numbering 74,000 persons, rose at an average annual
rate of 1.5 percent between 1958 and 1980. It peaked in
1978, when it stood 39 percent above the 1958 level. In
general, it rose slightly during most of the 1960’s, and
more strongly in the early 1970’s. Subsequent upswings
and downswings were more marked than in earlier peri­
ods, reflecting similarly pronounced swings in the indus­
try’s output. Employee hours generally paralleled the
trend in employment, rising at an average annual rate
of 1.3 percent over the period. Average annual hours
per employee in the millwork industry did not, on bal­
ance, change significantly between 1958 and 1972, and
declined slightly between 1972 and 1980. Year-to-year
changes were often larger for production worker em­
ployment than for production worker hours. The work­
week per production worker averaged slightly less after
1972 (39.3 hours) than before (40.1 hours) indicating a

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

drop in overtime. Generally, overtime averaged consid­
erably less than for durables manufacturing as a whole.11
Differences in trend between production and
nonproduction worker hours were not significant. But
short-term fluctuations were much greater for produc­
tion than for nonproduction worker employment and
hours. The proportion of nonproduction workers, 18
percent in 1977, did not change materially over the
study period, except for years of flagging industry out­
put, when production worker employment weakened.
Industry employment evidences considerably higher
turnover of production workers than durables manufac­
turing. In 1978, accessions (mostly new hires) in
millwork, at 5.5 per 100 workers, were nearly two-fifths
again as high as for all durables manufacturing; separa­
tions (mostly quits) were more than three-fifths again as
high. High turnover rates mean a loss of trained and
experienced workers12 and more break-in periods re­
quired for newly hired workers, which may contribute
to retarding productivity.

Technological developments
Millwork essentially consists of the sawing, shaping,
planing, and sanding of wood to specified dimensions.
The unfabricated lumber is delivered to the plant in the
form of uniformly sized and quality-graded boards.
Large-scale gluing operations are performed as part of
the production process. Glazing is a normal part of the
manufacture of windows and windowed doors.
Millwork is highly mechanized; virtually all work
that transforms the lumber is done by machines. In
some plants, feeding and tailing (the removal of the
workpiece from the machine) are carried out manually,
partly because of apprehension that a mechanized pro­
cess would damage sensitive woods.
The basic technology used in millwork plants dates
from the 1930’s and 1940’s when, as noted, large-scale
production was first introduced in the industry. Factory
production of millwork items antedates the 1930’s, but
large-scale operations were held back by the lack of wa­
terproof, quick-curing adhesives. Moreover, millwork
firms, at the time serving mostly local and regional
markets, were slow in standardizing their product, ham­
pering adoption by developers of housing projects.
These obstacles began to be overcome with the innova­
tion of synthetic resin adhesives, yielding waterproof
bond.13 Standardization progressed. Precision machinery
became more widely available, probably accelerating the
shift from onsite carpentry to the factory.14These devel­
opments also helped broaden the product lines of
millwork firms. For example, complete double-hung
windows mounted in prefabricated, weather-stripped
frames, ready for installation at the construction site,
were introduced in the 1940’s and, subsequently,
prehung doors.
Although the industry’s basic machinery and equip23

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Productivity in Millwork Industry
ment reflect woodworking technologies that have
existed for many decades, there are indications that
much of this equipment is less than 20 years old, and
that sizable proportions are 10 years old or less.15Thus,
three-fifths of the finger jointing machinery and of auto­
matic mortisers appear to be in the lower age group,
and as much as three-quarters of many types of sawing
machinery. Fifty percent of door sizers, and much of
the glue room equipment— including clamps and
clamping machines, glue guns and pumps, and spread­
ers and presses— are of comparatively recent date, as is
finishing equipment (for example, hot air ovens). The
same holds for such general plant equipment as air con­
ditioners, dust collectors, and computers. However, it
cannot be determined from the available data whether
the more recently installed— therefore, more up-to-date
— equipment is well diffused throughout the industry. It
is believed that diffusion is slow, partly because of the
fragmentation of the industry into many firms.
A trend toward automated systems in the industry
seems to be underway.16 This trend is furthered by the
declining costs of numerical controls, which more and
more entail one-station systems featuring microcompu­
ters.17 That trend also involves computer-controlled ma­
terial handling systems, robotized transfer and pallet­
izing, and carousels interfacing with conveyors, robots,
and other material handling devices.18 But some persons
in the industry argue that automation is unlikely to
make much headway in millwork because it compels a fi­
nancial commitment to highly specialized equipment— a
commitment which often cannot be justified because of
the erratic demand for the industry’s products.
Other, more narrowly focused technological advances
have been made which have evidently been more readily
adopted than automated equipment. For example, the
versatility of machines fabricating moldings has been
greatly extended so that a large variety of complex
molding profiles can be cut and grooved at great speeds
without loss of precision and insignificant loss in setup
time.19 Ripsaws have been introduced whose sawing pat­
terns can be controlled by instructions relayed by ma­
nipulating the shadow of an overhead wire. Stock which
is free from knots and other flaws can thus be mechani­
cally selected, eliminating a number of strenuous manu­
al operations and resetting of the sawing machine, and
reducing waste.20 Solid-state sensing devices have in re­
cent years been attached to abrasive planers, ensuring
uniform surfaces. Abrasive planers were developed in an
era of low-cost energy, but have become more energyefficient, as well as faster.21 Hand-operated sanders have
been disappearing as multifunctional sanding machines
have evolved. Thus, automatic thickness settings permit
ranges from bites of V« inch to the finest surface finish.22
A gradual shift from electrically powered to air-pow­
ered hand tools has probably also contributed to im­
proving productivity. Air-driven hand tools are believed
Digitized
24for FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

to achieve job requirements more efficiently, and to be
less fatiguing for the operator because of their light
weight and a wider choice of such options as handles
and styles.23
Significant advances have likewise been made in adhe­
sive applications. High-speed production requires rapid
curing, and the gluing process is therefore usually an in­
tegral part of the production process. Certain radio fre­
quency gluing devices have reduced curing time from 20
to 2 minutes, and, for example, as many as 20 door
stiles can be processed at the same time. The saving in
labor requirements made possible by this process has
been estimated at 35 percent.24 Bonding strength, too,
has been increased, permitting the elimination of
clamping in some operations (clamping has usually been
regarded as a bottleneck in high-speed millwork assem­
bly where gluing is required).25

Capital expenditures
New plant and equipment spending by the millwork
industry went up fairly rapidly between 1963 (when
pertinent data first became available) and 1978. In
terms of constant dollars, it rose at an average annual
rate of 4.7 percent.26 However, the annual increase be­
tween 1963 and 1972, 9.4 percent, by far exceeded that
for 1972 to 1978— 1.2 percent. Significantly, outlays for
buildings and other structures rose at nearly the same
rate as for equipment during the former period, but de­
clined during the latter. Capital spending by the indus­
try showed at times huge year-to-year swings, induced
most likely by fluctuations in demand for the industry’s
product from residential construction. Comparisons
with trends in the private economy’s fixed investment
outlays follow (average annual rates of change, in per­
cent).27

Millwork:
Total ..................................
Machinery and equipment . . .
S tru ctu res...........................
Private fixed investment:
Total ................................ . .
Producer durable equipm e n t................................ . .
Nonresidential structures . . . .

1963-78

1963-72

1972-78

6.3
1.6

9.4
10.3
8.1

1.2
0.9
-3.9

3.6

4.6

2.4

5.2
0.9

5.7
3.1

4.3
-1.3

The tabulation shows that the pattern of vigorous
capital spending growth in the 1960’s and early 1970’s
in the millwork industry closely resembled that of the
private domestic economy, and likewise that of meager
capital spending growth in the mid-to-late 1970’s. But
for millwork, the slowdown was far more pronounced
and spelled virtual stagnation in investment in new ma­
chinery and equipment.
New capital expenditures per employee in millwork

represented only 42 percent of the comparable figure for
manufacturing as a whole in 1978. That ratio does vary
widely over time because of the large fluctuations of
millwork firms’ plant and equipment outlays (it was 61
percent in 1972). Yet, the comparative capital intensity
of millwork is somewhat understated because its firms
rent a larger proportion of plant structures and equip­
ment than other manufacturers. In 1978, rents for struc­
ture represented the equivalent of 67 percent of
millwork firms’ purchases of structures, and rents for
equipment, 22 percent. The corresponding figures for
manufacturing were 34 percent and 9 percent. When
rental payments are added to millwork’s total capital
outlays, the per-employee ratio to manufacturing men­
tioned above rises to 50 percent in 1978 (and 65 percent
in 1972). That still spells relatively low capital intensity,
a characteristic also manifest in the low value of the in­
dustry’s fixed assets per employee— it represented be­
tween 42 and 44 percent of the manufacturing average
in the 1970’s. In 1976, each dollar of millwork ship­
ments required 17 cents in fixed assets, compared with
34 cents for manufacturing in general.

Size of establishments
Millwork firms are preponderantly small— 70 percent
employed fewer than 20 workers in 1977, and another
23 percent employed from 20 to 99 workers. In this re­
spect— that is, in terms of the size distribution of firms
by employment— millwork closely resembles manufac­
turing. However, the smaller millwork establishments
account for a much larger proportion of total employ­
ment in the industry than smaller manufacturing firms

in general — 50 versus 26 percent. The same pattern
holds for the value of shipments, nearly one-half of
which originated with the smaller millwork firms, com­
pared with only about one-fifth for their counterparts in
total manufacturing. Large millwork establishments—
those employing 500 workers or more— recorded corre­
spondingly smaller shares of total industry employment
and shipments. The comparisons suggest that economies
of scale are generally less of a factor of productivity im­
provement in millwork than in manufacturing.
L a b o r p r o d u c t i v i t y i n m i l l w o r k should continue
to advance moderately over the long term. The diffusion
of automatic controls and the replacement of existing
machinery with more up-to-date equipment will obvi­
ously be positive factors. But the predominance of
smaller firms is likely to retard installation of automat­
ed transfer equipment, because, in their case, volume
rarely justifies such equipment. Fluctuating residential
building markets, and the trend toward apartment con­
struction, will very likely continue to cause firms in the
industry to be cautious in committing large funds to
highly specialized automated machinery.
BLS employment projections have not been published
for millwork alone, only for its industry group.28 For it,
a small, negative employment trend has been assumed
during the 1980’s. With demand from residential con­
struction expected to expand, and industry employment
to decline slightly, a moderate improvement in labor
productivity is implied.29 However, this progress is pred­
icated upon the continued adoption of more advanced
technologies by firms in the industry.
□

FOOTNOTES
' The millwork industry has been designated as number 2431 in the
1972 Standard Industrial Classification Manual of the Office of Man­
agement and Budget. It consists of establishments which primarily
manufacture such millwork products as moldings, wooden doors, win­
dows, shutters, blinds, and awnings; and other architectural millwork
items. All average annual rates of change are based on the linear least
squares trend of the logarithms of the index numbers. The indexes for
productivity and related variables will be updated annually and
published in the annual BLS Bulletin, P r o d u c tiv ity I n d e x e s f o r S e le c te d
In d u s trie s .
1 The data on average square foot are per single-unit dwelling, num­
ber of rooms and stories, and other examples mentioned in this and
the following paragraph are from the following sources: C h a r a cte r istics
o f N e w O n e -F a m ily H o m e s, 1968; C h a r a c te r istic s o f N e w F a m ily H o u s ­
ing: 1 9 7 8 ; both published by the Bureau of the Census, U.S. Depart­

ment of Commerce, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Washington, D.C.; James W. Myrtle, “Characteristics
of New Housing,” C o n stru ctio n R e v ie w , April 1979, pp. 4-9; Abraham
Goldblatt, “Profile of New One-Family Homes,” C o n stru ctio n R ev ie w ,
February 1973, pp. 4-8; and S ta tis tic a l A b s tr a c t o f th e U n ite d S ta tes,
1 9 8 0 (Government Printing Office, 1980), p. 791.
’ A r c h ite c tu r a l A lu m in u m I n d u s tr y S ta tis tic a l R e v ie w (Chicago, Ar­
chitectural Aluminum Manufacturing Association, 1980), Table 14.
4 Based on information from Housing Industry Dynamics, Crofton,
Md.
5See footnote 3.


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

6 Based on information from Housing Industry Dynamics.
7A r c h ite c tu r a l

A lu m in u m I n d u s tr y S ta tis tic a l R ev ie w , 1 980.

8 Robert Ball,

L a b o r a n d M a te r ia l R e q u ir e m e n ts f o r C o n stru ctio n o f

P r iv a te S in g le -F a m ily H o u ses,

Bulletin 1755 (Bureau of Labor Statis­

tics, 1972), p. 22.
9 Information from William B. Lloyd, author of M illw o r k : P rin c ip le s
(Chicago, Cahners Publishing Company, 1966).

a n d P r a c tic es

10M illw o r k , p. 208.
"The majority of millwork production workers hold jobs as ma­
chine and materials handling operators and assemblers. I n d u s tr y W a g e
S u rv e y: M illw o rk , J u n e 1 9 7 9 , Bulletin 2083 (Bureau of Labor Statis­
tics, 1980).
12Some effects of high turnover rates are discussed by Peter Henle,
“Economic Effects: Reviewing the Evidence,” in Jerome M. Rosow
T h e W o rk e r a n d th e J o b (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1974),
p. 125.
11M illw o r k , p. 8.
14 M illw o r k , p. 8. Hours worked by carpenters in building a 1-family
dwelling have undoubtedly declined, and the decline in part points to
a shift of the work conventionally performed by the carpenter to man­
ufacturing. Thus, according to the BLS publication cited in footnote
8, there were 29 onsite carpenter hours required per 100 square feet of
a 1-family house in 1969. According to studies done by the BLS for
1-family frame houses built in 1946-47, onsite carpentry then required

25

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Productivity in Millwork Industry
about 70 hours per 100 square feet. The decline implied in the num­
ber of onsite carpenter hours may have partly occurred because of dif­
ferences in survey methods, the type of houses selected, and other
technical or statistical factors. Moreover, part of the decline may be
attributable to productivity improvements in carpentry. Nevertheless,
a significant portion of the decline is likely to have been linked to
shifts to factory production of carpentering work, including here
millwork items, as well as roof trusses, plywood subflooring, and so
forth. See Edward M. Gordon, “House Construction: Man-Hours by
Occupation, 1946-47,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1948, pp.
611-14; and Adela L. Stuckey, “Labor Share in Construction Costs of
New Houses,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , May 1949, pp. 517-20.
1 A n I n v e n to r y o f M a c h in e s a n d E q u ip m e n t in th e W o o d w o r k in g a n d
F u r n itu r e M a r k e t, issued by W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e st, Whea­
ton, 111., 1979. A n I n v e n to r y presents the number of woodworking ma­
chines, by type, for each woodworking industry (as classified by the
Standard Industrial Classification Manual). In a separate presentation,
A n I n v e n to r y shows the age breakdown of each type of woodworking
machinery, but the age breakdown is not grouped by industry. The
discussion in the text assumes that the age breakdown applies to ma­
chinery in the millwork industry where this industry accounts for a
relatively large proportion of a given type of woodworking machinery.
The authors of A n I n v e n to r y believe this assumption to be valid.
16 W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig est, February 1976, p. 65.
W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e st,

18 W o o d w o r k in g

a n d F u r n itu r e D ig est,

August 1978, p. 83.
July 1981, pp. 14—19.

Industry source.
20 Industry source.
21 W o o d w o r k in g
1981, p. 16.
22 W o o d w o r k in g

a n d F u r n itu r e D ig est,

a n d F u r n itu r e D ig e st,

W o o d w o r k in g a n d F u r n itu r e D ig est,

August 1978, p. 83; May

May 1981, p. 16.
February 1981, pp. 10-19.

24 Industry source.
‘5 W o o d w o r k in g a n d
ary 1981, pp. 10-19.

F u r n itu r e D ig e st,

August 1978, p. 83 ff.; Janu­

26Constant-dollar capital expenditures were derived by deflating the
current-dollar census data on the millwork industry’s new capital ex­
penditures by the implicit price deflators for fixed investment, shown
on p. 236 of E c o n o m ic R e p o r t o f th e P re sid e n t, January 1981.
27The rates for private fixed investment (in 1972 dollars) are derived
from Table B-2, E c o n o m ic R e p o r t o f th e P re sid e n t, January 1981.
2KThe millwork industry is part of SIC 243, which includes veneer,
plywood, and structural wood members. It accounts for about 35 per­
cent of SIC 243 in terms of employment.
'"See Data Resources, Inc., U.S. L o n g -T e r m R e v ie w , Spring 1982, p.
11.20; and Valerie Personick, “The outlook for industry output and
employment through 1990,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , August 1981, es­
pecially p. 34.

APPENDIX: Measurement techniques and limitations
Indexes of output per employee hour measure chang­
es in the relation between the output of an industry and
employee hours expended on that output. An index of
output per employee hour is derived by dividing an in­
dex of output by an index of industry employee hours.
The preferred output index for manufacturing indus­
tries would be obtained from data on quantities of the
various goods produced by the industry, each weighted
(multiplied) by the employee hours required to produce
one unit of each good in a specified base period. Thus,
those goods which require more labor time to produce
are given more importance in the index.
In the absence of adequate physical quantity data,
the output index for this industry was constructed by a
deflated value technique. The value of shipments of the
various product classes were adjusted for price changes
by appropriate Producer Price Indexes to derive real

26


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

output measures. These, in turn, were combined with
employee hour weights to derive the overall output
measure. The result is a final output index that is con­
ceptually close to the preferred output measure.
Employment and employee hour indexes were derived
from data published by the Bureau of the Census be­
cause b l s data were not available. Employees and em­
ployee hours are each considered homogeneous and
additive, and thus do not reflect changes in the qualita­
tive aspects of labor, such as skill and experience.
The indexes of output per employee hour do not
measure any specific contributions, such as that of labor
or capital. Rather, they reflect the joint effect of factors
such as changes in technology, capital investment, ca­
pacity utilization, plant design and layout, skill and ef­
fort of the work force, managerial ability, and labormanagement relations.

Research
Summaries

The aging of the older population and
the effect on its labor force rates
P h i l i p L. R o n e s

Changes in labor force measures are not always easy to
interpret. For instance, a rise in the unemployment rate
over time is generally interpreted as meaning that it has
become more difficult for an individual to find a job.
But, that is not necessarily the case. The unemployment
measure could show an increase over a long-term period
even though the rates for each specific labor force group
(by age, sex, and race) either remained stable or de­
clined. This would occur if groups which typically have
higher than average unemployment rates retained those
rates as their proportion of the labor force increased.
The increase in the aggregate measure, then, could stem
from either a change in the age distribution of the pop­
ulation or changes in the labor force participation rates
for specific groups.1
Probably the most widely used measure of the labor
market status of older workers is not the unemployment
rate but, rather, the labor force participation rate. This
statistic has been closely followed in recent years be­
cause labor force activity of older workers affects social
security and private pension outlays, and also could re­
flect the impact of mandatory retirement legislation.
The participation rate for men age 55 and older has de­
clined markedly in the post-World War II period, from
70.7 percent in 1948 to 44.5 percent in 1981, largely re­
flecting this group’s improved financial ability to retire.
During the same period, the participation rate for wom­
en age 55 and over rose from 17.2 to 22.7 percent, but
that gain was far less than that registered by younger
women.
In the last 2 years, a fall in participation rates for
older persons of both sexes has accelerated, following 3
years of relatively slow decline. This has occurred de­
spite changes in age discrimination laws and high rates

Philip L. Rones is an economist in the Division of Employment and
Unemployment Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

a

of inflation, factors which many observers expected to
provide upward pressure on participation. This recent
labor force trend has spurred a rise in interest regarding
the nature and causes of declining participation among
older workers.
One possible explanation is that the fall in participa­
tion, particularly in recent years, might be partly the re­
sult of the aging of the older population. Basically, this
is the converse of the argument that has been used to
explain part of the rise in the unemployment rate. The
rationale is that the oldest groups within the elderly
population, those with the lowest participation rates,
have been increasing as a proportion of the elderly and
are receiving more weight in the overall calculation.
To examine the validity of this proposition, popula­
tion and labor force data from the Current Population
Survey ( c p s ) for men and women by single years of age
were obtained for 1968, 1972, and 1981. Each year was
selected for an important reason: 1968 is the first full
year for which single-year-of-age data were tabulated
using the civilian noninstitutional population concept;
1972 is the first year that the CPS used 1970-based pop­
ulation controls (rather than those projected from the
1960 census results); and 1981 is the most recent date
for annual average data and also is the first year that
1980 census-based population estimates were available.
The census data themselves were not used because
the single-year-of-age tabulations refer to total popula­
tion, while the CPS, beginning in m id-1967, uses civilian
noninstitutional population. This distinction is critical
because of the rapid rise in the institutional population
of the elderly (mostly in nursing homes), currently
about 1.6 million people.
Analysis of the CPS data isolated the effects of three
factors on changes in participation between 1968 and
the two latter years (1972 and 1981). These were: (1)
changes in the age-specific participation rates, (2)
changes in the age composition of the population, and
(3) changes attributable to “interaction”, that is, chang­
es that are not explained by the age-specific participa­
tion rates or by the age composition of the labor force.
Interaction accounted for a very small portion of the to­
tal change in participation. Table 1 shows the amount
of change accounted for by each of the three factors.
27

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Research Summaries
ri6g is the 1968 participation rate for the ith
age group and popigl is the 1981 civilian
noninstitutional population for the ith age
group.

Table 1. Changes in age components of labor force
participation rates for men and women age 55 and older
Change due to —
Age and year

Men, age 55 and
over:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........
Age 55 to 64:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........
Age 65 and over:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........
Women, age 55 and
over:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........
Age 55 to 64:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........
Age 65 and over:
1968 .........
1972 .........
1981 .........

Average
participation
rate

Total
change

Age
specific
participation
rate

Age
composition
of
population

Inter­
action
effect1

56.54
53.36
44.47

0.00
-3.18
-12.07

0.00
-3.33
-11.28

0.00
.19
-.71

0.00
-.04
-.08

84.26
80.51
70.63

0.00
-3.75
-13.62

0.00
-3.51
-13.31

0.00
-.21
-.21

0.00
-.03
-.10

27.27
24.35
18.35

0.00
-2.92
-8.92

0.00
-3.13
-9.15

0.00
.27
.37

0.00
-.06
-.14

25.04
24.52
22.73

0.00
-.52
-2.31

0.00
-.19
-1.14

0.00
-.33
-1.13

0.00
.00
-.04

42.44
42.14
41.35

0.00
-.30
-1.09

0.00
-.16
-.83

0.00
-.15
-.19

0.00
.01
-.07

9.57
9.33
8.01

0.00
-.22
-1.56

0.00
-.20
-1.41

0.00
-.03
-.16

0.00
.01
.01

This calculation shows what the rates would have been
in 1981 if the age-specific participation rates had re­
mained as they were in 1968. In other words, it isolates
the impact of changes in the age composition of the
population. For men age 55 and over, the adjusted par­
ticipation rate in 1981 was 55.83 percent, explaining
only .71 point of the 12.07-point fall in participation
since 1968.

Results
Among men, the change in the age structure of the
55-and-over population has had relatively little impact
on the dramatic declines in participation. In fact, for
men age 65 and over, the changing population distribu­
tion caused a slight rise in participation rates, indicating
that the growth has been greater in the younger, not
older, groups in this age cohort. The following tabula­
tion of age distribution for men age 65 and over in 1968
and 1981 demonstrates this:

1The “interaction" effect is that part of the total change in participation not explained by
the other two variables.

The amount of change in participation attributable to
changes in age-specific participation rates is derived by
first computing participation rates for single-years-ofage between age 55 and 74 and for age 75 and over.
Then, a rate was computed using the following formula
(1981 is the target year and 1968 is the base year):
S.O isr PoP.as)
2,P°Pi68

where:
rj81 is the 1981 participation rate for the ith
age group and popi6g is the 1968 civilian
noninstitutional population for the ith age
group.
Simply put, this calculation shows what the participa­
tion rate would have been in 1981 if the population dis­
tribution had been the same as in 1968. In other words,
it isolates the effect of changing participation rates. For
instance, for men age 55 and over, changing participa­
tion accounted for 11.28 points of the fall in participa­
tion between 1968 and 1981; therefore, their adjusted
1981 rate is 45.26 percent (56.54-11.28).
The formula used to compute the effect of changes in
the population distribution is:

s .(r,68- POPiJ
P°Pi8.
where:
28

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

Percent of population in—
1968
1981
65 and over ...................
6 5 .....................................
6 6 .....................................
6 7 .....................................
6 8 .....................................
6 9 .....................................
7 0 .....................................
7 1 .....................................
7 2 .....................................
7 3 .....................................
7 4 .....................................
75 and over ....................

100.0
8.4
7.8
7.6
7.3
6.2
6.2
5.5
5.4
5.4
4.7
35.4

100.0
8.3
8.4
7.8
7.3
6.5
6.5
5.9
5.6
5.3
5.0
33.5

The oldest age group, age 75 and over, made up
much larger proportion of all men age 65 and older in
1968, while the younger age groups predominated in
1981. The 55-to-64 group did age somewhat over the
18-year period, but only enough to explain about twotenths of a point out of a participation rate decline that,
by 1981, totaled more than 15 points.
Unlike the mixed results experienced by men, the age
composition effect was consistently in the downward di­
rection for older women.2 For women ages 55 to 64 and
65 and over, the age effect was less than two-tenths of a
point in both 1972 and 1981. The relatively large age
effect, by 1981, in the 55-and-over group suggests a
shift in population into the older (65 and over) age
group. (A similar shift, causing a .71-point decline in
participation, occurred among men.) However, the par­
ticipation rates for older women have changed compara­
tively little over time and tend to be much less an issue

*

than those for men, which have fallen dramatically. In
the years ahead, the aging of the first generation of
American women who have developed a strong labor
force attachment is likely to provide upward pressure
on the participation rates of women age 55 and over.
The declines in participation among older workers
over the last several years are particularly noteworthy,
because they occurred despite increased protection
against forced retirement and the prevailing high rates
of inflation. The main causes of the long-term declines
in participation among the elderly have been document­
ed,3 and the declines in the last 2 years may have been
intensified by the weakening economy. The changing
age distribution of the older population seems to have
played, at most, a very small part in these important la­
bor force trends.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1The effect of these influences on the unemployment rate was dis­
cussed in a series of articles in the March 1979 M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w .
See Paul O. Flaim, “The effect of demographic changes on the Na­
tion’s unemployment rate”; Glen G. Cain, “The unemployment rate
as an economic indicator”; and Joseph Antos and others, “What is a
current equivalent to unemployment rates of the past?”
; It should be kept in mind that the “aging” of the older population
is limited by the use of the noninstitutional population in the calcula­
tions. Nursing home residents, who make up most of the institutional
elderly, are concentrated in the oldest age groups and the vast majori­
ty are women.
See, for example, Philip L. Rones, “Older men — the choice be­
tween work and retirement,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , November 1978,
pp. 3-10; or Joseph F. Quinn, T h e M ic r o e c o n o m ic s o f E a r ly R e tir e ­
m e n t: A C ross S e c tio n a l V iew (U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, 1975).

Occupational changes
and tenure, 1981
N ancy F. R ytina
The labor force is characterized by a relatively high de­
gree of occupational change. Studies have shown that
most workers are employed in occupations which differ
from those of their fathers.1Occupational shifts are also
quite common over the course of a worker’s career. The
occupation held by a worker in midlife often differs
from the first occupation after leaving school.2
Although the volume of occupational mobility that
occurs within a given year is much smaller, it provides
an indication, on a current basis, of recent trends.

Nancy F. Rytina is a demographer in the Division of Labor Force
Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

When assembled over time, data on 1-year mobility
shows changes that are important for purposes of devel­
oping vocational and higher educational programs.
Studies of 1-year occupational mobility based on data
from the Current Population Survey ( c p s ) of January
1966, 1973, and 1978 indicated that about 1 in 10 of all
workers in each year were employed in a different occu­
pation than in the previous year.3 Much of the occupa­
tional change was concentrated among persons under
age 30 who tend to “job shop” as they obtain exposure
to various kinds of work.
This report presents an update of these previous stud­
ies. The data shown are based on information obtained
in the January 1981 Current Population Survey and re­
late to the occupations of workers in that month and in
January 1980. Workers who changed occupations are de­
fined as those employed in both January 1980 and Jan­
uary 1981, but in a different “three-digit” census
occupation in January 1981 than the occupation report­
ed for January 1980. For example, a person employed
as a typist in 1981 and as a stenographer in 1980 would
be defined as having changed occupations, although the
change occurred within the major occupational group­
ing— clerical workers. The occupational mobility rate
used in this report refers to the number of workers who
changed occupations as a proportion of the total num­
ber employed in January of 1980 and 1981.4
This study also presents new information on occupa­
tional tenure based on the years spent in the current
occupation. These data are limited to persons employed
in both January 1980 and 1981. Workers in the same
“three-digit” census occupation in January 1981 as in
January 1980 were asked how many years, altogether,
they had “been doing that kind of work.” Persons who
had changed occupations were assigned to the tenure
category of less than 1 year.
The data on both occupational mobility and tenure
are subject to a number of limitations. Besides those
normally associated with sample surveys (sampling vari­
ability and nonresponse), there may be errors associated
with the retrospective reporting of the occupation a year
earlier and the number of years in the same occupa­
tion.5 Because occupation is reported only for the
months of January 1980 and January 1981, any tempo­
rary changes in occupation that occurred during the
year will not be reflected in the survey results. Since the
tenure question was asked only of persons in the same
occupation in January 1980 and 1981, the tenure data
exclude persons employed in January 1981 but not Jan­
uary 1980, as well as any years spent in the occupation
prior to 1980 for persons not in the same occupation in
both January 1980 and 1981. Moreover, the information
on tenure was collected in a combination of single and
multiyear intervals, thus making it difficult to obtain re­
liable estimates of mean or median tenure.6
29

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Research Summaries

Workers who changed occupations
Of the 88.3 million employed workers 18 years of age
and over and not in school in January 1981, 9.5 percent
reported employment in a different occupation in Janu­
ary 1980. Eighty-one percent had been in the same oc­
cupation and the remaining 9 percent had either been
unemployed or not in the labor force the previous Janu­
ary. The occupational mobility rate stood at 10.5 per­
cent. Both the distribution of labor force status in the
previous year and the mobility rate are not much dif­
ferent from the CPS data reported for 1966, 1973, and
1978.
In 1981, as in earlier years, age was the factor most
associated with occupational change. Of the total 8.4
million workers who shifted occupations between Janu­
ary 1980 and January 1981, 70 percent were under age
35, although this age group accounted for only 46 per­
cent of the labor force in January 1981.
Not surprisingly, occupational mobility rates declined
sharply with age (table 1). The rate for workers age 35
to 44 was less than one-fourth as high as that for work­
ers 18 and 19 years of age. High rates of occupational
mobility among young workers are accounted for by a
number of factors. Upon completion of school, young
persons often try several fields of employment before
settling into a careei*. Also, as many of them make
changes in residence and living arrangements, they also
change occupations. In contrast, occupational change
among older workers occurs less frequently because of
attachments to a particular occupation or the risks of
losing income, job security, and pension rights, which
might accompany an occupational shift.
Mobility rates by age were much the same as in the
earlier CPS surveys. Standardizing the mobility rates by
age in 1966 and 1981 suggests that the slightly higher
rate observed in 1981 (10.5 versus 8.8) was almost en­
tirely a result of the increased proportion of young per­
sons in the work force.7
Differences in occupational mobility by sex are quite
small relative to age differences. For both men and
women, mobility rates decreased with age (table 1).
Women, however, have a slightly higher mobility rate
than men (11.4 versus 9.9 percent). Since 1966, the mo­
bility rate for women has risen substantially, up from
6.6 percent. An increase is to be expected because of the
entry into the labor force of women from younger age
groups which have always had higher mobility rates.
However, standardizing for age indicates that over 70
percent of the increase was attributable to changes in
mobility within specific age groups.8 The rise in the rate
of occupational change for women reflects their shift
into professional and managerial occupations as well as
their increased employment in clerical jobs where the
rate of occupational change has traditionally been high.
30


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

In contrast, the mobility rate for men in 1981 was at
the same level as in 1966. The 1981 male rate, however,
probably would have been slightly lower were it not for
the increase in the proportion of young men in the la­
bor force.
Occupational mobility rates do not differ much by
race and ethnicity. Among men, the rate is slightly
higher among Hispanics partly because they are youn­
ger than either whites or blacks. The rate for white
women is higher than that for either black or Hispanic
women and this difference is evident among most age
groups.
The reason given for changing one’s occupation is
one factor which is not strongly related to age (table 2).
Close to 43 percent of all workers reported better pay
as the most important reason for shifting occupations.9
Better pay is cited more frequently than any other rea­
son among all age, sex, race, and ethnic groups except
workers ages 55 and over. A larger percentage of older
workers cited “other” reasons (presumably retirement
from the previous occupation) than better pay. The re­
cession of 1980 may have some bearing on the fact that
Table 1. Occupational mobility between January 1980
and January 1981 of employed persons, by age, sex, race,
and Hispanic origin, January 1981
Total employed
in January 1981

Characteristic

Total, 18 years
and over,
not in
school . . . .

Status in January 1980

Occupational
Number
Same Different
Not in mobility
(in
Percent occu­ occu­ Unem­ labor
rate1
thousands;
pation pation ployed force

88,334

100.0

81.0

9.5

3.3

6.1

10.5

Total, 18 years and
over, not in
school ...........
18 and 19 years ..
20 to 24 years ...
25 to 34 years . ..
35 to 44 years . ..
45 to 54 years ...
55 to 64 years ...
65 years and over

50,502
1,581
6,202
14,735
10,746
9,047
6,503
1,688

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

83.8
43.3
63.5
82.4
89.1
92.6
93.2
91.9

9.2
21.4
19.3
11.6
7.2
4.3
3.4
1.5

3.2
8.5
7.1
3.2
2.4
2.2
1.5
1.2

3.7
26.8
10.1
2.7
1.3
.9
1.8
5.5

9.9
33.1
23.3
12.4
7.4
4.4
3.5
1.6

White................
Black................
Hispanic origin ...

45,460
4,199
2,755

100.0
100.0
100.0

84.1
82.0
79.0

9.3
8.1
11.0

3.0
5.3
4.4

3.6
4.6
5.7

10.0
9.0
12.2

Total, 18 years and
over, not in
school ...........
18 and 19 years ..
20 to 24 years ...
25 to 34 years . ..
35 to 44 years . ..
45 to 54 years ...
55 to 64 years ...
65 years and over

37,832
1,449
5,754
10,916
7,970
6,526
4,212
1,005

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

77.2
37.8
61.9
73.8
82.3
87.5
91.9
90.1

10.0
21.8
18.0
11.9
8.1
5.4
2.6
1.6

3.5
8.9
6.0
3.9
2.5
2.3
1.5
.7

9.3
31.4
14.2
10.4
7.1
4.8
4.1
7.6

11.4
36.6
22.5
13.9
8.9
5.8
2.7
1.8

White................
Black.................
Hispanic origin ...

33,022
4,050
1,804

100.0
100.0
100.0

76.8
80.7
74.5

10.3
7.5
7.8

3.1
6.3
5.6

9.8
5.5
12.1

11.9
8.4
9.5

Men

Women

'Percent of persons employed in both January 1981 and January 1980 who were
employed in a different occupation in January 1981 than January 1980.

Table 2. Reasons for occupational change for persons employed in a different occupation in January 1981 than January
1980, by sex, age, race, and ethnicity
[Percentage distribution]
Number
(in thousands)

Total

Change from
job held
in school

8,430

100.0

White ....................................................
Black ....................................................
Hispanic ................................................

7,643
642
443

100.0
100.0
100.0

Men, total ..............................................
18 to 24 years .................................
25 to 34 years .................................
35 to 44 years .................................
45 to 54 years .................................
55 years and over ............................

4,656
1,537
1,716
769
389
245

Women, total..........................................
18 to 24 years .................................
25 to 34 years .................................
35 to 44 years .................................
45 to 54 years .................................
55 years and over ..........................

3,774
1,352
1,302
644
352
124

Workers who changed occupations

Total, 18 years and over, not in
school .....................................


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

Other

9.0

7.8

21.0

4.6

9.4
5.9
8.5

7.8
7.8
9.6

21.3
17.6
20.8

4.5
5.9
5.9

13.5
15.2
12.2
14.2
11.7
12.9

8.7
9.2
8.9
9.0
7.5
4.9

6.7
6.8
6.9
5.8
7.8
7.0

20.3
13.8
20.1
21.4
29.4
45.1

4.9
4.2
4.9
4.9
7.3
6.3

8.8
9.2
7.7
8.8
10.9
10.3

9.5
9.0
11.4
4.9
13.3
5.9

9.0
7.5
8.9
11.5
10.8
8.4

21.9
19.4
21.7
21.8
24.3
46.5

4.3
4.6
4.8
2.9
4.6
1.9

Lost job,
laid off

3.6

42.5

11.4

3.7
3.3
1.6

42.2
45.0
42.0

11.2
14.5
11.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

2.9
6.3
2.2
.3
.0
.0

42.9
44.5
44.9
44.5
36.3
23.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

4.5
10.3
1.9
1.0
.0
.0

42.0
40.0
43.6
49.2
36.1
27.0

nearly 11 percent of all workers cited either job loss or
layoff as the reason for changing occupations.
In addition, the length of time spent with the current
employer is closely associated with occupational mobili­
ty. About 90 percent of all workers who changed occu­
pations had less than a year of tenure with their current
employer, compared with 10 percent of all workers who
remained in the same occupation. (See article on job
tenure, page 34.)
An indication of how mobility rates varied by the oc­
cupation of the employed in 1981 is provided in table 3.
For both sexes, mobility rates are generally highest in
those occupations with large percentages of young
workers. For example, nonfarm laborers have a high
mobility rate and over 50 percent of all workers moving
into that occupation were under age 25. Similarly, large
percentages of young workers shifted into the clerical
and service occupations. An exception is the high mo­
bility rate for women employed as managers. Almost
one-fourth of women moving into this occupation were
35 to 44 years of age, in part reflecting an expansion in
employment opportunities for women in management.
Some of the occupations with lower rates of mobility
are those requiring high levels of education (profession­
al) or other specialized training (craft). Declining em­
ployment opportunities in farming and the attachment
to the land of those who have remained in this occupa­
tion explain the very low mobility rates for farmers and
farm managers.
Evidence regarding the occupational origins and des­
tinations of workers who changed occupations is pro­
vided in table 4, which shows the occupational
distribution in January 1980 for each occupation in Jan­
uary 1981. It is apparent that workers who changed oc­
cupations came largely from the same occupational
grouping, that is, from related occupations. For exam­

Not
answered

Working
conditions

Better pay,
full-time work

Dissatisfied,
underutilized

ple, among professionals, 43 percent of the men and 37
percent of women had been employed in a professional
occupation in January 1980. The degree of intraoccupational group shifting was also quite high for men
employed as managers, craftworkers, and operatives, ex­
cept transportation equipment operatives. For women,
intraoccupational group shifting was particularly high
among clerical workers, operatives (except transporta­
tion equipment operatives), and service workers. About

Table 3. Occupational mobility rates between January
1980 and January 1981 of employed persons, by
occupation and sex
[Numbers in thousands]
Women

Men

Occupational
mobility
rate’

Number
employed,
both
January
1980 and
1981

Occupational
mobility
rate'

46,990

9.9

32,983

11.4

8,063

6.8

6,329

9.1

7,597
2,892
2,951

8.8
10.9
13.6

2,854
1,912
11,691

13.5
13.8
12.5

Craft and kindred workers ..
Operatives, except transport .
Transport equipment
operatives ....................
Laborers, except farm .......

10,069
5,174

8.3
12.7

626
3,294

10.8
9.6

2,631
2,477

9.4
18.6

225
354

8.5
16.6

Private household workers ..
Service workers, except
private household...........
Farmers and farm managers .
Farm laborers and
supervisors ..................

23

(2)

616

9.6

Occupation

Total, 18 years and
over, not in school
Professional, technical, and
kindred workers .............
Managers and administra­
tors, except farm ...........
Salesworkers ..................
Clerical and kindred workers .

Number
employed,
both
January
1980 and
1981

3,504
1,108

12.3
2.5

4,814
115

11.5
1.6

503

13.0

152

7.8

'Percent of persons employed in both January 1981 and January 1980 who were
employed in a different occupation in January 1981 than January 1980.
2Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.

31

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 e Research Summaries
60 percent of women in clerical work in January 1981
had come from that occupational group. This results
partly from the high degree of skill interchangeability
and employment turnover that occurs within clerical oc­
cupations.
Also, most of the shifts between occupational group­
ings tended to occur within the same broad fields, for
example, white-collar and blue-collar occupations.
About 80 percent of women and 66 percent of men em­
ployed in white-collar occupations had been employed
in these occupations during the previous year. Similarly,
over 70 percent of men in blue-collar occupations were
employed in the same occupations a year earlier. In
contrast, the proportion of women employed in bluecollar occupations is comparatively low. Not surprising­
ly, about one-half of women who shifted into blue-col­
lar occupations came from the white-collar and service
occupations.

Table 4.

Occupational tenure
An indication of occupational tenure is found by ex­
amining the distribution of the number of years spent in
the January 1981 occupation for those who had been in
the same occupation in January 1980. It should be not­
ed that because the data on occupational tenure in this
report are restricted to persons employed in January
1980 and January 1981, the occupational mobility rates
shown in previous tables are equivalent to the propor­
tion of workers with less than 1 year in the occupation.
Of the 80 million workers employed in both January
1980 and 1981, over one-third had been in the same oc­
cupation from 1 to 5 years (table 5). Adding to that
figure those in the occupation less than 1 year indicates
that close to one-half of all workers had been employed
in their January 1981 occupation less than 5 years.
Tenure in the occupation is strongly linked with age.

Persons who changed occupation: major occupational group in January 1981, by occupation in January 1980

[Percent distribution]
Different
occupation in
January 1980'
Number
(in
thousands)

Percent

Professional,
technical,
and
kindred
workers

4,383

100.0

11.0

Sex and occupation
in January 1981

Managers
and
administrators,
except
farm

Sales­
workers

Clerical
and
kindred
workers

Craft
and
kindred
workers

Operatives,
except
transport

Transport
equipment
operatives

Laborers,
except
farm

Service
workers,
including
private
household

12.1

8.1

7.9

18.6

15.5

6.3

9.4

9.1

1.9

Farm­
workers

MEN

Total, 18 years and
over, not in
school .............
Professional, technical,
and kindred workers ..
Managers and administra­
tors, except farm . . . .
Salesworkers .............
Clerical and kindred work­
ers ........................
Craft and kindred workers
Operatives, except trans­
port ........................
Transport equipment
operatives...............
Laborers, except farm ..
Service workers, including
private household . . . .
Farmworkers...............

514

100.0

42.8

13.6

5.7

9.1

9.9

6.6

2.0

3.7

5.8

8

630
298

100.0
100.0

15.8
6.4

32.4
23.4

14.1
24.1

8.8
12.4

9.8
10.0

4.3
6.7

3.0
5.7

4.4
4.3

6.8
5.0

.5
20

383
781

100.0
100.0

7.6
5.0

10.0
6.7

7.8
5.2

26.6
5.2

16.4
34.8

7.8
17.5

8.8
6.5

7.0
11.4

7.8
6.4

.0
1.2

622

100.0

2.4

3.1

5.0

2.9

20.7

35.4

8.5

12.1

8.0

1.8

234
419

100.0
100.0

2.6
4.5

9.8
6.7

4.2
5.2

4.7
3.1

23.0
19.1

17.0
21.9

10.6
10.2

11.5
18.6

10.7
8.6

6.0
2.4

412
90

100.0
100.0

8.0
3.3

5.1
4.4

6.6
4.4

5.6
1.1

14.3
21.1

15.8
16.7

5.1
5.6

9.7
20.0

27.2
7.8

2.7
15.6

3,604

100.0

12.0

7.4

7.7

40.3

2.1

9.2

.6

2.1

18.0

.3

WOMEN

Total, 18 years and
over, not in
school .............
Professional, technical,
and kindred workers ..
Managers and administra­
tors, except farm . . . .
Salesworkers .............
Clerical and kindred work­
ers ........................
Crafts, operatives including
transport, nonfarm
laborers, total2 .........
Operatives, except trans­
port ........................
Service workers, including
private household . . . .
Farmworkers...............

546

100.0

37.2

8.1

4.2

30.6

.9

3.5

.4

1.5

13.7

0

367
257

100.0
100.0

15.2
9.7

20.0
12.8

12.8
10.5

38.3
39.3

1.4
.8

3.1
5.4

.0
.0

.8
3.1

8.4
183

0
0

1,388

100.0

6.5

4.9

7.6

59.8

1.8

4.5

.8

1.4

12.2

.6

5.1

3.1

3.6

18.1

6.9

35.1

1.8

5.6

20.1

.4

447

100.0

306

100.0

2.3

2.6

2.6

14.0

6.9

42.1

2.0

5.6

21.7

0.3

585
14

100.0
(3)

6.0
(3)

5.5
(3)

9.7
<3)

23.1
(3)

1.2
(3)

11.4
(3)

.3
(3)

2.6
(3)

39.7
(3)

.7
(3)

1Excludes a small number of workers with 1980 occupation not classified.
2Craftworkers, transport equipment operatives, and nonfarm laborers not shown separately

32


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

because the base in each case is less than 75,000.
3Data not shown where base is less than 75,000.

Table 5. Occupational duration of persons employed in
both January 1980 and 1981 by age, sex, race, and
ethnicity
[Numbers in thousands]

Characteristic

Total employed
in both
January 1980
and 1981

Less 1 up
than to 5
1 year years

5 up
to 10
years

10 up
to 25
years

25 years
or more

Number Percent

Total, 18 years
and over,
not in school

79,973

100.0

10.5

36.9

19.2

24.6

8.7

Men..........................
Women ....................

46,990
32,983

100.0
100.0

9.9
11.4

32.5
43.4

19.0
19.5

27.2
20.9

11.4
4.8

White........................
Black........................
Hispanic....................

71,225
7,355
3,964

100.0
100.0
100.0

10.7
8.7
11.2

36.4
40.6
48.4

19.0
20.6
19.2

24.8
24.5
18.0

9.1
5.6
3.4

18 to 24 years...........
25 to 34 years...........
35 to 44 years...........
45 to 54 years...........
55 years and over . . . .

11,618
23,219
17,550
14,829
12,757

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

24.9
13.0
8.0
5.0
2.9

68.8
47.2
29.5
22.3
16.5

6.4
27.7
22.0
17.3
13.9

(')
12.0
38.7
38.9
33.9

(’ )
(’ )
1.6
16.5
32.9

1Rounds to zero.

Workers under age 35 were concentrated in the 1 to 5
years category, while the majority of workers age 35
and over had been in the same occupation 5 years or
more.
Men had more years in the same occupation than
women. The sex difference is especially pronounced at
10 years or more in the occupation. Although women
have continued to gain on men in year-round employ­
ment, they experience greater job turnover. This stems
partly from personal and family priorities, but also be­
cause women have remained segregated in occupations
which have high rates of turnover.
In terms of race and ethnicity, the distribution of oc­
cupational tenure is relatively similar between blacks
and whites compared to Hispanics. Among blacks and
whites, approximately 50 percent were in the same oc­
cupation for less than 5 years, compared to almost 60
percent among Hispanics. The lower occupational ten­
ure of Hispanics can be attributed to some degree to
their lower average age and greater likelihood of em­
ployment in service, laborer, and farm occupations.
The number of years in the same occupation varied
by the January 1981 occupation. Much like the inci­
dence of occupational change, tenure of less than 5
years is more common in occupations requiring less
training (operatives and laborers), transferable skills
(clerical work), or high employment growth (managers
for women). In contrast, tenure is relatively high in oc­
cupations with either declining employment opportun­
ités (farmers and farm managers) or where specialized
skills and lengthy training are involved (professionals
for both sexes and craftworkers for men).
This report has provided an update on patterns of oc­
cupational change between 1980 and 1981 and de­
scribed the distribution of occupational tenure among

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

various dem ographic groups. W ith the January 1981
CPS, it is also possible to examine how occupational
change and tenure relate more specifically to the eco­
nomic status of workers. For example, the occupational
categories used here were broad and conceal sex, race,
and ethnic differences in employment that might be un­
covered by focusing on detailed occupations. In terms
of earnings, findings from a recent study using these
data suggest that the lower tenure of women accounts
for just 4 percent of the male-female earnings gap.10The
January 1981 CPS data can be used to explore further
these and other labor force topics.
□
--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------1See Elton Jackson and Harry J. Crockett, “Occupational Mobility
in the United States: A Point Estimation and Trend Comparison,”
A m e r ic a n S o c io lo g ic a l R e v ie w , February 1964, pp. 5-15; Peter M. Blau
and Otis Dudley Duncan, T h e A m e r ic a n O c c u p a tio n a l S tr u c tu r e (New
York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967); and David L. Featherman and
Robert M. Hauser, O p p o r tu n ity a n d C h a n g e (New York, Academic
Press, 1978).
2See William H. Sewell, Robert M. Hauser, and Wendy C. Wolf,
“Sex, Schooling and Occupational Status,” A m e r ic a n J o u r n a l o f S o c i­
o lo g y, November 1980, pp. 551-583; Rachel A. Rosenfeld, “Race and
Sex Differences in Career Dynamics,” A m e r ic a n S o c io lo g ic a l R ev ie w ,
October 1980, pp. 583-609.
1For reports using earlier CPS data see Samuel Saben, “Occupa­
tional mobility of employed workers” (January 1965-66), M o n th ly L a ­
b o r R e v ie w , June 1967, pp. 31-38, reprinted as Special Labor Force
Report 84; James J. Byrne, “Occupational mobility of workers” (Jan­
uary 1972-73), M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1975, pp. 53-59, re­
printed as Special Labor Force Report 186; and Carl Rosenfeld,
“Occupational mobility during 1977” (January 3977-78), M o n th ly L a ­
b o r R e v ie w , December 1979, pp. 44-48, reprinted as Special Labor
Force Report 231.
4This rate measures the proportion of workers who entered the oc­
cupation, not the proportion leaving the occupation held in 1980.
This is only one of a number of possible measures of mobility, and it
was selected because it is the same measure used in the previous stud­
ies. See footnote 3.
5See Paula J. Schneider, “Evaluation of the Occupation One-Year
Ago Item in the January 1973 CPS,” P ro c ee d in g s o f th e S o c ia l S ta tis ­
tics S essio n o f th e A m e ric a n S ta tis tic a l A sso cia tio n , 1977.
6The categories included 1 up to 2 years, 2 up to 3 years, 3 up to 4
years, 4 up to 5 years, 5 up to 10 years, 10 up to 25 years, and 25
years or more.
7The 1981 mobility rates by age were standardized on the 1966 age
distribution resulting in a standardized mobility rate of 9.3. Reversing
the procedure, the 1966 mobility rates by age were standardized on
the 1981 age distribution which resulted in a standardized mobility
rate of 10.8. The average of the “rate effect” and the “age effect”
shows that 97 percent of the difference between the reported mobility
rates of 8.8 in 1966 and 10.5 in 1981 was due to differences in the age
distributions in the 2 years. See Evelyn M. Kitagawa, “Components
of the Difference Between Two Rates,” J o u r n a l o f th e A m e r ic a n S ta tis ­
tic a l A sso cia tio n , December 1955, pp. 1168-94. Other standardization
techniques are discussed in Henry S. Shryock and Joseph Siegel, T h e
M e th o d s a n d M a te r ia ls o f D e m o g ra p h y , Vols. I a n d I I (Bureau of the
Census, 1971). Another possible source of difference between the 1966
and 1981 rates is that there were fewer three-digit occupations listed
in the 1966 CPS.
* Based on age standardization. See footnote 5.
4This category also includes changing occupations for advancement
opportunities and full-time work.
10See Nancy F. Rytina, “Tenure as a factor in the male-female
earnings gap,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , April 1982, pp. 32-34.
33

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Research Summaries

Job tenure of workers
in January 1981

Table 1. Length of time on current job, workers 16 years
and older, by sex, race, and Hispanic origin, January 1981
[Numbers in thousands]
Length of time
on current job

Both
sexes

Men

Women

White

Black

Hispanic
origin

Total: Number.............

92,557

52,700

39,857

82,375

8,514

4,734

F rancis W. H orvath
Close to 30 percent of all workers during January 1981
had been on their jobs less than 1 year. At the same
time, however, nearly one-fourth had been at the same
job more than 10 years. (See table 1.) Overall, the medi­
an job tenure was 3.2 years.
This report gives the most recent summary statistics
on job tenure derived from a special supplement to the
January 1981 Current Population Survey and reviews
some basic relationships in the data.1
Job tenure is a measure of the length of time an em­
ployee has worked continuously for the same employer,
although not necessarily in the same occupation; contin­
uous employment is broken only by interruptions other
than vacations, temporary illnesses, strikes, layoffs of
less than 30 days, or other short-term absences. A per­
son terminates his or her tenure by quitting, being laid
off for 30 days or more, entering the Armed Forces, or
transferring to a job in a different company.
Measurement of job tenure is affected by many of the
same methodological issues which complicate other
time-based indices such as unemployment duration. Just
as the average duration of unemployment is not a meas­
ure of how long a person is likely to remain unem­
ployed,2 job tenure is not a measure of how long a
person will stay with a single employer. Rather, it is an
index of how long one has been with an employer as of
a specific point in time. This is an important distinction,
which may be illustrated by comparing the average age
of a population with its life expectancy. The average age
tells nothing about completed life spans; it measures
only the age of those who are still living. Similarly, job
tenure is an index of accumulated time on the job for
those still working.
Job tenure should not be confused with occupational
mobility (discussed in more detail on page 29): Job ten­
ure is a duration concept. On the other hand, occupa­
tional mobility pertains to persons who change
occupations but not necessarily employers. Also, occu­
pational mobility is more frequently discussed in terms
of rates of change, while job tenure is usually presented
as a length of time.
Job tenure is influenced by both voluntary and invol­
untary choices. For example, the part-time and summer
jobs of most young persons are not intended to be per­
manent. For others, especially those who work in indus­

Francis W. Horvath is an economist in the Division of Labor Force
Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
34


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

Percent .............

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

6 months or less .........
7 to 12 months ...........
Over 1 to 2 years .......
Over 2 to 3 years .......
Over 3 to 5 years .......
Over 5 to 10 years.......
Over 10 to 15 years . . . .
Over 15 to 20 years . . .
Over 20 to 25 years . . . .
Over 25 to 30 years . . . .
Over 30 to 35 years . . . .
Over 35 years.............

18.2
9.5
11.6
9.2
12.0
15.9
9.6
5.3
3.4
2.4
1.7
1.2

15.9
8.9
10.3
8.6
11.5
16.2
10.4
6.4
4.4
3.3
2.5
1.7

21.4
10.4
13.3
9.9
12.6
15.6
8.4
3.9
2.2
1.3
.7
.5

18.3
9.6
11.5
9.2
12.0
15.7
9.4
5.4
3.5
2.5
1.8
1.2

17.5
8.6
11.4
8.9
11.4
18.2
11.5
5.4
2.9
2.4
1.2
.6

23.2
11.3
13.6
10.0
13.3
14.5
7.6
3.0
2.0
.9
.4
.2

Median years...............

3.2

4.0

2.5

3.2

3.6

2.2

tries such as construction or retail trade, regular cycles
of expansion and contraction in employment can reduce
the length of one’s tenure.
With the termination of the BLS Labor Turnover Sur­
vey because of budget reductions, job tenure informa­
tion has become an important official data source
relating to labor turnover. Even though the tenure sur­
vey is conducted only every 3 to 5 years, it provides
valuable insights into the magnitude of job turnover
and stability in the economy.
Job tenure data can also be combined with mortality
projections to provide estimates of the proportion of
workers who will remain on the job for a specified
number of years. For example, the data may be used to
estimate how many of a company’s current employees
might be eligible to receive future benefits under exist­
ing pension provisions.3
Not surprisingly, young workers have the lowest lev­
els of job tenure. Fifty percent of all teenagers working
in January 1981 had been at their jobs for 6 months or
less. Almost 70 percent had started their jobs within

Table 2. Median years on current job, by age, race, and
Hispanic origin, and sex, January 1981
All workers

White

Black

Hispanic
origin

Age
Both
sexes Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women

Total, 16 years old
and over .........
16 to 24 years . . . .
25 to 34 years . . . .
35 to 44 years . . . .
45 to 54 years . . . .
55 to 64 years . . . .
65 years and older .

3.2

4.0

2.5

4.0

2.4

4.0

3.3

2.3

2.0

.8
.9
2.5 2.9
4.9 6.6
8.4 11.0
11.9 14.8
10.2 10.3

.8
2.0
3.5
5.9
9.1
10.0

.9
2.9
6.7
11.2
14.9
10.1

.8
2.0
3.3
5.7
9.1
9.8

.7
3.0
6.2
10.0
14.4
12.0

8
2.7
5.2
8.1
10.3
11.9

.9
2.4
3.7
6.4
8.6
(')

.9
1.9
3.2
4.4
5.8
(’ )

1Median not shown where base is less than 75,000.

Table 3. Median years on current job, by age, marital
status, and sex, January 1981
Married, spouse
present

Single
Age

Other marital
status1

Men

Women

Men

Women

Men

Women

Total, 16 years old and over

1.2

1.2

6.0

3.1

4.3

3.4

16 to 24 years................
25 to 34 years................
35 to 44 years.................
45 to 54 years.................
55 to 64 years................
65 years and older .........

.8
2.2
4.7
10.5
16.2
(2)

.7
2.4
6.1
10.9
14.3
10.7

1.2
3.2
6.8
11.5
15.1
10.3

.9
2.0
3.4
6.2
9.4
9.8

1.0
2.4
5.2
6.7
10.7
10.9

.8
1.7
3.1
4.7
8.2
10.0

11ncludes widowed, divorced, and separated persons.
2Median not shown where base is less than 75,000.

the previous year. In addition to the higher exposure to
layoffs or terminations that teenagers face, they are
more likely to be working in temporary jobs by choice,
as they attend school or sift through various jobs in
search of a suitable career. Even when teenagers hold
jobs that are career-oriented, their careers do not begin
until formal schooling or military service is completed.
For all demographic groups shown (except men over
65 years old) successively higher age intervals show
greater levels of job tenure. (See table 2.) The highest
medians occur for men age 55 to 64— exceeding 14
years. Approximately 30 percent of men in this group
have served the same employer for more than 25 years.
At the other extreme, a basic rate of job changing
seems to occur at every age level: close to 9 percent or
more of the workers of all age groups with jobs in Jan­
uary 1981 had started them within the past year.
Men have higher overall median levels of tenure than
women, 4 years compared with 2.5. (See table 2.) Part
of this difference is because of the greater proportion of
working women who are under age 25. Another factor
is the greater likelihood of women leaving jobs to care
for young children. Sharp male-female contrasts in ten­
ure by age do not appear until after the women’s prime
childbearing years.
Overall, black workers had more years of job tenure
than whites did in 1981. (See table 1.) White and black
men had identical median job tenure of 4 years, but
black women had worked longer than white women.
(See table 2.) This difference may be related to the work
patterns of those of childbearing age. White women
with children under age 6 were less likely to be working
than black women, and significantly fewer of the former
were employed full time.4
Job tenure differences between sexes of the same race
were also observed. (See table 2.) For whites, men had
the longer tenure regardless of age. The largest relative
difference in medians for white men and women oc­
curred in the 35-to-44-year age group, where the female
median was only about half that of men. Among

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

blacks, both sexes showed only slight dissimilarities in
tenure from the teens to middle age; the largest differ­
ence was found among those age 55 to 64.
The inhibiting effect young children have on the
worklives of wives may help account for differences in
job tenure by marital status. (See table 3.) While single
men and women had small relative differences in years
on the job, wives had far fewer years than husbands.
Because single persons tend to be young, the typical
single man or woman has accumulated a limited num­
ber of years on their current job. The median level of
job tenure for both single men and women is 1.2 years,
compared with about 3.1 for wives and 6 years for hus­
bands. At most age levels below age 54, husbands have
more years on the job than single men, while wives
have fewer years than their single counterparts.
Firms in growing industries usually hire new persons
as they expand, and these industries will thus show cor­
respondingly low levels of job tenure. Other establish­
ments, in areas which are stagnant or declining, do not
hire as often, letting positions expire as they become va­
cant. If a reduction in personnel is required, it will gen­
erally be concentrated among persons with the least
seniority. Each of these actions increases the observed
job tenure among those still in the industry.

Table 4. Median years on current job, by occupation,
industry, and sex, January 1981
Men

Women

4.0

2.5

4.9
5.7
3.4
3.4
4.4
3.5
3.7
1.8
2.1
17.5
2.3

3.1
3.3
1.7
2.4
3.4
3.1
3.1
1.9
1.8
9.9
4.1

Agriculture.......................................................

7.3

4.4

Wage and salary workers.......................................
Self-employed workers..........................................
Unpaid family workers ..........................................

2.3
16.3
5.2

1.5
8.1
13.3

Nonagricultural industries ...................................

3.9

2.5

Wage and salary workers.......................................
Mining .........................................................
Construction..................................................
Manufacturing................................................
Transportation and public utilities ......................
Wholesale and retail trade...............................
Finance, insurance, and real estate ..................
Service .......................................................
Public administration .......................................
Self-employed workers..........................................
Unpaid family workers ..........................................

3.7
2.6
2.4
5.2
5.6
2.2
4.1
3.1
6.8
6.2

2.4

Occupation and industry

Total, all workers..................................................
OCCUPATION

Professional, technical, and kindred workers...............
Managers and administrators, except farm................
Salesworkers.......................................................
Clerical and kindred workers...................................
Craft and kindred workers .....................................
Operatives, except transport...................................
Transport equipment operatives .............................
Nonfarm laborers.................................................
Service workers...................................................
Farmers and farm managers...................................
Farm laborers and supervisors ...............................
INDUSTRY

n

—

2.1
3.2
3.5
1.5
2.3
2.6
3.0
3.4
5.7

’ Median not shown were base is less than 75,000.
Dashes indicate data not available.

N ote :

35

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Research Summaries

Table 5. Median years on current job of women by age,
marital status, and full- and part-time status, January 1981
Single

Married, spouse Other marital
present
status'

Age
Full
time

Part
time

Full
time

Part
time

Full
time

Part
time

Total, 16 years old and over.......

1.6

0.6

3.4

2.3

3.4

3.6

16 to 24 years ..........................
25 to 34 years ..........................
35 to 44 years ..........................
45 to 54 years ..........................
55 to 64 years ..........................
65 years and older....................

.8
2.6
6.2
11.9
15.3

.6
.9
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

1.0
2.4
3.8
6.7
10.7
11.5

.5
1.2
2.4
4.8
5.8
7.4

.8
1.7
3.2
4.8
8.7
11.3

(2)
1.2
2.3
3.8
5.5
8.5

n

11ncludes widowed, divorced, and separated persons.
2Median not shown where base Is less than 75,000.

In addition, job tenure will also be influenced by skill
level of the work force. Employers are less likely to lay
off or fire skilled workers, as it costs more in hiring and
training costs to replace them.5 Employers may try to
reduce voluntary terminations of more valuable employ­
ees by linking vacation or pension benefits to increased
seniority.
By industry, self-employed men in agriculture had the
longest spells of job tenure. Self-employed workers in
nonagricultural industries also had a high level of job
tenure, although male wage and salary workers in pub­
lic administration ranked highest. (See table 4.)
Since 1963, surveys have found farmers to have the
longest job tenure of any occupational group. They
tend to own their own farms, and remain at work re­
gardless of cyclical fluctuations. In January 1981, medi­
an job tenure for male farmers was 17.5 years, well
above that of all other occupations. Managers and ad­
ministrators have the next highest level of job tenure for
men, followed by professional workers. Laborers— both
farm and nonfarm— have the lowest tenure on their
current job. For women, the patterns by occupation are
similar except farm laborers have relatively high tenure;
probably these women work on family farms owned or
operated by their husbands.
Tabulations of years of tenure were also compiled by
full- or part-time status on one’s current job. In gener­
al, part-time workers had less job tenure than full-time
ones. A typical pattern is displayed in table 5, which
lists job tenure for women by full- and part-time status.
For women who are widowed, divorced, or separated,
relatively little difference by job status is apparent, but
for wives, part-time work on the current job correlates
with fewer years of tenure. Again, it seems likely that a
desire to rearrange work schedules to facilitate child
care is a major factor behind the relationship.
□

the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Most of
the data relate to persons who are 16 years old and over employed in
the civilian labor force in the week ending January 17, 1981. Sampling
variability may be large where numbers are small. Therefore, small
differences between estimates or percentages should be interpreted
with caution.
Employment figures in this study differ significantly from those re­
ported in the regular Current Population Survey (CPS) for January
1981. The primary reason for this difference is that the job tenure
data are not adjusted for nonresponse as are the CPS figures. See Th e
C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n S u rv e y: D esig n a n d M e th o d o lo g y , Technical Paper
No. 40 ( U.S. Department of Commerce, 1978), for more information.
This is the seventh in a series of reports on this subject. The latest
contained data for January 1978 and appeared in the December 1979
M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w . It was reprinted with additional tabular data
and an explanatory note as S p e c ia l L a b o r F o rce R e p o r t 2 3 5 , “Job Ten­
ure Declines as Work Force Changes.” There are no comparisons in
this report between 1978 and 1981 median tenure data, because of a
change in the procedure used to calculate the medians. The 1981 Job
Tenure Survey obtained more detail than earlier ones about persons
who had begun their jobs during the previous year. Such people were
asked the m o n th in which they started work with their present em­
ployers. Additional information can be obtained from the Division of
Labor Force Studies.
' Norman Bowers, “Probing the issues of unemployment duration,”
July 1980, pp. 23-32.
“Job Tenure of Workers, January 1973,” S p e c ia l L a b o r F orce R e ­
p o r t 1 7 2 provided an example of how this might be done.
4 Allyson Sherman Grossman, “More than half of all children have
working mothers,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , February 1981, pp. 44—46;
and unpublished tables from the March 1981 Current Population Sur­
vey.
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ,

One of the best treatments of these issues is Walter Y. Oi, “Labor
as a Quasi-Fixed Factor,” J o u r n a l o f P o litic a l E c o n o m y , December
1962, pp. 538-55. Also see Donald Parsons, “Specific Human Capital:
An Application to Quit Rates and Layoff Rates,” J o u r n a l o f P o litic a l
E c o n o m y , November-December 1972, pp. 1120-43.

How European unions
cope with new technology
Steve Early

and

M att Witt

In European countries, as in the United States,
computerized production systems and robots are being
introduced into manufacturing plants. Electronic sys­
tems are eliminating many tasks for which workers
previously were needed in warehouses, stores, banks,
and insurance companies. Many secretaries, government
workers, reporters, telephone operators, engineers, and
technicians are working at electronic screens called vid­
eo display terminals. Such changes threaten job security
and could make the jobs which remain less interesting,
more isolated and stressful.

--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------This report is based primarily on information from a supplementa­
ry question, “When did . . . start working at his present job or busi­
ness?” in the January 1981 Current Population Survey, conducted by
36


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

Matt Witt is director and Steve Early, a former staff member, of the
American Labor Education Center, Washington, D.C. Research for
this report was supported by the German Marshall Fund of the Unit­
ed States.

European unions generally are not trying to block
technological change; rather they want to be sure such
change will benefit workers as well as employers. To do
this, the unions are asking for: consultation before deci­
sions are made about new technology; technology which
increases rather than replaces the workers’ traditional
skills, and which improves rather than worsens working
conditions; protection from job losses and lower pay
rates; a share in the profits and social benefits created
by new technology; and assurance that new technology
will not be used to undermine the union. To achieve
these goals, they are giving local union committees
more information and power.
By using their powerful labor parties to influence
government policy, European unions have already won
some new rights through legislation. For example, in
Norway and Sweden, unions have the legal right to
complete information about proposed new technology.
Union representatives attend meetings of company
boards of directors, obtain all information available to
those boards, and present the union’s point of view.
Also, national “work environment” laws give unions
the power to veto workplace changes which would ad­
versely affect job safety and health, as many new tech­
nologies do without proper design and planning.
Through collective bargaining, European unions have
won additional rights. For instance, a branch of the
Norwegian Iron and Metal Workers’ Union, which rep­
resents blue-collar and white-collar workers at an Inter­
national Telephone and Telegraph subsidiary, has won
the contract right to block any new computerized sys­
tem that does not meet its approval.
In Germany, a contract covering about one-third of
the metal workers guarantees against a decrease in in­
come because of changing work assignments caused by
new technology. And, at American Express, which em­
ploys 1,200 workers in banks on U.S. military bases,
the German banking union won a contract prohibiting
involuntary layoff or transfer of workers as a result of
technological change.
A new technology benefit for Civil Service unions
representing 600,000 government workers in England
included a 10-percent reduction in working hours.
Another benefit, bargained by many unions in Nor­
way, Sweden, and England, provides video display ter­
minal operators with a 4-hour per day limit on their
machines— scheduled in 2 hours on, 2 hours off rota­
tion. This system forces employers to arrange a variety
of work assignments for clericals who would otherwise
be restricted to their terminals.
European unions are aided in preparing bargaining
proposals by knowledge gained in union-sponsored, em­
ployer-financed training programs on new technology.
Unlike U.S. unions which foot the bill for most labor
education, national laws in Europe require management

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

to pay stewards, local officers, and committee members
for attending union classes.
In Sweden, Germany, Norway, and England, unions
have also obtained millions of dollars in government or
employer funds to pay for training courses in the new
technology.
In Scandinavia, the money for training comes from
national work environment or labor education funds, fi­
nanced by employer contributions largely controlled by
the labor movement. In West Germany and Great Brit­
ain, union training programs are subsidized by govern­
ment departments of industry, research, or technology.
European unions also have obtained government or
employer funds to consult with outside experts on new
technology. Many unions in Norway, Sweden, and
Great Britain get advice from labor-oriented computer
experts from university research programs and technical
institutes, such as the government-funded Norwegian
Computing Center, Swedish Work Life Center, and the
British Center for Alternative Industrial Technological
Systems. Under a government grant, the German Metal
Workers set up a national system of “innovation advice
bureaus” consisting of engineers, economists, and other
technicians, to help local unions evaluate and bargain
over employers’ new technology plans.
German unions have also been represented for several
years on advisory committees which give government
research and development funds to projects that im­
prove the work environment. This allows German
unions to lobby for inclusion of health and safety fea­
tures into new technology at the developmental stage.
Further, German unions are seeking a requirement
that they be consulted before employers and equipment
suppliers are given government money to experiment
with production systems, such as computerized machine
tools and industrial robots.
When a local union in Europe uses its rights to re­
spond to technological change, the results can provide
quite a contrast to comparable situations in the United
States. For example, metal workers at an aircraft parts
plant in Kongsberg, Norway, have had far more success
in coping with the introduction of computer-based ma­
chine tools than have workers at a similar plant in
Lynn, Massachusetts.
At Kongsberg, the trained union technology commit­
tee received complete information before the com­
puterized machine tools were installed. On the basis of
this information, the committee insisted that machine
operators already on the job be trained to do the com­
puter programming and repairs. As a result, the ma­
chinists’ skills were broadened rather than narrowed by
the technological change.
In contrast, at Lynn, the equipment was installed
without consultation with the union. Now supervisors
or nonunion programmers handle the computer work,
37

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Research Summaries
thereby reducing many skilled machinists to “machine
tenders” or “button pushers” with less interesting work
and lower pay. Job losses for union members are possi­
ble, and any future job action by the union will be less
effective.
rn

Cost-of-living indexes
for Americans living abroad
The U.S. Department of State has computed new index­
es of living costs for selected foreign cities. These index­
es compare the costs (in dollars) of representative
consumer goods and services (excluding housing and
education) purchased at foreign posts with the costs of
comparable goods and services in Washington, D.C.
In most of the foreign cities, living costs for Ameri­
cans are higher than in Washington, D.C. However, in
the last 2 years, relative costs have declined in many
cities, as the appreciation of the U.S. dollar exchange
rate offset, in part, the higher prices abroad.
For example, although prices in Switzerland increased
at the same rate as in the United States, living costs
were down 22 percent in Geneva— from 176 to 137—
according to the May 1981 index, because 21 percent of
the higher Swiss prices was offset by the appreciation of
the U.S. dollar. Similarly, living costs for Americans
were down 8 percent in Tokyo— from 155 to 142— ac­
cording to the February 1982 index. Japanese prices
rose 3 percent more than U.S. prices over the previous
year, but appreciation of the dollar offset 10 percent of
the higher Japanese prices.
The new index for Rome, however, shows living costs
down by only 4 percent, even though the U.S. dollar
exchange rate appreciated about 25 percent, because
consumer prices in Rome rose 20 percent more than
prices in Washington, D.C. In some countries, recent
price increases have been greater than the appreciation
of the dollar. For example, the new (January 1982) in­
dex for Mexico City showed U.S. dollar costs for Amer­
icans up 6 percent over the previous year because, while
the dollar appreciated 12 percent versus the peso, Mexi­
can prices rose 19 percent more than U.S. prices. (In
February, the peso was devalued, and costs for Ameri­
cans have sharply declined.)
It is advisable to check the prevailing exchange rates
whenever using the indexes of living costs abroad be­
cause the rates are subject to sudden shifts, and differ­
ent rates would substantially affect living costs in
dollars.
The indexes of living costs abroad are computed in
order to establish allowances for American government
employees assigned to foreign posts where the cost of
38


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

Table 1. Indexes of living costs abroad, excluding
housing and education, July 1982
[Washington, D.C. =100]
Survey
date

Monetary
unit

Rate of
exchange
per
U.S. Dollar

Local
index

Argentina: Buenos Aires.........
Australia: Canberra .........
Austria: Vienna................
Bahrain: Manama...........
Belgium: Brussels..............

Aug. 1981
Sep. 1981
Jan. 1982
Nov. 1980
Apr. 1981

Peso
Dollar
Shilling
Dinar
Franc

7350
0.8547
16.4
0.3774
37.0

107
126
137
138
126

Brazil: Sao Paulo......................
Canada: Ottawa.............
China: Beijing......................
France: Paris......................
Germany: Frankfurt ..............

Oct. 1980
Nov. 1981
July 1980
Mar. 1981
Feb. 1981

Cruzeiro
Dollar
Yuan
Franc
Mark

58.3
1.18
1.46
4.80
2.00

96
105
96
153
138

Hong Kong: Hong Kong .............
India: New Delhi......................
Israel: Tel Aviv........................
Italy: Rome .............................
Japan: Tokyo........................

Apr. 1981
Mar. 1981
May 1981
Feb. 1982
Feb. 1982

Dollar
Rupee
Shekel
Lira
Yen

5.40
8.25
9.60
1300
230

115
93
125
108
142

Korea: Seoul ..........................
Mexico: Mexico, D.F..................
Netherlands: The Hague.............
Nigeria: Lagos ..........................
Philippines: Manila ....................

June 1981
Jan. 1982
Feb. 1982
Mar. 1981
Dee. 1980

Won
Peso
Guilder
Naira
Peso

684
26.4
2.60
0.5774
7.66

125
110
125
169
104

Saudi Arabia: Al Khobar (Dhahran)
Singapore: Singapore................
South Africa: Johannesburg .......
Spain: Madrid ..........................
Sweden: Stockholm..................

July 1981
July 1981
Nov. 1981
Feb. 1982
May 1981

Riyal
Dollar
Rand
Peseta
Krona

3.38
2.16
0.9524
99.0
4.80

142
118
103
114
148

Switzerland: Geneva...............
United Arab Emirates: Abu Dhabi .
United Kingdom: London.............
U.S.S.R.: Moscow ....................
Venezuela: Caracas..................

May 1981
May 1981
Apr. 1981
Dee. 1981
Sep. 1981

Franc
Dirham
Pound
Ruble
Bolivar

2.01
3.64
0.5000
0.7000
4.28

137
133
130
142
142

Country and city

S o urce :

U.S. Department of State, Allowances Staff.

living is significantly higher than in Washington, D.C.
In addition, indexes are computed for American private
employees. (The indexes shown in table 1 are those
computed for private Americans.) The indexes and post
allowances cover most living costs, except housing and
education which are covered by separate allowances.
The indexes of living costs abroad and quarters
(housing) allowances for selected foreign cities are
published quarterly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
They are now available by subscription, or single copy,
from the Superintendent of Documents. The new sub­
scription series include indexes for more than 160 cities,
housing allowances for about 75 cities, and hardship
differentials for all important hardship posts.
U.S. Department o f State Indexes o f Living Costs
Abroad, Quarters Allowances, and Hardship Differentials
can be ordered from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20402. Price for an annual subscription (four quarterly
issues) is $6.50 domestic, $8.15 foreign; individual cop­
ies, $1.75 domestic, $2.20 foreign. A description of the
statistics and overseas allowances system, U.S. Depart­
ment o f State Indexes o f Living Costs Abroad and Quar­
ters Allowances: A Technical Description (Report 568), is
available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
□

Special
Labor Force
R e p o rts- Summaries

Labor force patterns of students,
graduates, and dropouts, 1981
A n n e M cD ougall Y oung

After having increased for nearly two decades, the labor
force participation rate for students age 16 to 24 began
to slip in 1978, starting a downward trend that was still
evident in the early 1980’s. Most of the decline has oc­
curred among teenagers, especially those 16 and 17.
For out-of-school youth 16 to 24, the labor force pat­
tern over the past two decades has mirrored the trend
among adults 25 and over. Rates for young men drifted
down, while those for young women advanced strongly.
(See table 1.)
Detailed information on the work activity of school
age youth is obtained from a special survey conducted
each October. This report summarizes data that have
recently become available from the 1981 survey.'

School and work
About 46 percent of the students 16 to 24 were in the
work force in October 1981, down from nearly 49 per­
cent in 1978. This decline may be related to a number
of factors, including the possibility of greater competi­
tion with women over 24 for jobs, especially for parttime jobs, and perhaps some discouragement with em­
ployment prospects as economic growth has slowed.
Some analysts have suggested that the labor force ac­
tivity of school age youth has been affected by the
increased labor force participation of women.2 For ex­
ample, James Grant and Daniel Hammermesh have
concluded that “competition from adult women has
very likely had a negative impact on the labor market
for youths.”3 During the expansionary era of the 1960’s
and early 1970’s, student labor force rates rose along
with those for women. However, in the late 1970’s and
early 1980’s, the competition for jobs has intensified,
and students were often looking for the same jobs that
were also sought by older women.

Anne McDougall Young is an economist in the Division of Labor
Force Studies, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


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

The decreases in labor force participation rates of stu­
dents have not changed the historical pattern by race—
the highest rates being for whites, followed by Hispanics, and the lowest for blacks. However, while the par­
ticipation rate for white students remained relatively
unchanged from 1980 to 1981, the rate for black stu­
dents dropped to the 1975 recession level. The trend for
male Hispanic students has been similar to that for
blacks, while the rates for Hispanic women have been
too volatile to detect a trend.
Labor force participation rates for young women no
longer in school have been an exception to the trend
among youth, rising by 13 percentage points since 1970.
In part, this rise reflects the growing proportion of
young women who have completed high school, and the
much higher labor force rates of graduates, compared
with dropouts. Probably more important was the in­
crease in proportion of out-of-school 16-to-24-year-old
women who are not yet married— from a third in 1970
to a half in 1981.4 Their labor force rate was 82 percent,
compared with 64 percent for their ever-married (that
Table 1. Labor force participation rates for persons 16 to
24 years old, by school enrollment status, sex, and race,
selected years, October 1960 to October 1981
School
Men
Women
Both
enrollment
sexes
status and year
Total White Black Hispanic Total White Black Hispanic

Enrolled
1960
1965
1970
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

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

31.8 36.4
35.0 39.8
40.7 42.9
44.0 44.5
45.3 47.1
46.8 48.3
48 7 49.5
47.7 48.3
47.4 47.8
46.2 46.7

35.8
43.3
44.5
47.3
49.6
51.3
52.9
51.5
50.4
50.1

41.9
33.3
29.2
27.2
32.9
31.1
29.3
30.5
32.0
27.5

68.9
70.4
73.1
77.8
79.1
80.4
81.6
81.5
81.6
81.9

94.9
94.1
93.2
93.7
93.7
94.3
94.2
93.6
93.5
93.4

95.0
93.6
84.9
83.2
81.3
86.0
85.4
85.3
82.4
82.5

_
—
—

40.3
42.8
45.3
50.1
42.1
45.7
40.2

26.0
28.9
38.0
43.5
43.4
45.2
47.8
47.1
47.0
45.7

26.6
30.0
40.0
45.9
46.9
48.8
50.7
50.5
50.6
48.7

21.2
20.3
25.3
30.4
24.6
24.1
30.5
32.0
26.8
29.9

50.2
54.1
600
65.8
67.7
69.3
71.4
71.6
72.3
73.0

49.4
53.5
60.3
67.3
69.3
72.5
72.8
73.5
74.3
74.7

55.1
58.3
57.9
57.5
59.0
62.8
63.3
60.5
62.6
65.3

_
—
—

32.2
33.7
35.7
42.9
32.0
37.4
35.8

Not enrolled
1960
1965
1970
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

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

N ote :

95.0
94.1
91.9
92.1
92.1
93.2
93.1
92.5
91.8
91.7

—
—
—

91.3
90.1
94.1
92.9
93.1
89.6
90.3

_
—
—

51.2
53.6
51.0
59.4
61.5
58.2
61.2

Rates are labor force as percent of population.

39

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Special Labor Force Reports— Summaries
is, married, divorced, separated, or widowed) counter­
parts. Labor force participation of women no longer in
school rose regardless of race or ethnicity.
In general, there has been a relatively steady decline
in the labor force participation rates of black male
youth no longer in school. Whereas their labor force
rate equaled that of their white counterparts in 1960, by
1981 there was a 10-percentage point difference. Re­
search on the declining participation rates has produced
contradictory results regarding the influence of the sub­
urbanization of many youth jobs, the significance of the

minimum wage, and the importance of personal charac­
teristics which youth bring to the job.5
Some reports have suggested that because of various
forms of discouragement— such as high unemployment
rates among peers, older friends, and neighbors; the
limited range of jobs available; and the perception of
lingering discrimination— some youth may have decid­
ed that the job search was not worth continuing. Paul
Osterman’s study of labor force activity among innercity youth, based on decennial census data, showed that
there was “a considerably more powerful discourage-

Table 2. Employment status of persons 16 to 24 years old, by school enrollment status, years of school completed sex
age, and race, October 1980 and 1981
[Numbers in thousands]
Population
Characteristics

Labor force

1980

1980

Revised

Revised

Unemployment rate

Population

1980
1981

Revised

Characteristics
1981

ALL PERSONS

Labor force

1980

1980

Revised

Revised

Unemployment rate
1980

1981

Revised

1981

BLACK

Total ................

37,103

36,946

24,921

24,583

13.9

14.8

Total..................

4,892

4,933

2,649

2,671

29.9

33.2

Enrolled, total ...............
Men......................
Women ................

15,713
7,997
7,716

15,909
8,150
7,759

7,454
3,825
3,629

7,352
3,803
3,549

13.7
14.8
12.5

14.4
14.3
14.6

Enrolled, total................
Men......................
Women ................

2,028
952
1,076

2,083
1,010
1,072

590
303
287

587
268
320

32.0
35.6
28.2

35.4
26.9
42.2

16 to 19 years.......
20 to 24 years.......

11,126
4,587

11,208
4,700

4,836
2,618

4,706
2,646

16.7
8.2

18.1
7.8

16 to 19 years .......
20 to 24 years .......

1,566
462

1,598
485

371
219

368
219

37.2
23.3

45.4
18.7

High school ...........
College ................
Full-time students .
Part-time students .

8,050
7,664
6,396
1,268

8,108
7,800
6,503
1,297

3,461
3,996
2,854
1,142

3,276
4,076
2,901
1,175

19.0
9.1
10.5
5.7

20.0
10.0
11.9
5.1

High school.............
College ................
Full-time students .
Part-time students .

1,282
747
641
106

1,303
780
661
119

292
298
214
84

280
307
222
85

40.8
23.5
29.9
7.1

49.3
22.5
28.4
7.1

21,390
10,245
11,145

21,037
10,018
11,019

17,467
9,405
8,062

17,231
9,185
8,046

14.0
14.9
12.9

15.0
15.2
14.7

Not enrolled, total...........
Men......................
Women ................

2,864
1,322
1,542

2,850
1,292
1,558

2,059
1,089
970

2,084
1,065
1,019

29.3
28.9
29.8

32.7
31.2
34.2

5,230
2,025
3,205
11,654

5,142
1,921
3,222
11,451

3,530
1,297
2,233
9,809

3,501
1,258
2,246
9,673

25.3
29.1
23.0
12.5

26.9
32.9
23.6
13.8

955
723
2,141
1,431

913
684
2,165
1,501

543
441
1,618
1,106

552
425
1,660
1,144

44.0
45.7
24.9
26.2

48.2
49.9
28.2
29.5

3,038
1,467

2,926
1,517

2,716
1,408

2,613
1,443

8.8
5.8

8.6
5.3

School completed:
High school:
Less than 4 years
16 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
4 years only. . . .
College:
1 to 3 years . . . .
4 years or more .

372
106

348
88

305
103

306
84

22.3
5.8

22.5
8.3

Total ................

31,345

31,110

21,811

21,474

11.9

12.5

Total..................

2,624

2,686

1,650

1,654

15.5

15.5

Enrolled, total ...............
Men......................
Women ................

13,242
6,821
6,421

13,312
6,853
6,459

6,688
3,437
3,251

6,576
3,431
3,145

11.9
12.9
11.0

12.5
13.2
11.7

Enrolled, total................
Men......................
Women ................

920
455
465

985
517
467

377
208
170

375
208
167

17.8
17.8
17.6

16.0
17.8
13.8

16 to 19 years .......
20 to 24 years.......

9,270
3,972

9,285
4,027

4,367
2,321

4,242
2,334

14.8
6.5

15.6
6.8

16 to 19 years .......
20 to 24 years .......

705
215

753
232

241
137

227
148

21.6
10.2

19.4
10.8

High school ...........
College ................
Full-time students .
Part-time students .

6,566
6,678
5,567
1,109

6,572
6,740
5,613
1,127

3,096
3,592
2,579
1,012

2,946
3,632
2,601
1,031

16.7
7.9
8.9
5.1

17.0
8.8
10.4
4.8

High school.............
College ................
Full-time students .
Part-time students .

579
341
255
86

627
358
288
69

184
193
118
77

180
195
127
68

23.9
12.4
10.2
14.3

20.0
11.3
11.0

18,103
8,714
9,389

17,798
8,562
9,236

15,123
8,146
6,977

14,898
7,996
6,902

11.9
13.1
10.5

12.5
13.1
11.7

Not enrolled, total...........
Men................
Women ................

1,704
840
864

1,701
816
885

1,273
752
521

1,279
737
542

14.8
14.4
15.5

15.4
15.6
15.1

4,166
4,511
13,592
10,025

4,107
4,132
13,663
9,778

2,931
3,628
11,495
8,597

2,890
3,307
11,587
8,417

21.6
16.5
10.5
10.8

22.7
19.0
10.6
11.6

922
487
1,217
589

891
486
1,215
634

628
337
936
478

620
333
945
501

18.9
20.2
12.9
12.3

18.1
24.6
12.3
15.0

2,340
1,255

2,253
1,338

7.2
5.7

6.7
5.0

School completed:
High school:
Less than 4 years
16 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
4 years only. . . .
College:
1 to 3 years . . . .
4 years or more .

141
36

129
35

123
33

3.9
(’ )

8.1
(’ )

Not enrolled, total .........
Men..................
Women ................
School completed:
High school:
Less than 4 years
16 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
4 years only ...
College:
1 to 3 years ...
4 years or more
WHITE

Not enrolled, total .........
Men......................
Women ................
School completed:
High school:
Less than 4 years
16 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
4 years only ...
College:
1 to 3 years ...
4 years or more

HISPANIC

2,588
1,324

2,511
1,402 I

1Percent not shown where base is less than 75,000.

40


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

N ote :

155
38 |

Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

(')

ment effect” for black youth in 1970 than in 1960 and
reasoned that “this doubtlessly explains the adverse
participation trends over the decade.”6 A recent study
suggests that some black out-of-school teenagers whose
families were on welfare may be inhibited from working
because their family allowance would be reduced by the
amount of their earnings.7

Unemployment rates
Unemployment rates for youth in and out of school
have fluctuated considerably since 1970. From 13.2 per­
cent for the enrolled and 10.9 percent for not enrolled
youth in 1970, they reached 15.0 and 14.9 percent in
1975, dropped to 12.5 and 10.0 percent in 1978, and
climbed back to 14.4 and 15.0 percent in October 1981.
These changes reflected not only the recessions in 1975
and 1981, but also continuing problems with finding
part-time jobs to fit the schedules of students, and full­
time jobs to match the varying skills and educational
attainment of out-of-school youth. While it is to be
expected that youth unemployment rates would be par­
ticularly vulnerable to cyclical changes, the rates for
youth have been much higher during the past decade
than in the 1960’s.
Within the enrolled group, the unemployment rate
for male students was relatively unchanged over the
year, whereas the rate had increased sharply for women.
(See table 2.) Most of the rise occurred among female
high school students but teenage women in college were
also affected. Only the 20-to-24 age group was un­
touched by increased joblessness. The unemployment
rate for black teenage students rose to 45.4 percent over
the year, nearly three times that for whites. Again, most
of the increase was among women in high school. His­
panic students’ jobless rate remained stable.
Among youth no longer in school, unemployment
rates ranged from 5.3 percent for college graduates to
26.9 percent for high school dropouts. As was the case
for students, the burden of increased unemployment
over the year was limited to women. Their overall un­
employment rate rose almost 2 percentage points while
the rate for men held steady. Only women who had
graduated from college showed no change in their un­
employment rate, which continued to be somewhat low­
er than the rate for male college graduates in the age
group. Out-of-school black youth have historically had
very high unemployment rates; in October 1981, about
a third of those in the labor force were looking for
work. The unemployment rate for Hispanic youth (15.4
percent) differed little from that for whites.

Recent graduates and dropouts
A record 1.6 million youth who graduated from high
school in 1981 were attending college in October 1981.
(See table 3.) Some 54 percent of all recent graduates

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

were enrolled, compared with 49 percent a year earlier.
A similar surge in college enrollment occurred during
the 1974-75 recession when many youth chose school
as an alternative to unemployment or a less desirable
job. The labor force participation rate of new college
students was 44 percent, substantially higher than in
the early 1970’s, reflecting, in part, the increase in
work-study programs associated with student aid.8
Most recent high school graduates who did not go on
to college were in the labor force in October. At 84 per­
cent, their labor force participation rate was also higher
than in 1970, mostly because of an increase in the rate
for women. The unemployment rate for recent gradu­
ates not in college— 21.4 percent— was substantially
Table 3. School enrollment and labor force status of
1981 high school graduates and 1980-81 high school
dropouts 16 to 24 years old, by sex and race, October
1981
[Numbers in thousands]

Characteristic

Civilian labor force
Civilian
noninstiUnemployed
Participation
Employed
tutional Number
rate
population
Number Percent

Total, 1981
high school
graduates .
Men ....................
Women................

3,053
1,490
1,563

1,899
927
972

62.2
62.2
62.2

1,524
772
752

375
155
220

19.7
16.7
22.6

White ..................
Black ..................
Hispanic ...............

2,624
358
146

1,674
189
77

63.8
52.8
52.7

1,406
93
61

268
96
16

16.0
50.8
20.8

Enrolled in college ..

1,646

719

43.7

597

122

17.0

Men...............
Women .........

816
830

341
378

41.8
45.5

300
297

41
81

12.0
21.4

Full-time student
Part-time student

1,520
126

612
107

40.3
84.9

499
98

113
9

18.5
8.4

White.............
Black.............
Hispanic.........

1,434
154
76

644
47
27

44.9
30.5
35.5

552
27
25

92
20
2

14.3
(')
(’ )

Not enrolled in
college .............

1,407

1,180

83.9

927

253

21.4

Men...............
Women .........
Single . . . .
Other marital status

674
733
616

586
594
522

86.9
81.0
84.7

472
455
396

114
139
126

19.5
23.4
24.1

117

72

81.9

59

13

(')

White.............
Black.............
Hispanic.........

1,190
204
70

1,030
142
50

86.6
69.6
(’ )

854
66
36

176
76
14

17.1
53.5
(’ )

714

450

63.2

286

164

36.4

Men...............
Women .........
Single . . . .
Other marital status

366
348
275

271
179
146

74.0
51.7
53.1

192
94
78

79
85
68

29.2
47.5
46.6

73

35

18

17

(’ )

White ...........
Black ...........
Hispanics . . . .

532
165
91

363
77
63

257
22
41

106
55
22

29.2
71.4
(’ )

Total, 198081 high
school
dropouts2

n
68.2
46.7
69.2

’ Percent not shown where base is less than 75,000.
2Persons who dropped out of school between October 1980 and October 1981. In addi­
tion, 78,000 persons 14 and 15 years old dropped out of school.
N ote : Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals.

41

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Special Labor Force Reports— Summaries
Table 4. Labor force status of college students 16 to 24
years old, by enrollment status and type of college
attended, October 1981
[Numbers in thousands]
Selected
characteristics

Enrolled

Full-time students

Total Percent Total

Part-time students

2-year 4-year
Total 2-year 4-year
college college
college college

POPULATION

Total . . .
White.............
Black.............
Hispanic.........

7,799
6,741
781
358

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

83.3
83.2
84.6
80.0

19.3
18.9
20.1
33.9

64.0
64.3
64.5
46.2

16.7
16.8
15.4
19.9

8.8
8.8
8.5
15.7

79
81
69
4.3

4,075
3,632
318
195

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

70.9
71.3
68.9
66.1

21.5
21.2
21.6
32.3

49.4
50.1
47.3
33.9

29.1
28.7
31.1
33.9

15.2
14.9
14.5
25.9

138
138
166
7.9

52.3
53.9
40.7
54.5

—

—
—
—

43.8
45.7
31.1
44.5

57.4
60.1
40.9
51.3

39.7
41.5
28.0
39.5

89.4
90.8
77.2
(3)

88.6
90.6
(3)
(3)

90 3
91.1
(3)
(3)

9.4
8.4
23.1
9.6

11.4
9.6
(3)
(3)

8.5
7.9
16.4
(3)

3.6
3.7
4.5
(3)

4.2
4.4
(3)
(3)

30
29

LABOR FORCE

Total . . .
White...........
Black.............
Hispanic.........
LABOR FORCE
PARTICIPATION
RATE1

Total .. .
White.............
Black.............
Hispanic.........
UNEMPLOY­
MENT RATE2

Total ...
White.............
Black.............
Hispanic.........

10.0
8.8
22.0
10.3

—

—
—

-

--------- F O O T N O T E S ---------(3)

1Labor force as percent of population.
2Unemployed as percent of labor force.
3Percent not shown where base is less than 75,000.

higher than a year earlier. It was also higher than the
rate for all youth in the age group with 4 years of high
school only (13.8 percent).

College students at work
Labor force participation of students is constrained
by geography, classroom schedules, and transportation
facilities, as well as general conditions in the economy.
With opportunities for employment generally limited to
the vicinity of the college, the growth of 2-year colleges
in metropolitan areas has allowed many persons to fur­
ther their education while holding down a job. The par­
ticular importance of employment for part-time students
is shown in table 4. Almost 9 of 10 such students were
in the labor force in October 1981.
The close connection between part-time schooling
and labor force activity is further illustrated by the low
unemployment rates for such students, regardless of
race or ethnic origin. The decision to attend college part
time, and the means to pay for it, appear to be directly
linked to the desire for advancement by youth already
employed. The unemployment rates for part-time stu­
dents were about the same for whites and blacks and
were consistently much lower than the rates for full­
time students.
42


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

Hispanic youth, some of them relatively new to the
United States,9 have made extensive use of low cost,
2-year community colleges— almost 50 percent of all
Hispanic college students were enrolled in such colleges
in 1981, compared with 28 percent of the white, and 29
percent of the black students. More than half of the
Hispanic students were working while attending school.
Black students were much less likely than either
white or Hispanic students to combine work and col­
lege. The lower labor force participation rates of black
college students have persisted despite their much lower
family income. A third of their families had incomes of
less than $15,000 compared with a tenth of the white
families and a fourth of the Hispanic families with stu­
dents in college in 1981. Whereas many jobs in retail
sales, food, and other service industries have moved to
suburban malls, the majority of black students live in
central cities.10 Lack of convenient transportation may
limit their access to jobs located on the periphery of the
city. The substantial number of students attending the
many black colleges located in rural areas also face lim­
ited employment opportunities.
□

' This report is based primarily on supplementary questions in the
October 1981 Current Population Survey, conducted and tabulated
for the Bureau of Labor Statistics by the Bureau of the Census. Most
data relate to persons 16 to 24 years of age in the civilian
noninstitutional population in the week ending Oct. 17, 1981.
Sampling variability may be relatively large in cases where the
numbers are small. Small estimates, or small differences between esti­
mates, should be interpreted with caution. For the most recent report
in this series, see Anne McDougall Young, “Labor force activity
among students, graduates, and dropouts in 1980,” M o n th ly L a b o r
R ev ie w , July 1981, pp. 31-33.
2 See Howard Hayghe, “Marital and family patterns of workers: an
update,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , May 1982, pp. 53-56.
James H. Grant and Daniel S. Hammermesh, “Labor Market
Competition Among Youths, White Women and Others,” R e v ie w o f
E c o n o m ic s a n d S ta tistic s , August 1981.
4 Unpublished data, October supplement to the Current Population
Survey, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
5For example, see Charles W. Dayton, “The Young Person’s Job
Search: Insights from a Study,” J o u r n a l o f C o u n se lin g P sych o lo g y, July
1981, pp. 321-333; Minimum Wage Study Commission, R e p o r t o f th e
M in im u m W a g e S tu d y C o m m issio n , 7 volumes, May-June 1981;
James Franncis Ragen, Jr., “The Impact of Minimum Wage Legisla­
tion on the Youth Labor Market,” PhD Thesis, Washington Universi­
ty, December 1975; Arvil V. Adams and Garth L. Mangum, T h e
L in g e r in g C risis o f Y o u th U n e m p lo y m e n t, Upjohn Institute for Em­
ployment Research, June 1978. See also U.S. General Accounting Of­
fice, “Labor Market Problems of Teenagers Result Largely From
Doing Poorly in School,” R e p o r t to th e H o n o r a b le C h a r le s R a n g e l,
U.S. House of Representatives, Mar. 29, 1982.
6Paul Osterman, G e ttin g
MIT Press, 1980, p. 126.

S ta r te d ,

The

Y o u th L a b o r M a r k e t,

p. 54.
National Center for Education Statistics, T h e
1 9 8 0 E d itio n , Table 4.18.

The

R e p o r t to th e H o n o r a b le C h a r le s R a n g e l,

8
tion,

C o n d itio n o f E d u c a ­

“Persons of Spanish Origin in the United States: March 1979,”
Series P-20, No. 354, p. 17.
10Unpublished data from the 1981 Current Population Survey.

C u r r e n t P o p u la tio n R ep o r ts ,

M ajor Agreements
Expiring Next M onth
T his list of co llectiv e bargaining agreem ents expiring in O ctob er is based on contracts on file in the
B ureau’s O ffic e of W ages and Industrial R ela tio n s. T he list includes agreem ents covering 1,000
w orkers or m ore.

Employer and location

Industry

Labor organization1

Number of
workers

American Enka Corp. (Lowland, Tenn.) ....................................................

Chemicals.................................

United Textile Workers........................

2,400

Bayly Corp. (Interstate).................................................................................

A pp arel....................................

Clothing and Textile Workers ............

1,200

Chain and Independent Food Stores (New Mexico)2 .................................
Colonial Stores, Inc., Raleigh Division (North Carolina) ..........................
Consolidated Gas Supply Corp. (Interstate)................................................
Cotton Garment and Outerwear Agreement (Philadelphia, Pa.)2 ..............

Retail trade .............................
Retail trade .............................
U tilitie s ....................................
A p p arel....................................

Food and Commercial W orkers..........
Food and Commercial W orkers.........
Service Employees ...............................
Clothing and Textile Workers ............

2,300
1,400
1,750
1,550

Dayton Power and Light Co. (O h io )...................................... .....................

Utilities ....................................

Utility W orkers....................................

2,600

General Motors Corp. (Interstate)................................................................
General Telephone Company of Illinois, Service, Construction and Supply
Departments (Illinois)
GTE Sylvania, Inc. (Seneca Falls, N.Y.) ....................................................

Transportation equipment . . . .
Communication........................

Plant Guard Workers (In d .).................
Electrical Workers (IBEW) .................

2,550
1,750

Electrical products...................

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

1,000

Hesston Corp. (Hesston, K a n s .)...................................................................

Machinery ...............................

1,450

Hotel Association of Ohio (O h io )................................................................

H o te ls ......................................

Hesston Corporation Workers
Association
Hotel Employees and Restaurant
Employees

Jewel Companies, Inc., Eisner Food Stores Division (Chicago, 111.) ..........

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

Retail Workers ....................................

1,400

Mack Trucks, Inc., Master Shop Agreement (Interstate)............................
Massey-Ferguson, Inc., Master Agreement (Interstate)...............................

Transportation equipment . . . .
Machinery ...............................

Auto W orkers......................................
Auto W orkers......................................

6,250
1,500

Pittsburgh Buildings Association (Pennsylvania)........................................

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

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

1,200

Retail Butchers Fish and Poultry Agreement (California)2 ........................
Retail Meat Markets and Frozen Food Locker Plants
(California)2
Rubbermaid, Inc. (Wooster, Ohio) ..............................................................

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

Food and Commercial W orkers..........
Food and Commercial W orkers..........

3,500
1,500

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

Rubber Workers .................................

1,300

Simmons Co. (Interstate)...............................................................................

Furniture.................................

Upholsterers.........................................

2,100

TRW, Inc. (O h io)..........................................................................................

Transportation equipment . . . .

Aircraft Workers Alliance, Inc. (Ind.) .

4,000

Wisconsin Public Service Corp. (Wisconsin)...............................................

Utilities ....................................

Operating Engineers.............................

1,000

1Affiliated with A FL-C IO except where noted as independent (Ind.).


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

1,600

industry area (group of companies signing same contract).

43

Developments in
Industrial Relations

Job security focus of GE contract
After 2 months of negotiations, the General Electric
Co. and 13 unions representing 100,000 workers settled
on 3-year contracts that featured improved job security
provisions. The breakthrough in the negotiations oc­
curred when the two unions that bargain with GE on a
“national” basis— the International Union of Electrical
Workers (representing 65,000 workers) and the United
Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers (13,000 work­
ers)— settled. Afterwards, the other member unions of
the Coordinated Bargaining Committee settled on the
same terms. Six of the unions had initiated the commit­
tee in 1965 to strengthen their bargaining position with
GE and with Westinghouse Electric Corp. (See “Collec­
tive Bargaining in the Electrical Machinery, Equipment,
and Supplies Industry,” Current Wage Developments,
March 1982, pp. 42-44.)
One of the job security provisions specifies that work­
ers shifted to lower-rated jobs because of the transfer of
work or the introduction of robots or automated manu­
facturing machines will be guaranteed their former pay
rate for 26 weeks. Following are other job-security pro­
visions which are separate from the existing Income Ex­
tension Aid Program that applies only to laid-off
workers:
agreed to give a 6-month notice of plant closings
or transfers of work and a 60-day notice before the
use of robots or automated manufacturing machines.
• The lump-sum severance payment for 15-year work­
ers affected by plant closings was increased from 1
week to 2 weeks of pay for each year of service. For
other employees with at least 2 years of service, the
payment was set at 1.5 weeks of pay for each year,
with a minimum of 4 weeks of pay.
• A liberalized table of age and service requirements
that made more terminated employees eligible for
• GE

“Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George
Ruben of the Division of Developments in Labor-Management Re­
lations, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is largely based on infor­
mation from secondary sources.
44


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

•

•

•
•

monthly income instead of severance pay until they
are re-employed or reach optional retirement age. Un­
der the revised table, eligibility ranges from employ­
ees age 50 with 25 years of service to those who are
age 55 with 10 years of service. The benefit equals 2
percent of monthly pay multiplied by years of service,
up to 50 percent of current pay.
Employees at least 50 years of age with a minimum
of 25 years of service who are affected by plant clos­
ings will not have their pensions actuarily reduced.
Instead, their benefits will be calculated as if they are
age 60. They will also receive a supplement of up to
$175 a month until age 62.
Employees with at least 7 years of service who are af­
fected by plant closings will have a vested pension
right.
Displaced workers will receive job placement assis­
tance and up to $1,800 for education and retraining.
Employees who are at least age 50 with at least 25
years of service who are affected by plant closings
will continue to be covered by company-financed
medical and life insurance until they are 65 or find
another job. Dependents also will be eligible for in­
surance continuation, if they continue to make a con­
tribution toward the premium cost.

The accord called for a June 28, 1982, general pay
increase of 7 percent plus a special “decompression”
pay adjustment of 2 cents an hour for employees earn­
ing $8.35 to $8.49 an hour, 4 cents for those earning
$8.50 to $8.64, 6 cents for those earning $8.65 to $8.79,
and so forth. The parties indicated that the special pay
adjustment for higher skilled workers and the percent­
age general increase (rather than a flat cents per hour
increase of equal cost) were provided to relieve a com­
pression of the pay rate structure.
The workers also will receive 3-percent specified pay
increases in June of 1983 and 1984. The provision for
automatic semiannual cost-of-living pay adjustments
was modified to provide for pay increases of 1 cent an
hour for each 0.175-percent rise in the Consumer Price
Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers,
beginning June 27, 1983. The first adjustment during

the agreement term (on December 27, 1982) will be cal­
culated at the previous rate of 1 cent for each 0.2-per­
cent movement in the index.
The parties said that specified and cost-of-living pay
adjustments will average $2.10 an hour, or 23.3 percent,
over the agreement term, based on an assumed price in­
dex rise of 6 percent a year.
There were a number of improvements in the pension
plan. Under the formula that applies to most retiring
workers, benefit rates were raised to $12-$ 17.50 a
month, varying according to pre-retirement average an­
nual earnings, for each year of service, effective July 1,
1982, and to $14-$ 19.50 on January 1, 1984. The previ­
ous range was from $10 to $15. Comparable changes
also were made in the alternate pension formula. Begin­
ning in 1983, the employee contribution toward pen­
sions will be 3 percent of that portion of annual
earnings in excess of $12,000 (formerly $9,000).
Other improvements included 5 weeks of vacation af­
ter 20 years of service, instead of 25 (maximum time off
remained at 6 weeks after 30 years); $500,000 instead of
$350,000 catastrophic medical coverage; $30,000 instead
of $20,000 minimum life insurance; and starting in
1983, $225 instead of $200 maximum sickness and acci­
dent benefits for disabilities.
Negotiations were continuing at Westinghouse, where
contracts in recent years have usually been patterned af­
ter GE agreements. The Westinghouse negotiations in­
volve more than 50,000 workers.

Teamsters, United Parcel Service settle
Nearly 85,000 Teamsters members were covered by
an agreement with United Parcel Service ( u p s ) that did
not provide for any specified wage increases over its
37-month term, ending on June 1, 1985. This was simi­
lar to the union’s settlement with the general trucking
industry. (See Monthly Labor Review, April 1982, p.
64.)
The UPS settlement followed the trucking agreement
in changing from semiannual to annual cost-of-living
adjustments calculated at 1 cent an hour for each
0.3-point movement in the Consumer Price Index for
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (1967 =
100). Both settlements called for diverting part or all of
the cost-of-living adjustments to meet the cost of
maintaining existing levels of pension and insurance
benefits. However, there was no diversion from the
72-cent May 1982 adjustment for UPS workers, in con­
trast to the general trucking workers, whose April ad­
justment was reduced by 25 cents an hour.
A paid holiday also was added, bringing the total to
10 to 15 days a year, depending on the region. This was
the second agreement negotiated on a national basis;
previously, agreements were negotiated on a regional
basis.

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

One major provision in the UPS agreement stipulates
that part-time workers hired in the future be paid lower
rates— $8 an hour for unskilled workers who load and
unload trucks, and $9 for skilled workers who sort par­
cels. All of the company’s drivers are full time.
These reduced rates, and the lack of specified wage
increases, drew strong criticism from Teamsters for
Democratic Union, a dissident group that has been con­
testing the union’s leadership in recent years. The orga­
nization claimed that the pay freeze was not warranted
because UPS was operating at a profit, unlike many
freight companies, and that the special pay rates would
induce UPS to increase its percentage of part-time work­
ers. Despite this criticism, the vote tally was 33,072 to
29,788 in favor of the contract, not close to the twothirds negative vote needed for rejection.

Ship officers and engineers give back pay increase
More than 7,000 licensed marine ship’s officers agreed
to roll back a June pay increase of 7.5 percent in re­
sponse to a request from the Reagan Administration.
Jesse Calhoun, president of the Marine Engineers Bene­
ficial Association, said members of his union accepted
the cut to aid the Administration’s effort “to develop an
affirmative and much needed maritime program.” Two
unions of unlicensed seamen, the Seafarers’ Internation­
al Union and the National Maritime Union, rejected the
request, saying that their labor contracts “are by no
means out of line with the economic realities of the
maritime industry, or the Nation as a whole.”

Utility contract features lifetime job security
More than 3,500 employees of the Potomac Electric
Power Co. in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, and
the District of Columbia were covered by a settlement
negotiated by the International Brotherhood of Electri­
cal Workers that called for pay increases of 9, 8, and 8
percent in June of 1982, 1983, and 1984. The 3-year ac­
cord also provides “lifetime job and pay security” to
employees with 12Ml years of seniority. According to
the union, eligible employees “cannot be furloughed or
reduced in pay due to lack of work, plant closings, re­
organizations, automation, etc.” In return, the workers
agreed to changes in “duties and responsibilities” provi­
sions to improve operating efficiency.
A company source said the changes in duties and re­
sponsibilities provisions permit PEPCO to adapt to
changing conditions and operations by making changes
in job content without union approval. This provision is
subject to review after a 2-year trial period.
Other contract terms included—
• A 3.3-percent special pay increase to 1,500 workers
whose job content had been increased in the past
45

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Developments in Industrial Relations
without a commensurate pay increase. This special
adjustment was in exchange for ending all of the
grievances employees had filed because of the job
content changes.
• A new absence and sick leave program designed to
reward workers with good attendance and penalize
those with poor records.
• Establishment of a company-financed dental care
plan.
• Elimination of the provision for an automatic cost-ofliving pay adjustment. (The adjustment under the
prior contract was 20 cents, effective March 1, 1982.)

Six-month raises for supermarket workers
In the New York City area, 13,000 workers were cov­
ered by a settlement between United Food and Com­
mercial Workers Local 1500 and 10 supermarket
chains. The 3-year contract provided for full-time em­
ployees to receive a wage increase of $90 a week, con­
sisting of a $30 immediate increase, followed by $20,
$10, $20, and $10 increases at 6-month intervals, begin­
ning in June 1983. Increases for part-time workers were
50, 30, 15, 30, and 15 cents an hour on the correspond­
ing dates.
The pension rate for full-time workers was increased
to $17 a month for each year of credited service (from
$11) effective September 1, 1982, and to $20 in Septem­
ber 1984. It will be financed by a two-step increase in
the employer’s funding obligation to $71.55 a month,
from $45. Employer funding of pensions for part-time
workers also was raised and they will continue receiving
benefits at half the rate that applies to full-time work­
ers.
The employers’ financing of welfare benefits for full­
time employees was increased by $20 a month (to $108)
over the term to permit a number of improvements, in­
cluding $250,000 major medical coverage (formerly
$100,000); $20,000 (instead of $10,000) life and acciden­
tal death and dismemberment insurance; a prescription
drug coverage plan; and increasing dental and vision
care coverage. There also were improvements in welfare
benefits for part-time workers.
Other provisions included a fifth week of vacation for
full-time employees with 25 years of service and a pro­
hibition of mandatory lie detector testing.

46


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

Warehouse workers get new contract
In Northern California, the Teamsters and Interna­
tional Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s unions
settled jointly with two warehouse associations on
3-year contracts for 5,000 workers. The settlement with
the Industrial Employers and Distributors Association
and the San Francisco Employers Council also had a
wider impact, as the two unions then won similar terms
for 15,000 other warehouse workers.
Wages will increase by 32 cents an hour in December
1982 and 24 cents in June of 1983 and 1984, bringing the
contract minimum wage rate to $11.59 an hour. The
cost-of-living clause, which was not changed, provides
for pay adjustments in June of 1983 and 1984 each equal
to 1 cent an hour for each 0.3-point rise in the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers (1967= 100) in ex­
cess of 7.2 index points during the preceding 12 months,
with no credit toward the adjustments for any rise in ex­
cess of 11 percent. The parties estimated that the result­
ing adjustments will total 89 cents, assuming rise of 7
percent a year.
Both contracts provided for a 37-cent-an-hour in­
crease in employer financing of benefit improvements,
which were not identical for both unions.

Employer need not remain neutral, NLRB rules
The National Labor Relations Board reversed a poli­
cy initiated in 1945 by holding that employers do not
have to stay strictly neutral when unions compete for
the right to represent their employees. The new policy
was manifested in rulings involving a subsidiary of RCA
Corp. located in Puerto Rico and the Bruckner Nursing
Home, located in New York.
In the RCA case, the board held that the employer
must continue to recognize and negotiate with an in­
cumbent union when another union asks the board to
conduct a representation election. The board said this
approach should further “stability in industrial rela­
tions” while ensuring “employee free choice.”
In the nursing home case, the board held that a non­
union employer need not remain neutral until an
election petition is filed by one of the competing unions.
Instead, the employer voluntarily may recognize the
union that signs up an “uncoerced, unassisted” majority
of workers in a bargaining unit.
□

Book Reviews

The long struggle of working women
Out to Work: A History o f Wage-Earning Women in the
United States. By Alice Kessler-Harris. New York,
Oxford University Press, 1982. 400 pp. $19.95.
The idea of writing a history of wage-earning women
in the United States was an excellent one and Alice
Kessler-Harris provides much information, particularly
about the period before the Second World War. It is
also refreshing to read a work on the role of women in
the economy written from the perspective of a historian
rather than a sociologist or economist. The book is
clearly well researched and brings many unfamiliar
sources to print.
In some sense, however, it is these strengths of the
book that are also its weaknesses. The historian’s ap­
proach, focusing on letters and other primary sources,
seems to one accustomed to social science research to
be generalizing from anecdotes rather than from data.
Moreover, misunderstandings of the nature of change
often occur from the use of anecdotal evidence. For ex­
ample, today we are familiar with articles that include
interviews with female plumbers, auto mechanics, and
truckdrivers. While it is true that some women have
moved into traditionally male occupations, it would be
wrong to conclude that such occupational changes have
become commonplace. Thus, it is natural to wonder
whether the letters of Ann Appleton to her sister Sarah
in 1847, or those of Lucy Davis, or Melinda Edwards
or the others, are truly representative. The relevance of
the historical approach could have been supported by a
greater use of the available statistics to set the stage.
The work could also have benefited from better inte­
gration with developments in American economic histo­
ry. The role of all workers, and especially women, has
been influenced by changes in the industrial structure of
the Nation, the types of goods and services that were
demanded, and the organizational structure that was
established to supply the demand.
The book is at its best covering the world of work
among women with little education. Manual workers,
those in sales and clerical jobs, and domestic workers

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

all play a major role in the book, but professional wom­
en are barely mentioned, although women have been
working in nursing, teaching, and other “helping profes­
sions” for many years.
The coverage of the period since the Second World
War is very sparse; actually, it might have been better
for it to have been omitted altogether. So much has been
written about this period in other books and journals
that the coverage in Out To Work seems superficial.
No book can be expected to provide complete cover­
age, however; and despite its limitations the work fills a
serious gap in our knowledge about working women in
the 18th and 19th centuries. It reminds us most dramat­
ically that the road to the present was not a straight or
level one and that working women in the past suffered
problems that are hard to even imagine today.
A few statistics can help put the transformation in
perspective. Prior to 1900, less than one-sixth of all
working women were married; today more than half
are. In 1900, more than half of women who worked
held blue-collar or private household jobs; today, only
one-sixth are engaged in those types of employment.
The proportion of all women in the paid work force
went from one-fifth in 1900, to one-fourth in 1940, to
one-third in 1960 and one-half in 1980. At the same
time, the typical job held by a woman was transformed
from one requiring long hours of physically tiring work
to one that was likely to be sedentary, in clean and safe
surroundings, and otherwise more desirable.
— D eb o r a h P isetzn er K l e in
Division of Employment and Unemployment Analysis
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Race, class, and income inequality
Racial Inequality. By Michael Reich. Princeton, N.J.,
Princeton University Press, 1981. 345 pp. $22.50.
This book may prove tough going for readers who do
not share the author’s political perspective, class con­
flict. Michael Reich believes that racial discrimination
47

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Book Reviews
against blacks affects white workers as well and pro­
poses “a broad interracial [working] class alliance” to
redistribute economic and political power.
Others may view the combination of a Marxian-tinted
framework and rigorous econometric analysis as novel.
But it is quite possible to both find Professor Reich’s
review of persistent income inequality by race well de­
veloped, while rejecting his singular interpretation and
solutions.
Reich’s analysis examines the embedded effects of a
socioeconomic class structure rather than standard dis­
crimination theory to explain income differences by
race. Because neoclassical theory does not envision per­
sisting differences, especially in the long run, the book
makes a valuable contribution in its clear exposition of
those discrepancies.
In his focus on economic inequality rather than em­
ployment discrimination, the author provides an explan­
atory framework for how such differences can persist.
This focus almost ignores gains by individuals, especial­
ly by race, however, leaving Reich with results not nec­
essarily related to his interpretation.
Employment gains by blacks over the past decade
attributable to voluntary or judicially directed compli­
ance with the Civil Rights Act, or to enhanced access
to job-qualifying education and training, play no role in
Reich’s schema, for example. A wage-subsidization-by­
race effect of the magnitude required to demonstrate
such a phenomenon is not possible where industrial
wages are set by job level and seniority, not worker
characteristics.
To the extent that preferable job assignments, carrying
higher wage levels, are improperly distributed by race in
a few instances, legal remedies exist for redress. Reich’s
results, drawn from 1960 and 1970 census data, unfortu­
nately fail to reflect changes over the past decade aff
ecting the conclusions that may be drawn from them.
The underlying hypothesis rests on several findings.
In particular, Reich found that owners of capital, and
whites in the upper decile, are concentrated in those
areas where racial income inequality is most extreme
and the presence of a redistributive effect of this in­
equality away from white as well as black workers.
But because the geographic redistribution of American
wealth into energy-related capital strongly overlaps those
regions where income is less evenly distributed to begin
with, a nexus tying race and class to earnings ultimately
fails to illuminate the question. If the author wants to as­
sert that discrimination against blacks harms all but
wealthy whites (what about wealthy blacks?), more clear­
ly developed proof is required. It is not provided.
Reich’s critique of the major neoclassical models, and
why they lack explanatory value as to racial discrimina­
tion is crisply written, building on his previous work.
The author’s own theory would have to show more per­
48


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

suasively how the owners of capital consciously scheme
to deprive wage earners of anything on the basis of race
beyond the compensation package, particularly as to
terms and conditions of employment.
As Reich said of Gary Becker’s pioneering study on
the economics of discrimination, “it deserves much
credit for bringing the subject into the mainstream of
economic analysis.” Similarly, this study deserves credit
for its effective summary and review of the extant litera­
ture, and the tenuous relevance of much of accepted
theory to a persisting long-term problem.
But a cogent critique of earlier theory does not imbue
the author’s own work with validity. Reich pinpoints
the difference wherein neoclassical theory treats labor
strictly as a commodity rather than a combined com­
modity and dynamic noncommodity, capable of inter­
acting with the other factors of production. This does
not explain how the combination of market processes
and capitalist-worker conflict will result in a lessening
of inequality, however.
Furthermore, Reich identifies managers and profes­
sionals as an intermediate group “between” workers
and capitalists. Yet the presence of this stratum sug­
gests that the working class solidarity required for any
major shift in economic power is completely absent.
The dichotomy between the author’s analysis and
conclusion is further illustrated by his statement: “The
class conflict theory accords with econometric evidence
indicating that most white workers are hurt by racism.
These results strengthen the advantages of the class
conflict theory over the neoclassical theory.” While that
view is open to debate, it is nonetheless a non sequitur
to the material that precedes it pertaining to the distinc­
tion among and between the factors of production.
The lack of movement toward Reich’s solution, an in­
terracial working class coalition, is clear to all, includ­
ing the author. This is explained in part by antiblack
attitudes within organized labor that have resulted in
the continued disadvantage of white workers, in Reich’s
view.
An equally plausible perspective may be mentioned.
That is, the lack of union power across much of the
Nation, especially in the Southern half, combined with
the diminished lack of economic vitality and reduced la­
bor demand of recent years, has affected the income of
workers far more than the factors cited by Reich.
Because most capitalists and skilled workers are
white, the effects of a somewhat noncompetitive market
structure tend to skew the Nation’s income distribu­
tion on several dimensions including race. But many, if
not most, white workers (along with most black work­
ers) fail to enjoy the incomes they might obtain under a
more balanced economic structure.
The book has its strong points, especially chapter 4.
It should most certainly be welcomed by readers seek-

ing broader exposure to non-mainstream economic
thought.
But American workers have not transformed trade
unionism into a radical political institution or a Europe­
an-type structure. Nor is a multiracial coalition likely to
emerge to redistribute earned income by race and class
simultaneously.
This leaves Reich committed, a priori, to a conclusion
at odds with how workers of both races behave, and the
distribution of their incomes as a result. The dynamic
durability of industrial and social institutions, particu­
larly those outside the workplace that affect occupation­
al qualifications and choice patterns, must be more
thoroughly investigated with 1980 census data before a
clearer and more realistic explanation can emerge.
— M a r c R o senblum
Chief economist
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

A new role for corporations
Corporate Control, Corporate Power. By Edward S.
Herman. New York, The Twentieth Century Fund,
Inc., 1981. 432 pp. $18.95, Cambridge University
Press, New York.
Fifty years have passed since the shift of control from
owners to managers in the increasingly dominant major
corporations was analyzed in the classic work, The
Modern Corporation and Private Property, by A. A. Berle, Jr. and Gardner Means. With support from the
Twentieth Century Fund, Edward S. Herman, Professor
of Finance at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton
School, has reexamined the earlier findings based on
contemporary corporate developments.
Managerial control of the corporation is Herman’s
starting point. For this, he has painstakingly combined
thorough examination of the accumulated voluminous
literature and analytical studies of corporations in re­
cent years with his own carefully developed conceptual
and statistical analysis. The initiating purpose of the
study is achieved through the treatment of the opera­
tional elements for internal corporate control; the
changing role of ownership among individuals, families,
and financial institutions; and external influences on
corporate control. As executed, the study is equally a
treatment of the role of the corporation in today’s
American society. The context of the study derives from
Herman’s long interest in the centralizing role of the
corporations, and in the possibilities and limits of cor­
porate interaction with reform and social change. The
breadth of his treatment is expressed in his perception
which “stresses the continued primacy of corporate ini­
tiatives in economic change, the great powers of corpo­

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

rate resistance to profitable growth and the resultant
strong tendencies toward political immobility.”
Regarding the managerial locus of corporate control
reported by Berle and Means, Herman demonstrates the
accentuation of that corporate characteristic. While
reformulating some of the Berle and Means classifica­
tions, Herman finds that the substantial decline in own­
ership control of corporations had already occurred by
1900, with the level changing little by 1929. There was,
however, a contrasting sharp drop between 1929 and
1975. In 1929, owner-controlled companies accounted
for 42 percent of the number and 28 percent of the assets
of the 200 largest companies; in 1975, owner-controlled
companies numbered 16 percent, with 13 percent of the
assets of the 200 largest. There has also been a decline in
controls exercised by banking and speculative interests.
This reinforcement and intensification of control by
managers with relatively little stock ownership in their
companies has not meant that these are neutral techno­
crats, as Berle and Means postulated, who are less con­
cerned with profits than in owner or entrepreneurial-run
companies. Herman finds that the evidence demon­
strates that such managerial-controlled companies do
not significantly differ in objectives from owner-controlled companies. Management confronted with the
constraints induced by the concerns of owners and
creditors and the workings of internal group decision­
making is just as concerned with achieving profitable
growth as are the owners. Management is in a strategic
position to function with a substantial degree of autono­
my, although internal and external constraints affect its
extent. These constraints include the relative position of
unions in bargaining, governmental tax and regulatory
requirements, community pressures, relations with other
firms, and other corporate interests by the board of di­
rectors.
Viewing the role of corporations in the American
economy, Herman points to their increasingly dominant
role, already apparent in 1900. These major firms are
interconnected through a loose network of joint ven­
tures, interlocking directorates, government advisory
bodies, and a variety of social, political, and trade
groups. At the same time, there are new dissociative
factors, with price competition replaced by product
competition resulting from the high rate of technologi­
cal change. Furthermore, the internationalization of
business since 1945, while making markets more open
and global, has enhanced the power of the multination­
al corporation in individual countries and increased its
autonomy. Flexibility of movement increases the corpo­
ration’s bargaining position with unions. The effect on
government is dualistic and paradoxical— at one and
the same time, the role of government is enhanced, with
appeals for assistance from both expanding multination­
als and threatened domestic interests; yet the govern49

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Book Reviews
ment role is weakened by the conflicts between domes­
tic interests and international pressures as well as by
events determined by private initiatives.
Such transcendent influences have engendered con­
cerns with corporate reforms which include assertions
of the need for corporate perspectives to include wider
social responsibilities. Herman points to the long and
widely held corporate leadership views that social re­
sponsibility was met by serving the community through
the corporation’s regular productive activities, and not
through charitable activities. Herman suggests the need
for broader societal approaches, than those usually
suggested, to raise corporate perspectives beyond short­
term concerns with profitable growth, and long-term
concerns with such limited matters as sources of raw
materials and market positioning. Broadening represen­
tation on corporate boards of directors, either through
outside directors or worker participation, is not viewed
as assuring significant changes in the horizons of corpo­
rate objectives.
Rather, Herman appeals for awareness of the urgency
for meeting the broad evolving needs of domestic and
international society in which corporations play a major
role. He calls attention to alternative possibilities, lean­
ing towards what he refers to as the French, Japanese,
and Swedish “Models of Guided Capitalism.” Adapta­
tion of elements of these economies in the American
ambience would only involve modest .external shocks
for the present order, while permitting “greater and
more explicit partnership arrangements between govern­
ment and big business to deal with both internal and
external needs.” He stresses that these models function
within a democratic framework, rather than the authori­
tarian approaches taken in some third world countries.
The warning is set forth that “in a revised ‘stages of
growth’ model, instead of third world political econo­
mies becoming like us, under conditions of slower
growth, severe factionalism, and major systemic shock,
we may become more like them.” Herman has contrib­
uted importantly to the literature of political economy
by relating his technical findings to the broader fluctuative social, economic, and political climate currently
buffeting governments, corporations, unions, and the
public at large.
— Jo s e p h

P.

G oldberg

Special Assistant to the Commissioner
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Day, Richard H., “Irregular Growth Cycles,” The American
Economic Review, June 1982, pp. 406-14.
Giersch, Herbert, ed., Towards an Explanation o f Economic
Growth: Sym posium 1980. Kiel, Germany, University of
Kiel, Institute of Weltwirtschaft, 1981, 476 pp.
Salant, Walter S., “The American Economy in Transition: A
Review Article,” Journal o f Economic Literature, June
1982, pp. 564-84.
Wilson, Marilyn, “Recovery: Ready to Go?” D un's Business
M onth, July 1982, beginning on p. 40.

Economic and social statistics
MaCurdy, Thomas E., Using Inform ation on the M om ents o f
Disturbances to Increase the Efficiency o f Estimation.

Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Re­
search, Inc., 1982, 41 pp. (NBER Technical Paper Series,
22.) $1.50.
Pluta, Joseph E„ Rita J. Wright, Mildred C. Anderson, 1982
Texas Fact Book. Austin, University of Texas at Austin,
Bureau of Business Research, 1982, 195 pp. $6, paper.
Rider, Christine, “Trade Theory Irrelevance,” Journal o f Post
Keynesian Economics, Summer 1982, pp. 594-601.
Schoemaker, Paul J. H., “The Expected Utility Model: Its
Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations,” Journal
o f Economic Literature, June 1982, pp. 529-63.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, A Guide to Seasonal A djust­
m ent o f Labor Force Data. Prepared by John F. Stinson,
Jr. Washington, 1982, 10 pp. (Bulletin 2114.) Stock No.
029-001-02643-9. $2, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington 20402.
---------Occupational E m ploym ent in Transportation, C om m u­
nications, Utilities, and Trade. Prepared by Wanda L.
Bland and Barbara L. Keitt. Washington, 1982, 70 pp.
(Bulletin 2116.) Stock No. 029-001-02700-1. $4.75, Su­
perintendent of Documents, Washington 20402.

Education
Becker, William E., Jr., “The Educational Process and Student
Achievement Given Uncertainty in Measurement,” The
American Economic Review, March 1982, pp. 229-36.
Martin, Jane Roland, “Excluding Women from the Educa­
tional Realm,” H arvard Educational Review, May 1982,
pp. 133-48.
Randour, Mary Lou, Georgia L. Strasburg, Jean LipmanBlumen, “Women in Higher Education: Trends in Enroll­
ments and Degrees Earned,” H arvard Educational Review,
May 1982, pp. 189-202.
Young, Stanley, Som e Dimensions o f Strategic Planning fo r
H igher Education. Excerpted from Planning fo r Higher
Education, Summer 1981, pp. 1-7. Amherst, Mass., Uni­
versity of Massachusetts, Labor Relations and Research
Center, 1982. (Reprint Series, 66.)

Health and safety

Economic growth and development

Borus, Michael E., C. Gregory Buntz, William R. Tash, Eval­
uating the Im pact o f H ealth Programs. Cambridge, Mass.,
The MIT Press, 1982, 147 pp., bibliography. $20, cloth;
$9.95, paper.

Applebaum, Eileen, “The Incomplete Incomes Policy Vision,”
Journal o f Post Keynesian Economics, Summer 1982, pp
546-57.

Seidman, Bert, “Bad Medicine for Health Care Costs,” The
A F L-C IO American Federationist, April-June 1982, pp. 2028.

Publications received

50


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

Industrial relations
Addison, J. T. and A. H. Barnett, “The Impact of Unions on
Productivity,” British Journal o f Industrial Relations, July
1982, pp. 145-62.
Anderson, John C , Gloria Busman, Charles A. O’Reilly, III,
“The Decertification Process: Evidence from California,”
Industrial Relations, Spring 1982, pp. 178-95.
Brauer, Mary A., “Improving Incentives for Retiree Cost-ofLiving Supplements, M arquette L aw Review, Winter 1981,
pp. 197-211.
Brock, Jonathan, Bargaining Beyond Impasse: Joint Resolution
o f Public Sector Labor Disputes. Boston, Mass., Auburn
House Publishing Co., 1982, 279 pp. $19.95.
Gennard, John, “The Financial Costs and Returns of Strikes,”
The British Journal o f Industrial Relations, July 1982, pp.
247-56.
Gould, William B., A Prim er on American Labor Law. Cam­
bridge, Mass., The MIT Press, 1982, 242 pp. $24.95,
cloth; $9.95, paper.
Graham, Harry, “Arbitration Results in the Public Sector,”
Public Personnel Journal, Summer 1982, pp. 112-17.
Griffin, Gerard, “Managing Technological Change: Industrial
Relations in the Banking and Insurance Industries,” The
Journal o f Industrial Relations, March 1982, pp. 53-68.
Gross, Ernest, Theodore Settle, Petro R. Stawnychy, New Jer­
sey Police and Fire Arbitration Databook, 1981. New
Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers— The State University of New
Jersey, Institute of Management and Labor Relations,
1982, 2,276 pp.
---------User’s Guide: New Jersey Police and Fire Arbitration
Databook: 1981. New Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers—The
State University of New Jersey, Institute of Management
and Labor Relations, 1982, 118 pp.

Intervention and Regulation in Canadian Agriculture. Ot­

tawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Canada, 1982, 139
pp., bibliography. $7.95, Canada; $9.55, other countries.
Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Supply and
Services Canada, Ottawa.
Kushnir, Joel M. and Uma R. Kastury, “How to Self-Police
for Regulatory Compliance,” M anagem ent Review, July
1982, pp. 47-51.
MacDonald, J. Douglas, The Public Regulation o f Commercial
Fisheries in Canada (Case Study, 4A) Regulating Pacific
Salm o n — The Alternatives Reviewed. (Technical Series

Report, 24, 71 pp.); James J. McRae and David M. Pres­
cott, Regulation and Performance in the Canadian Truck­
ing Industry. (Technical Series Report, 23, 183 pp.);
Margot Priest, Provision o f Inform ation in the Context o f
Regulation. (Technical Report Series, 22, 87 pp.). Ottawa,
Ontario, Economic Council of Canada, 1982.

International economics
Ethier, Wilfred J., “National and International Returns to
Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade,” The
American Economic Review, June 1982, pp. 389-405.
McKinnon, Ronald I., “Currency Substitution and Instability
in the World Dollar Standard,” The American Economic
Review, June 1982, pp. 320-33.

Labor and economic history
Forsey, Eugene, Trade Unions in Canada, 1812-1902. Buffalo,
N.Y., University of Toronto Press, 1982, 600 pp., bibli­
ography. $65, cloth; $25, paper.
Krause, Elliott A., Division o f Labor: A Political Perspective.
Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press, 1982, 203 pp.
$27.50.

Labor force

Hearn, June, “Australian Trade Unionism in 1981,” The Jour­
nal o f Industrial Relations, March 1982, pp. 99-107.
Ichniowski, Casey, “Arbitration and Police Bargaining: Pre­
scriptions for the Blue Flu,” Industrial Relations, Spring
1982, pp. 149-66.
Marsack, Gary A. and Phoebe M. Eaton, “Successorship
Law: The Impact on Business Transfers and Collective
Bargaining,” M arquette Law Review, Winter 1981, pp.
213-39.
Metcalf, David, “Unions and the Distribution of Earnings,”
British Journal o f Industrial Relations, July 1982, pp. 163—
69.
Muir, John, Industrial Relations Procedures and Agreements.
Brookfield, Vt., Gower Publishing Co., Ltd., 1981, 184
pp. $40.
Ogden, S. G., “Bargaining Structure and the Control of In­
dustrial Relations,” British Journal o f Industrial Relations,
July 1982, pp. 170-85.
Yerbury, D., “Industrial Relations Legislation in 1981,” The
Journal o f Industrial Relations, March 1982, pp. 77-88.

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Or­
ganizations, Unemployment Survey, Building and Con­
struction Trades Department, A F L -C IO . Washington,
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industri­
al Organizations, Building and Construction Trades De­
partment, 1982, 28 pp.
Brown, Charles, Curtis Gilroy, Andrew Kohen, “The Effect of
the Minimum Wage on Employment and Unemploy­
ment,” Journal o f Economic Literature, June 1982, pp.
487-528.
Economic Council of Canada, In Short Supply: Jobs and Skills
in the 1980s. Ottawa, Ontario, Economic Council of Can­
ada, 1982, 128 pp. $7.95, Canada; $9.55, other countries.
Available from Canadian Government Publishing Centre,
Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa.
Oliver, J.M. and J.R. Turton, “Is There a Shortage of Skilled
Labour?” British Journal o f Industrial Relations, July
1982, pp. 195-200.
Raelin, Joseph A., “A Comparative Analysis of Female-Male
Early Youth Careers,” Industrial Relations, Spring 1982,
pp. 231-47.

Industry and government organization

Management and organization theory

Argyle, Nolan J., “Civil Service Reform: The State and Local
Response,” Public Personnel M anagem ent Journal, Sum­
mer 1982, pp. 157-64.
Forbes, James D., David R. Hughes, T. K. Warley, Economic

Anderson, Ralph, “Management Forecast and Checklist for
1982,” Public Personnel Journal, Summer 1982, pp. 11825.
Bauer, Robert W., “How to Make OD Work Better for Your


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

51

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Book Renews
Organization,” M anagem ent Review, June 1982, pp. 5661.
Bowditch, James L. and Anthony F. Buono, Quality o f Work
L ife Assessment: A Survey-Based Approach. Boston, Au­
burn House Publishing Co., 1982, 171 pp. $19.95.

A cadem y o f M anagem ent Review, April 1982, pp. 228-34.

Smits, William H., Jr., “Personnel Administration— A Viable
Function in Government?” Public Personnel M anagem ent
Journal, Summer 1982, pp. 91-103.
Sulzner, George T., The Im pact o f Labor-M anagement Cooper­

Cederblom, Douglas, “The Performance Appraisal Interview:
A Review, Implications, and Suggestions,” Academ y o f
M anagem ent Review, April 1982, pp. 219-27.

ation Committees on Personnel Policies and Practices at
Twenty Federal Bargaining Units. Excerpted from the
Journal o f Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector, Vol.

Chadwick-Jones, J.K., Nigel Nicholson, Colin Brown, Social
Psychology o f Absenteeism. New York, Praeger Publishers,
1982, 161 pp., bibliography. $21.95.

11, No. 1, 1982, pp. 37-45. Amherst, Mass., University
of Massachusetts, Labor Relations and Research Center,
1982. (Reprint Series, 67.)

Clarke, Richard M., “Middle Management Today: Who’s
Calling the Shots?” M anagem ent Review, July 1982, pp.
21-25.

Versagi, Frank J., “What American-Labor-Management Can
Learn from Japanese Unions,” M anagem ent Review, June
1982, pp. 24-28.

Connors, Tracy Daniel, Dictionary o f M ass M edia & C om m u­
nication. New York, Longman, Inc., 1982, 255 pp.
$24.95, cloth; $12.95, paper.

Walker, Jon E. and Curt Tausky, An Analysis o f Work
Incentives. Excerpted from the Journal o f Social Psycholo­
gy, 1982, pp. 27-39 and 116. Amherst, Mass., University
of Massachusetts, Labor Relations and Research Center,
1982. (Reprint Series, 67.)

Dalton, Dan R. and William D. Todor, “Turnover: A Lucra­
tive Hard Dollar Phenomenon,” A cadem y o f M anagem ent
Review, April 1982, pp. 213-18.
Ellenberger, James N., “Japanese Management: Myth or
Magic,” The A F L -C IO Am erican Federationist, AprilJune 1982, pp. 3-12.
Finkel, Coleman L., “What Teleconferencing Can and Cannot
Do For Your Meeting,” M anagem ent Review, July 1982,
pp. 8-15.
Fombrun, Charles J., “Strategies for Network Research in Or­
ganizations,” A cadem y o f M anagem ent Review, April
1982, pp. 280-91.
Harmon, Robert E., Improving Adm inistrative Manuals. New
York, American Management Associations, Research and
Information Service, 1982, 81 pp. $10, AMA members;
$13.50, nonmembers.
Helm, Lewis M. and others, eds., Inform ing the People: A
Public Affairs Handbook. New York, Longman, Inc.,
1981. 359 pp. $27.95.
Mansell, Jacquie and Tom Rankin, “Sustaining the QWL Pro­
cess,” QWL Focus, The News Journal of the Ontario
Quality of Working Life Center, May 1982, pp. 1-4.
Narayanan, V.K. and Raghu Nath, “Hierarchical Level and
the Impact of Flexitime,” Industrial Relations, Spring
1982, pp. 216-30.
Ornati, Oscar A., Edward J. Giblin, Richard R. Floersch, The
Personnel Department: Its Staffing and Budgeting. New
York, American Management Associations, AMA Re­
search and Information Service, 1982, 70 pp. $10, AMA
members; $13.50, nonmembers.
Rainey, Glenn W., Jr. and Lawrence Wolf, “The Organiza­
tionally Dysfunctional Consequences of Flexible Work
Hours: A General Overview,” Public Personnel M anage­
m ent Journal, Summer 1982, pp. 165-75.
Rotchford, Nancy L. and Karlene H. Roberts, “Part-Time
Workers as Missing Persons in Organizational Research,”

52


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

Yerys, Arlene, “How to Get What You Want Through Influ­
ential Communication,” M anagem ent Review, June 1982,
beginning on p. 12.

Monetary and fiscal policy
Bautista, Romeo M., “Exchange Rate Variations and Export
Competitiveness in Less Developed Countries Under
Generalized Floating,” The Journal o f Development S tu d ­
ies, April 1982, pp. 354-78.
Connor, John M. and Willard F. Mueller, “Market Structure
and Performance of U.S. Multinationals in Brazil and
Mexico,” The Journal o f Development Studies, April
1982, pp. 329-53.
Drabenstott, Mark and Anne O’Mara McDonley, “The Im­
pact of Financial Futures on Agricultural Banks,” Eco­
nomic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City,
May 1982, pp. 19-30.
Guffey, Roger, “Quick-Fix Economics: A Look at the Issues,”
Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City,
May 1982, pp. 3-7.
Reilly, Ann M., “Derailing Bank Deregulation,” D un's Busi­
ness M onth, July 1982, beginning on p. 30.
Walsh, Carl E., “The Federal Reserve’s Operating Procedures
and Interest Rate Fluctuations,” Economic Review, Fed­
eral Reserve Bank of Kansas City, May 1982, pp. 8-18.

Productivity and technological change
Berndt, Ernst R. and Melvyn A. Fuss, Productivity Measure­
m ent Using Capital Asset Valuation to A djust fo r
Variations in Utilization. Cambridge, Mass., National Bu­

reau of Economic Research, Inc., 1982, 44 pp. (NBER
Working Paper Series, 895.) $1.50.
Gordon, Myron J., “Corporate Bureaucracy, Productivity
Gain, and Distribution of Revenue in U.S. Manufactur­
ing, 1947-77,” Journal o f Post Keynesian Economics,
Summer 1982, pp. 483-96.
□

Current
Labor Statistics
N o te s on C u rren t L a b o r S ta tis tic s

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

S c h e d u le o f r e le a s e d a te s fo r m a jo r B L S s t a t is t ic a l s e r ie s

54

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

54

E m p lo y m e n t d a ta fr o m h o u s e h o ld s u r v e y . D e f in it io n s a n d n o t e s
1. Employment status of noninstitutional population, selected years, 1950-81 ..................................................................
2. Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted .......................................................................................
3. Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted ..........................................................................................................
4. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted .....................................................................................................
5. Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ...............................................................................................
6. Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted .......................................................................
7. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted ..................................................................................................................

55

E m p lo y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n in g s d a ta fr o m e s t a b lis h m e n t s u r v e y s . D e f in it io n s a n d n o t e s
8. Employment by industry, selected years, 1950-81 ...............................................................................................................
9. Employment by State ............................................................................. : ..................................................................................
10. Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ..........................................
11. Hours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1950-81
12. Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted ........................................
13. Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................
14. Hourly Earnings Index, by industry division .......................................................................................................................
15. Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group ........................................................................

60

U n e m p lo y m e n t in s u r a n c e d a ta . D e f in it io n s
16. Unemployment insurance and employment service operations ..........................................................................................

67
67

P r ic e d a ta . D e f in it io n s a n d n o te s
..........................................................................................................................................
17. Consumer Price Index, 1967-81 ...............................................................................................................................................
18. Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, general summary and selected items ............................. .. . ......................
19. Consumer Price Index, cross-classification of region and population size class .............................................................
20. Consumer Price Index, selected areas .....................................................................................................................................
21. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing .....................................................................................................................
22. Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings ...............................................................................................
23. Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings ...............................................................................................
24. Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product ...............................................................................................................
25. Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries
..................................................................................

68
69
69
75
76
77
78
80
80
80

P r o d u c t i v i t y d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n s a n d n o t e s ..........................................................................................................................
26. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,selected years, 1950-81 ....................
27. Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,1971-81 ................................................
28. Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted .....................
29. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices . .

83
83
84
84
85

W a g e a n d c o m p e n s a t i o n d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n s .......................................................................................................................
30. Employment Cost Index, total compensation .......................................................................................................................
31. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry grou p ..........................................................
32. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area
s i z e ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
33. Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1977 to date .............................................
34. Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1977 to d a te ................

86
87
88

W o r k s t o p p a g e d a t a . D e f i n i t i o n ...............................................................................................................................................
35. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date .....................................................................................

91
91


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

NOTE
Tables 10 and 13 have been deleted, and the
succeeding tables renumbered.

55
56
57
58
59
59
59

61
61
62
63
64
65
65
66

89
90
90

NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS

This section of the Review presents the principal statistical se­
ries collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
A brief introduction to each group of tables provides defi­
nitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually
found in footnotes.
Readers who need additional information are invited to
consult the BLS regional offices listed on the inside front cov­
er of this issue of the Review. Some general notes applicable to
several series are given below.
S eason al adjustm ent. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted
to eliminate the effect of such factors as climatic conditions, industry
production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying
periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short­
term movements of the statistical series. Tables containing these data
are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated
on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are com­
puted each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for sev­
eral preceding years.
Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 2-7 were revised in
the March 1982 issue of the R e v ie w to reflect experience through 1981.
The original estimates also were revised to 1970 to reflect 1980 census
population controls.
Beginning in January 1980, the BLS introduced two major modifi­
cations in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data.
First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new procedure
called X -ll/A R IM A , which was developed at Statistics Canada as an
extension of the standard X -11 method. A detailed description of the
procedure appears in T h e X - l l A R I M A S e a s o n a l A d ju s tm e n t M e th o d
by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 12-564E, Feb­
ruary 1980). The second change is that seasonal factors are now being
calculated for use during the first 6 months of the year, rather than for
the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year for the July-December period. Revisions of historical data continue to be made only
at the end of each calendar year.
Annual revision of the seasonally adjusted payroll data shown in
tables 10, 12, and 14 were made in August 1981 using the X -ll
ARIMA seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal factors for
productivity data in tables 28 and 29 are usually introduced
in the September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent
changes from month to month and from quarter to quarter are

published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series.
However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U.S.
average All Items CPI. Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are
available for this series.
A djustm ents for price changes. Some data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing
current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate
component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given
a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of
150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is
$2 ($3/150 X 100 = $2). The resulting values are described as
“real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars.
A vailab ility of inform ation. Data that supplement the tables in this
section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety of
sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information
published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published
according to the schedule given below. The B L S H a n d b o o k o f L a b o r
S ta tistic s , Bulletin 2070, provides more detailed data and greater his­
torical coverage for most of the statistical series presented in the
M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w . More information from the household and es­
tablishment surveys is provided in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, a
monthly publication of the Bureau. Historically, comparable informa­
tion from the establishment survey is published in two comprehensive
data books— E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n ite d S ta te s and E m p lo y ­
m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, S ta te s a n d A rea s, and their annual supplements.
More detailed information on wages and other aspects of collective
bargaining appears in the monthly periodical, C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p ­
m en ts. More detailed price information is published each month in the
periodicals, the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P ric e s a n d P ric e I n ­
d ex es.

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

Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series
Series

Employment situation...........................................
Producer Price Index ...............................................
Consumer Price Index .....................................................
Real Earnings ....................................................
Major collective bargaining settlements..................................
Productivity and costs:
Nonfarm business and manufacturing ................................

54


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

Release
date

Period
covered

September 3
September 10
September 23
September 23

August
August
August
August

Release
date

Period
covered

MLR table
number

October 8
October 15
October 26
October 26
October 27

September
September
September
September
1st 9 months

1-10
21-25
17-20
11-15
33-34

October 28

3rd quarter

26-29

EM PLOYM ENT DATA FRO M THE H O U SEH O LD SURVEY

m p l o y m e n t d a t a in this section are obtained from the
Current Population Survey, a program of personal interviews
conducted monthly by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. The sample consists of about 60,000
households selected to represent the U.S. population 16 years
of age and older. Households are interviewed on a rotating
basis, so that three-fourths of the sample is the same for any 2
consecutive months.

E

those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes
persons retired, those engaged in their own housework, those not
working while attending school, those unable to work because of
long-term illness, those discouraged from seeking work because of
personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle.
The noninstitu tion al population comprises all persons 16 years of age
and older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions,
sanitariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy.
F ull-tim e w orkers are those employed at least 35 hours a week;
part-tim e w orkers are those who work fewer hours. Workers on part-

Definitions
E m ployed persons are (1) those who worked for pay any time
during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who
worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise
and (2) those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs
because of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. A
person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at
which he or she worked the greatest number of hours.
U n em p loyed persons are those who did not work during the survey
week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and
had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did
not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new
jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed.
The unem ploym ent rate represents the number unemployed as a
percent of the civilian labor force.

The civ ilia n labor force consists of all employed or unemployed
persons in the civilian noninstitutional population; the total labor
force includes military personnel. Persons not in the labor force are

1.

time schedules for economic reasons (such as slack work, terminating
or starting a job during the week, material shortages, or inability to
find full-time work) are among those counted as being on full-time
status, under the assumption that they would be working full time if
conditions permitted. The survey classifies unemployed persons in
full-time or part-time status by their reported preferences for full-time
or part-time work.

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

Data in tables 2-7 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal
experience through December 1981.

Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-81

[Numbers in thousands]
Civilian labor force

Total labor force
Year

Total noninstitutional
population

Unemployed

Employed
Number

Percent of
population

Total
Total

Percent
of
population

Agriculture

Nonagricultural
industries

Number

Percent of
labor
force

Not in
labor force

1950 ..............................
1955 ..............................
1960 ..............................

106,645
112,732
119,759

63,858
68,072
72,142

59.9
60.4
60.2

62,208
65,023
69,628

58,918
62,170
65,778

55.2
55.1
54.9

7,160
6,450
5,458

51,758
55,722
60,318

3,288
2,852
3,852

5.3
4.4
5.5

42,787
44,660
47,617

1965
1966
1967
1968
1969

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

129,236
131,180
133,319
135,562
137,841

77,178
78,893
80,793
82,272
84,240

59.7
60.1
60.6
60.7
61.1

74,455
75,770
77,347
78,737
80,734

71,088
72,895
74,372
75,920
77,902

55.0
55.6
55.8
56.0
56.5

4,361
3,979
3,844
3,817
3,606

66,726
68,915
70,527
72,103
74,296

3,366
2,875
2,975
2,817
2,832

4.5
3.8
3.8
3.6
3.5

52,058
52,288
52,527
53,291
53,602

1970
1971
1972
1973
1974

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

140,272
143,033
146,574
149,423
152,349

85,959
87,198
89,484
91,756
94,179

61.3
61.0
61.1
61.4
61.8

82,771
84,382
87,034
89,429
91,949

78,678
79,367
82,153
85,064
86,794

56.1
55.5
56.0
56.9
57.0

3,463
3,394
3,484
3,470
3,515

75,215
75,972
78,669
81,594
83,279

4,093
5,016
4,882
4,365
5,156

4.9
5.9
5.6
4.9
5.6

1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981

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

155,333
158,294
161,166
164,027
166,951

95,955
98,302
101,142
104,368
107,050

61.8
62.1
62.8
63.6
64.1

93,775
96,158
99,009
102,251
104,962

85,846
88,752
92,017
96,048
98,824

55.3
56.1
57.1
58.6
59.2

3,408
3,331
3,283
3,387
3,347

82,438
85,421
88,734
92,661
95,477

7,929
7,406
6,991
6,202
6,137

8.5
7.7
7.1
6.1
5.8

54,315
55,834
57,091
57,667
58,171
59,377
59,991
60,025
59,659
59,900

169,848
172,272

109,042
110,812

64.2
64.3

106,940
108,670

99,303
100,397

58.5
58.3

3,364
3,368

95,938
97,030

7,637
8,273

7.1
7.6

60,806
61,460


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

55

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
2.

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

[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status

Annual average

1981

1982

1980

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

169,848
2,102
167,745
106,940
63.8
99,303
58.5
3,364
95,938
7,637
7.1
60,806

172,272
2,142
170,130
108,670
63.9
100,397
58.3
3,368
97,030
8,273
7.6
61,460

172,385
2,139
170,246
108,688
63.8
100,864
58.5
3,342
97,522
7,824
7.2
61,558

172,559
2,160
170,399
108,818
63.9
100,840
58.4
3,404
97,346
7,978
7.3
61,581

172,758
2,165
170,593
108,494
63.6
100,258
58.0
3,358
96,900
8,236
7.6
62,099

172,966
2,158
170,809
109,012
63.8
100,343
58.0
3,378
96,965
8,669
8.0
61,797

71,138
56,455
79.4
53,101
2,396
50,706
3,353
5.9

72,419
57,197
79.0
53,582
2,384
51,199
3,615
6.3

72,472
57,172
78.9
53,874
2,383
51,491
3,298
5.8

72,559
57,250
78.9
53,791
2,422
51,369
3,459
6.0

72,670
57,262
78.8
53,693
2,383
51,310
3,569
6.2

72,795
57,355
78.8
53,504
2,413
51,091
3,851
6.7

72,921
57,459
78.8
53,354
2,382
50,972
4,105
7.1

73,020
57,665
79.0
53,122
2,311
50,811
4,543
7.9

73,120
57,368
78.5
53,047
2,390
50,657
4,322
7.5

73,209
57,448
78.5
53,097
2,386
50,711
4,351
7.6

73,287
57,554
78.5
53,006
2,377
50,629
4,548
7.9

73,392
57,730
78.7
52,988
2,382
50,606
4,742
8.2

73,499
58,164
79.1
53,260
2,464
50,796
4,904
8.4

73,585
58,016
78.8
52,985
2,424
50,561
5,031
8.7

73,685
58,084
78.8
52,996
2,474
50,522
5,088
8.8

80,065
41,106
51.3
38,492
584
37,907
2,615
6.4

81,497
42,485
52.1
39,590
604
38,986
2,895
6.8

81,561
42,682
52.3
39,810
590
39,220
2,872
6.7

81,671
42,666
52.2
39,841
609
39,232
2,825
6.6

81,792
42,344
51.8
39,426
608
39,818
2,918
6.9

81,920
42,831
52.3
39,814
596
39,218
3,017
7.0

82,038
42,987
52.4
39,878
63.5
39,243
3,109
7.2

82,151
42,88
52.2
39,713
572
39,141
3,175
7.4

82,260
42,868
52.1
39,764
64.9
39,115
3,104
7.2

82,367
43,031
52.2
39,744
628
39,116
3,286
7.6

82,478
43,243
52.4
39,807
636
39,172
3,435
7.9

82,591
43,301
52.4
39,715
601
39,114
3,586
8.3

82,707
43,683
52.8
40,075
634
39,441
3,608
8.3

82,811
43,904
53.0
40,350
581
39,769
3,554
8.1

82,926
44,076
53.2
40,392
600
39,791
3,684
8.4

16,543
9,378
56.7
7,710
385
7,325
1,669
17.8

16,214
8,988
55.4
7,225
380
6,845
1,763
19.6

16,213
8,834
54.5
7,180
369
6,811
1,654
18.7

16,169
8,902
55.1
7,208
373
6,835
1,694
19.0

16,131
8,888
55.1
7,139
367
6,772
1,749
19.7

16,093
8,826
54.8
7,025
369
6,656
1,801
20.4

16,037
8,826
55.0
6,940
355
6,585
1,886
21.4

15,995
8,631
54.0
6,778
326
6,452
1,853
21.5

15,955
8,643
54.2
6,771
373
6,398
1,872
21.7

15,913
8,686
54.6
6,748
359
6,389
1,938
22.3

15,902
8,549
53.8
6,679
336
6,343
1,870
21.9

15,861
8,616
54.3
6,637
326
6,311
1,979
23.0

15,820
8,819
55.7
6,782
390
6,392
2,037
23.1

15,794
8,271
52.4
6,429
353
6,076
1,842
22.3

15,753
8,362
53.1
6,344
386
5,958
2,018
24.1

146,122 147,908 147,976
93,600 95,052 95,126
64.1
64.3
64.3
87,715 88,709 89,170
5,884
6,343
5,956
6.3
6.7
6.3

148,144
95,163
64.2
89,221
5,942
6.2

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

TOTAL

Total noninstitutional population1 .............
Armed Forces 1 .........................
Civilian noninstitutional population 1 ...............
Civilian labor force....................
Participation rate .......................
Employed ......................................
Employment-population ratio 2 .......
Agriculture...................................
Nonagricultural Industries ................
Unemployed ....................
Unemployment rate ..................
Not in labor force........ .............

173,155 173,330 173,495 173,657 173,843 174,020 174,201 174,364 174,544
2,158
2,164
2,159
2,168
2,175
2,176
2,175
2,173
2,180
170,996 171,166 171,335 171,489 171,667 171,844 172,026 172,190 172,364
109,272 109,184 108,879 109,165 109,346 109,648 110,666 110,191 110,522
63.9
63.8
63.5
63.7
63.7
63.8
64.3
64.0
64.1
100,172 99,613 99,581 99,590 99,492 99,340 100,117 99,764 99,732
57.9
57.5
57.4
57.3
57.2
57.1
57.5
57.2
57.1
3,372
3,209
3,411
3,373
3,349
3,309
3,488
3,357
3,460
96,800 96,404 96,170 96,217 96,144 96,032 96,629 96,406 96,272
9,100
9,571
9,298
9,575
9,854 10,307 10,549 10,427 10,790
8.3
8.8
8.5
8.8
9.0
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.8
61,724 61,982 62,456 63,324 63,321 62,197 61,360 61,999 61,842

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force ..............................
Participation rate .......................
Employed .................................
Agriculture...................................
Nonagricultural industries .................
Unemployed ......................
Unemployment rate ....................
Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force ..........................
Participation rate .......................
Employed ...................................
Agriculture...................................
Nonagricultural industries .................
Unemployed .................................
Unemployment rate ....................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force...............................
Participation rate .......................
Employed ......................................
Agriculture...................................
Nonagricultural industries .................
Unemployed ............................
Unemployment rate ....................
White

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force ..............................
Participation..............................
Employed ...................................
Unemployed ...................................
Unemployment rate ....................

148,370 148,562 148,631 148,755 148,842 148,855 149,132 149,249 149,250 149,429 149,569
94,884 95,365 95,535 95,329 95,120 95,333 95,508 96,015 96,641 96,223 96,493
64.0
64.2
64.1
64.3
63.9
64.0
64.0
64.3
64.8
64.4
64.5
88,628 88,734 88,498 88,010 87,955 87,990 87,956 87,988 88,450 88,173 88,137
6,256
6,631
7,037
7,319
7,165
7,344
7,552
8,026
8,191
8,050
8,356
6.6
7.0
7.4
7.7
7.5
7.7
7.9
8.4
8.5
8.4
8.7

Black

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force .........................
Participation rate .......................
Empovod ...................................
Unemployed .........................
Unemployment rate ....................

17,824
10,865
61.0
9,313
1,553
14.3

18,219
11,086
60.8
9,355
1,731
15.6

18,239
10,971
60.2
9,388
1,633
14.9

18,266
11,069
60.6
9,267
1,802
16.3

18,297
11,134
60.9
9,319
1,815
16.3

18,333
11,188
61.0
9,313
1,875
16.8

18,362
11,207
61.0
9,321
1,886
16.8

18,392
11,226
61.0
9,279
1,947
17.3

18,423
11,188

8,901
5,700
64.0
5,126
575
10.1

9,310
5,972
64.1
5,348
624
10.4

9,282
5,905
63.6
5,314
591
10.0

9,400
5,924
63.0
5,340
584
9.9

9,466
5,964
63.0
5,393
571
9.6

9,559
6,074
63.5
5,422
652
10.7

9,556
6,151
64.4
5,446
705
11.5

9,519
6,095
64.0
5,426
669
11.0

9,314
1,874
16.8

18,450
11,205
60.7
9,265
1,939
17.3

18,480
11,217
60.7
9,197
2,020
18.0

18,511
11,170
60.3
9,111
2,058
18.4

18,542
11,335
61.1
9,216
2,120
18.7

18,570
11,253
60.6
9,174
2,079
18.5

18,600
11,322
60.9
9,223
2,098
18.5

9,400
6,054
64.4
5,330
724
12.0

9,341
6,065
64.9
5,298
767
12.6

9,297
6,024
64.8
5,260
764
12.7

9,235
5,933
64.2
5,191
743
12.5

9,297
6,001
64.5
5,166
834
13.9

9,428
5,931
62.9
5,131
800
13.5

9,521
5,966
62.7
5,135
832
13.9

HISPANIC ORIGIN

Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...............
Civilian labor force............................
Participation rate ....................
Employed ..............................
Unemployed .................................
Unemployement rate ..................

'
P°Pu^a*'on anc*Armed Forces figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2Civilian employment as a percent of the total noninstitutional population (including Armed
Forces).

56


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

N ote : Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to totals
because data for the “other races’’ group are not presented and Hispanics are included
¡n both the white and black population groups.

3.

Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[ Numbers in thousands]
Annual average

1982

1981

Selected categories
1980

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

99,613
56,725
42,888
38,342
23,691
5,064

99,581
56,629
42,952
38,234
23,744
5,107

99,590
56,658
42,932
38,255
23,727
5,158

99,492
56,472
43,020
38,181
23,900
5,095

May

June

July

99,340 100,117
56,401 56,820
42,940 43,297
38,142 38,312
23,831 24,213
5,095
4,986

99,764
56,223
43,541
38,354
24,401
5,112

99,732
56,192
43,540
38,213
24,223
5,247

CHARACTERISTIC

Total employed, 16 years and over ..................
Men ..................................................
Women...............................................
Married men, spouse present ....................
Married women, spouse present.................
Women who maintain families....................

99,303 100,397
57,186 57,397
42,117 43,000
39,004 38,882
23,532 23,915
4,780
4,998

100,864 100,840 100,258
57,640 57,551 57,471
43,224 43,289 42,787
38,961 38,961 38,855
24,159 24,043 23,626
4,969
4,988 5,015

100,343 100,172
57,266 57,051
43,077 43,121
38,746 38,553
23,874 23,820
5,045
5,049

OCCUPATION

White-collar workers.....................................
Professional and technical .......................
Managers and administrators, except farm ....
Salesworkers........................................
Clerical workers.....................................
Blue-collar workers......................................
Craft and kindred workers .......................
Operatives, except transport......................
Transport equipment operatives ................
Nonfarm laborers...................................
Service workers ..........................................
Farmworkers .............................................

51,882
15,968
11,138
6,303
18,473
31,452
12,787
10,565
3,531
4,567
13,228
2,741

52,949
16,420
11,540
6,425
18,564
31,261
12,662
10,540
3,476
4,583
13,438
2,749

52,907
16,364
11,578
6,373
18,592
31,580
12,787
10,719
3,526
4,548
13,526
2,727

53,141
16,621
11,460
6,490
18,570
31,611
12,724
10,658
3,530
4,699
13,282
2,753

52,908
16,598
11,533
6,441
18,336
31,266
12,514
10,524
3,506
4,722
13,391
2,743

53,199
16,681
11,616
6,400
18,502
30,953
12,446
10,410
3,580
4,517
13,525
2,770

53,086
16,657
11,461
6,418
18,550
30,683
12,411
10,220
3,438
4,614
13,670
2,802

53,084
16,774
11,424
6,450
18,436
30,344
12,446
10,169
3,368
4,361
13,639
2,660

52,836
16,803
11,091
6,520
18,423
30,203
12,370
9,966
3,415
4,451
13,709
2,817

52,841
16,612
11,253
6,544
18,432
30,309
12,454
9,955
3,503
4,397
13,612
2,787

52,763
16,659
11,311
6,637
18,155
30,416
12,511
9,860
3,397
4,648
13,526
2,710

53,177
16,844
11,501
6,603
18,229
29,924
12,492
9,688
3,400
4,343
13,555
2,623

53,705
16,818
11,541
6,587
18,759
29,926
12,316
9,585
3,419
4,607
13,738
2,731

53,586
17,053
11,504
6,547
18,482
29,716
12,207
9,655
3,414
4,441
13,791
2,660

53,685
17,292
11,355
6,567
18,471
29,609
12,229
9,453
3,439
4,488
13,634
2,750

1,425
1,642
297

1,464
1,638
266

1,495
1,593
244

1,501
1,638
256

1,461
1,643
256

1,502
1,631
261

1,436
1,641
321

1,352
1,602
228

1,377
1,674
380

1,426
1,596
359

1,416
1,644
277

1,423
1,664
270

1,541
1,698
236

1,431
1,676
251

1,530
1,674
250

88,525
15,912
72,612
1,192
71,420
7,000
413

89,543
15,689
73,853
1,208
72,645
7,097
390

89,971
15,637
74,334
1,216
73,118
7,071
389

89,995
15,526
74,469
1,259
73,210
7,103
387

89,376
15,475
73,901
1,102
72,799
7,217
399

89,460
15,491
73,969
1,162
72,807
7,152
451

89,238
15,397
73,841
1,204
72,637
7,141
425

88,991
15,585
73,406
1,291
72,115
7,057
410

88,759
15,578
73,181
1,248
71,932
6,971
410

88,586
15,527
73,059
1,161
71,898
7,055
408

88,526
15,492
73,034
1,225
71,809
7,126
434

88,322
15,453
72,869
1,192
71,677
7,264
413

89,051
15,422
73,629
1,202
72,427
7,269
382

88,606
15,635
72,970
1,201
71,770
7,319
397

88,541
15,443
73,098
1,200
71,898
7,268
390

90,209
73,590
4,064
1,714
2,350
12,555

91,377
74,339
4,499
1,738
2,761
12,539

92,532
75,620
4,374
1,680
2,694
12,538

91,569 90,878
74,467 73,794
4,350 4,656
1,729 1,759
2,621 2,897
12,752 12,428

91,384
73,886
5,009
2,006
3,003
12,489

91,323
73,915
5,026
1,945
3,081
12,382

90,922
73,360
5,288
2,121
3,167
12,274

90,125
72,803
5,071
1,783
3,287
12,251

90,892
73,028
5,563
2,193
3,370
12,300

90,548
72,649
5,717
2,237
3,480
12,183

90,596
72,335
5,834
2,223
3,611
12,427

91,282
73,036
5,763
2,211
3,552
12,483

91,020
72,662
5,444
2,064
3,380
12,914

90,501
72,438
5,492
2,001
3,491
12,579

MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS
OF WORKER

Agriculture:
Wage and salary workers.........................
Self-employed workers............................
Unpaid family workers ............................
Nonagricultural Industries:
Wage and salary workers.........................
Government ...................................
Private industries..............................
Private households ......................
Other industries .........................
Self-employed workers............................
Unpaid family workers ............................
PERSONS AT WORK'

Nonagricultural industries ..............................
Full-time schedules ................................
Part time for economic reasons..................
Usually work full time.........................
Usually work part time.......................
Part time for noneconomic reasons.............

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


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

57

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data
4.

Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted

[Unemployment ratesj
Selected categories

Annual average

1981

1982

1980

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Total, 16 years and over................................
Both sexes, 16 to 1 years.........................
Men, 20 years and over...........................
Women, 20 years and over.......................

7.1
17.8
5.9
6.4

7.6
19.6
6.3
6.8

7.2
18.7
5.8
6.7

7.3
19.0
6.0
6.6

7.6
19.7
6.2
6.9

8.0
20.4
6.7
7.0

8.3
21.4
7.1
7.2

8.8
21.5
7.9
7.4

8.5
21.7
7.5
7.2

8.8
22.3
7.6
7.6

9.0
21.9
7.9
7.9

9.4
23.0
8.2
8.3

9.5
23.1
8.4
8.3

9.5
22.3
8.7
8.1

9.8
24.1
8.8
8.4

White, total ..........................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ................
Men, 16 to 19 years ....................
Women, 16 to 19 years.................
Men, 20 years and over.....................
Women, 20 years and over .................

6.3
15.5
16.2
14.8
5.3
5.6

6.7
17.3
17.9
16.6
5.6
5.9

6.3
16.4
16.6
16.2
5.0
5.8

6.2
16.1
16.7
15.4
5.2
5.5

6.6
17.2
17.5
16.8
5.5
5.9

7.0
17.7
17.9
17.5
5.9
6.1

7.4
19.0
19.6
18.3
6.4
6.3

7.7
19.0
20.2
17.7
6.9
6.4

7.5
19.6
20.8
18.2
6.6
6.3

7.7
20.0
20.4
19.4
6.7
6.6

7.9
19.0
20.2
17.6
7.0
6.9

8.4
20.8
22.3
19.2
7.3
7.2

8.5
20.3
21.2
19.2
7.5
7.3

8.4
19.4
21.1
17.5
7.7
7.1

8.7
21.0
22.6
19.2
7.9
7.3

3lacK, total ..........................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .................
Men, 16 to 19 years ....................
Women, 16 to 19 years.................
Men, 20 y ears and over ....................
Women, 20 years and over .................

14.3
38.5
37.5
39.8
12.4
11.9

15.6
41.4
40.7
42.2
13.5
13.4

14.9
40.0
41.8
37.9
12.7
13.1

16.3
49.0
49.9
47.8
13.6
13.8

16.3
40.8
38.5
43.4
14.5
14.0

16.8
45.6
41.6
49.5
14.7
13.9

16.8
44.1
41.9
46.6
15.5
13.6

17.3
42.2
39.6
45.1
16.5
14.1

16.8
41.2
36.3
46.7
16.3
13.3

17.3
42.3
40.7
44.2
16.0
14.5

18.0
46.0
48.5
43.1
16.0
15.4

18.4
48.1
48.3
47.8
16.9
15.6

18.7
49.8
50.6
48.9
17.0
15.3

18.5
52.6
58.1
46.2
17.1
15.0

18.5
49.7
48.3
51.2
16.8
15.5

Hispanic Origin, total ............................

10.1

10.4

10.0

9.9

9.6

10.7

11.5

11.0

12.0

12.6

12.7

12.5

13.9

13.5

13.9

Married men, spouse present....................
Married women, spouse present.................
Women who maintain families....................
Full-time workers...................................
Part-time workers...................................
Unemployed 15 weeks and over.................
Labor force time lost1..............................

4.2
5.8
9.2
6.9
8.8
1.7
7.9

4.3
6.0
10.4
7.3
9.4
2.1
8.5

3.9
5.7
11.2
6.8
9.3
2.0
7.9

4.0
5.5
10.1
6.9
9.6
2.0
7.9

4.4
6.0
10.7
7.3
9.6
2.1
8.5

4.8
6.1
10.6
7.7
9.5
2.1
9.1

5.2
6.5
10.8
8.1
10.2
2.2
9.5

5.7
6.6
10.5
8.7
9.2
2.2
10.1

5.3
6.2
10.4
8.4
9.6
2.2
10.0

5.3
7.0
10.2
8.5
10.8
2.5
9.8

5.5
7.1
10.6
8.9
10.0
2.7
10.4

6.0
7.8
11.5
9.2
10.9
2.7
10.4

6.1
7.4
11.8
9.2
10.5
3.0
11.1

6.5
7.0
12.4
9.4
9.8
3.3
10.2

6.6
7.4
12.0
9.5
11.4
3.2
10.7

3.7
2.5
2.4
4.4
5.3
10.0
6.6
12.2
8.8
14.6
7.9
4.6

4.0
2.8
2.7
4.6
5.7
10.3
7.5
12.2
8.7
14.7
8.9
5.3

4.0
2.8
2.6
4.9
5.7
9.5
6.9
11.1
7.3
14.4
8.0
4.8

3.9
2.5
2.7
4.7
5.7
9.5
7.0
11.1
8.0
13.2
8.9
5.4

4.1
2.8
2.7
5.0
5.8
10.2
7.7
11.6
8.7
14.6
9.0
4.0

4.1
2.6
2.8
4.9
6.0
10.9
8.3
12.8
8.0
15.6
9.3
6.2

4.2
2.7
3.0
5.0
6.0
11.8
8.5
14.1
10.4
16.0
9.7
6.2

4.5
3.4
3.1
4.9
6.2
12.7
9.3
15.5
10.5
16.9
9.6
6.4

4.2
2.9
2.7
4.5
6.3
12.5
9.0
15.4
10.2
16.9
9.2
6.9

4.6
3.1
3.1
4.8
6.7
12.5
8.4
15.4
10.3
17.9
9.8
4.9

4.8
3.2
3.0
5.8
6.9
12.9
9.1
15.9
10.4
17.9
10.2
5.4

4.9
3.2
3.3
5.6
7.2
13.7
9.6
16.9
10.7
19.2
11.1
5.8

4.8
3.3
3.5
5.2
6.8
13.5
9.4
16.5
11.8
18.3
11.3
8.3

5.0
3.3
3.8
5.8
6.9
13.9
10.3
16.7
13.0
17.9
9.9
7.2

4.9
3.3
3.7
5.4
6.9
14.4
10.9
17.4
11.6
18.6
10.5
6.1

7.4
14.1
8.5
8.9
7.9
4.9
7.4
5.3
4.1
11.0

7.7
15.6
8.3
8.2
8.4
5.2
8.1
5.9
4.7
12.1

7.2
15.2
7.3
7.1
7.6
4.1
7.9
5.7
4.6
10.7

7.3
16.2
7.0
6.5
7.9
4.8
7.9
5.7
4.5
12.0

7.7
16.3
7.9
7.7
8.3
4.2
8.5
6.0
4.7
11.0

8.1
17.6
8.6
8.6
8.6
4.8
8.4
6.2
4.7
13.4

8.4
17.8
9.4
9.5
9.3
5.5
8.6
6.1
5.2
14.1

9.1
18.1
11.0
11.8
9.6
6.0
8.9
6.4
5.0
14.8

8.8
18.7
10.4
11.0
9.5
6.4
8.7
5.9
4.8
16.2

9.0
18.1
10.6
11.3
9.5
5.9
9.0
6.5
5.2
12.8

9.5
17.9
10.8
10.8
10.8
5.6
10.3
6.9
4.9
14.0

9.9
19.4
11.3
11.9
10.5
7.0
10.1
7.0
5.3
14.6

9.9
18.8
11.6
12.2
10.7
6.5
10.6
6.9
5.0
18.2

10.0
19.2
12.3
13.2
11.0
6.9
9.7
6.8
4.6
16.3

10.2
20.3
12.0
12.7
11.0
6.1
10.5
7.0
4.6
13.8

CHARACTERISTIC

OCCUPATION

White-collar workers.........................
Professional and technical .......................
Managers and administrators, except farm ....
Salesworkers...................................
Clerical workers.....................................
Blué-collar workers...............................
Craft and kindred workers ......................
Operatives, except transport......................
Transport equipment operatives .................
Nonfarm laborers...................................
Service workers......................................
Farmworkers ...................................
INDUSTRY

Nonagricultural private wage and salary workers 2 .
Construction ........................................
Manufacturing .....................................
Durable goods ...............................
Nondurable goods............................
Transportation and public utilities.................
Wholesale and retail trade .......................
Finance and service industries....................
Government workers .......................
Agricultural wage and salary workers.................

1Aggregate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a
percent of potentially available labor force hours.

58


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

2Includes mining, not shown separately,

5.

Unemployment rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted
Sex and age

Annual average

1981

1980

1981

Total, 16 years and over................................
16 to 19 years......................................
16 to 17 years.................................
18 to 19 years.................................
20 to 24 years......................................
25 years and over .................................
25 to 54 years.................................
55 years and over............................

7.1
17.8
20.0
16.2
11.5
5.1
5.5
3.3

7.6
19.6
21.4
18.4
12.3
5.4
5.8
3.6

7.2
18.7
19.8
17.8
11.5
5.2
5.5
3.5

Men, 16 years and over ...........................
16 to 19 years.................................
16 to 17 years ...........................
18 to 19 years ...........................
20 to 24 years.................................
25 years and over............................
25 to 54 years ...........................
55 years and over.......................

6.9
18.3
20.4
16.7
12.5
4.8
5.1
3.3

7.4
20.1
22.0
18.8
13.2
5.1
5.5
3.5

Women, 16 years and over.......................
16 to 19 years.................................
16 to 17 years ...........................
18 to 19 years ...........................
20 to 24 years.................................
25 years and over............................
25 to 54 years ...........................
55 years and over.......................

7.4
17.2
19.6
15.6
10.4
5.5
6.0
3.2

7.9
19.0
20.7
17.9
11.2
5.9
6.3
3.8

6.

July

Aug.

1982

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

7.3
19.0
20.8
17.6
12.1
5.2
5.5
3.5

7.6
19.7
21.4
18.5
12.3
5.4
5.8
3.8

8.0
20.4
21.5
20.0
12.7
5.7
6.2
3.8

8.3
21.4
22.6
20.5
13.0
6.0
6.5
3.8

8.8
21.5
21.9
21.2
13.5
6.5
6.9
4.1

8.5
21.7
21.9
21.3
13.5
6.3
6.7
4.2

8.8
22.3
22.7
22.0
14.1
6.4
6.8
4.3

9.0
21.9
22.7
21.3
14.2
6.8
7.3
4.6

9.4
23.0
24.6
21.9
14.7
7.0
7.4
5.0

9.5
23.1
25.3
21.3
14.3
7.1
7.7
4.8

9.5
22.3
23.7
21.9
14.4
7.4
7.7
5.4

9.8
24.1
26.1
22.8
14.5
7.5
7.9
5.2

6.7
18.8
19.9
17.9
11.6
4.7
5.0
3.4

7.1
19.8
21.5
18.3
12.9
4.9
5.2
3.4

7.3
19.9
21.5
18.7
13.1
5.0
5.5
3.5

7.7
20.1
21.1
19.3
13.8
5.5
5.9
3.7

8.3
21.8
22.7
21.0
14.4
5.8
6.3
3.7

9.0
22.3
22.6
22.2
14.8
6.5
6.9
4.4

8.6
22.1
23.0
21.4
14.9
6.3
6.7
4.3

8.7
22.5
23.0
22.1
15.4
6.3
6.7
4.2

9.0
23.5
24.3
22.9
15.7
6.6
7.1
4.8

9.4
24.4
24.7
24.3
16.0
6.9
7.2
5.1

9.6
24.0
26.3
21.9
15.5
6.9
7.5
4.7

9.7
24.2
25.8
24.0
15.8
7.5
8.0
5.0

9.9
25.1
28.1
23.4
15.9
7.5
8.1
4.8

7.8
18.6
19.7
17.7
11.3
5.8
6.1
3.7

7.7
18.2
20.0
16.9
11.1
5.6
6.0
3.7

8.0
19.5
21.2
18.3
11.4
6.0
6.3
4.3

8.2
20.7
21.9
20.6
11.5
6.1
6.5
4.0

8.4
20.9
22.5
19.9
11.3
6.4
6.8
3.8

8.5
20.5
21.1
20.0
12.0
6.4
6.9
3.7

8.4
21.2
20.6
21.1
11.9
6.3
6.7
4.1

8.9
22.1
22.5
21.9
12.7
6.5
7.0
4.3

9.0
20.1
20.8
19.6
12.6
7.0
7.6
4.3

9.4
21.3
24.5
19.4
13.3
7.2
7.7
4.8

9.5
22.1
24.1
20.6
12.9
7.4
8.0
5.0

9.1
20.2
21.4
19.7
12.9
7.2
7.4
6.0

9.6
23.1
24.1
22.2
12.9
7.4
7.7
6.0

Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
Reason for unemployment

Annual average

1981

1982

1980

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

3,947
1,488
2,459
891
1,927
872

4,267
1,430
2,837
923
2,102
981

3,867
1,225
2,642
926
2,078
940

4,106
1,276
2,830
879
2,034
971

4,426
1,452
2,974
921
2,058
977

4,573
1,631
2,942
976
2,178
1,002

4,905
1,826
3,079
916
2,339
996

5,343
2,042
3,301
923
2,244
1,021

5,205
1,860
3,345
835
2,079
1,055

5,153
1,740
3,413
964
2,277
1,100

5,622
1,828
3,794
885
2,249
1,044

5,906
1,946
3,959
937
2,365
1,081

5,901
1,969
3,932
874
2,438
1,154

6,302
2,071
4,231
813
2,372
1,088

6,177
2,079
4,098
813
2,528
1,249

100.0
51.7
19.5
32.1
11.7
25.2
11.4

100.0
51.6
17.3
34.3
11.2
25.4
11.9

100.0
49.5
15.7
33.8
11.9
26.6
12.0

100.0
51.4
16.0
35.4
11.0
25.5
12.2

100.0
52.8
17.3
35.5
11.0
24.6
11.7

100.0
52.4
18.7
33.7
11.2
25.0
11.5

100.0
53.6
19.9
33.6
10.0
25.5
10.9

100.0
56.1
21.4
34.6
9.7
23.5
10.7

100.0
56.7
20.3
36.5
9.1
22.7
11.5

100.0
54.3
18.3
35.9
10.2
24.0
11.6

100.0
57.4
18.7
38.7
9.0
22.9
10.7

100.0
57.4
18.9
38.5
9.1
23.0
10.5

100.0
56.9
19.0
37.9
8.4
23.5
11.1

100.0
59.6
19.6
40.0
7.7
22.4
10.3

100.0
57.4
19.3
38.1
7.5
23.5
11.6

3.7
.8
1.8
.8

3.9
.8
1.9
.9

3.6
.9
1.9
.9

3.8
.8
1.9
.9

4.1
.8
1.9
.9

4.2
.9
2.0
.9

4.5
.8
2.1
.9

4.9
.8
2.1
.9

4.8
.8
1.9
1.0

4.7
.9
2.1
1.0

5.1
.8
2.1
1.0

5.4
.9
2.2
1.0

5.3
.8
2.2
1.0

5.7
.7
2.2
1.0

5.6
.7
2.3
1.1

NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED

Lost last job...............................................
On layoff.............................................
Other job losers.....................................
Left last job ...............................................
Reentered labor force...................................
Seeking first jo b ..........................................
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION

Total unemployed........................................
Job losers ................................................
On layoff.............................................
Other job losers.....................................
Job leavers ...............................................
Reentrants................................................
New entrants .............................................
PERCENT OF
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE

Job losers ................................................
Job leavers ...............................................
Reentrants................................................
New entrants .............................................

7.

Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
Weeks of unemployment

Less than 5 weeks ......................................
5 to 14 weeks ...........................................
15 weeks and over......................................
15 to 26 weeks .....................................
27 weeks and over.................................
Mean duration, in weeks ................................
Median duration, in weeks..............................


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

Annual average

1982

1981

1980

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

3,295
2,470
1,871
1,052
820
11.9
6.5

3,449
2,539
2,285
1,122
1,162
13.7
6.9

3,323
2,312
2,170
1,096
1,074
14.1
7.0

3,326
2,469
2,217
1,078
1,139
14.3
7.0

3,529
2,585
2,248
1,146
1,102
13.7
6.9

3,707
2,686
2,292
1,166
1,126
13.6
6.8

3,852
2,882
2,364
1,229
1,135
13.1
6.9

4,037
3,016
2,372
1,189
1,183
12.8
6.7

3,852
3,068
2,399
1,210
1,190
13.5
7.2

3,789
3,052
2,724
1,445
1,278
14.1
7.3

3,825
3,078
2,954
1,605
1,349
13.9
7.6

3,958
3,304
3,015
1,508
1,507
14.2
8.5

3,874
3,320
3,286
1,634
1,652
14.6
9.0

3,543
3,458
3,673
1,826
1,847
16.5
9.8

3,990
3,161
3,580
1,792
1,788
15.6
8.3

59

EM PLOYM ENT, HOURS, AND EARNINGS DATA FRO M ESTABLISHM ENT SURVEYS

E m p l o y m e n t , h o u r s , a n d e a r n i n g s d a t a in this section are
compiled from payroll records reported monthly on a volun­
tary basis to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its cooperat­
ing State agencies by 177,000 establishments representing all
industries except agriculture. In most industries, the sampling
probabilities are based on the size of the establishment; most
large establishments are therefore in the sample. (An estab­
lishment is not necessarily a firm; it may be a branch plant,
for example, or warehouse.) Self-employed persons and others
not on a regular civilian payroll are outside the scope of the
survey because they are excluded from establishment records.
This largely accounts for the difference in employment figures
between the household and establishment surveys.

payments. R eal earnings are earnings adjusted to reflect the effects of
changes in consumer prices. The deflator for this series is derived
from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical
Workers (CPI-W). The H ou rly Earnings Index is calculated from av­
erage hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two types
of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments:
fluctuations in overtime premiums in manufacturing (the only sector
for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes and
seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and lowwage industries.
H ou rs represent the average weekly hours of production or
nonsupervisory workers for which pay was received and are different
from standard or scheduled hours. O vertim e hours represent the por­
tion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular
hours and for which overtime premiums were paid.

Definitions
E m ployed persons are all persons who received pay (including holi­

day and sick pay)
12th of the month.
cent of all persons
ment which reports

for any part of the payroll period including the
Persons holding more than one job (about 5 per­
in the labor force) are counted in each establish­
them.

P rod uction w orkers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker
supervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with
production operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 11-15 in­
clude production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction
workers in construction; and nonsupervisory workers in transporta­
tion and public utilities; in wholesale and retail trade; in finance, in­
surance, and real estate; and in services industries. These groups
account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private
nonagricultural payrolls.
E arnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers
receive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime
or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special

60


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

Notes on the data
Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are
periodically adjusted to comprehensive counts of employment (called
“benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the re­
lease of May 1982 data, published in the July 1982 issue of the R eview .
Consequently, data published in the R e v ie w prior to that issue are not
necessarily comparable to current data. Complete comparable histori­
cal unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a Supple­
ment to Employment and Earnings (unadjusted data from April 1977
through February 1982 and seasonally adjusted data from January
1974 through February 1982) and in E m p lo y m e n t a n d E a rn in g s, U n it­
e d S ta tes, 1 9 0 9 -7 8 , BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods).
A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household
and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green,
“Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur­
veys,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , December 1969, pp. 9-20. See also B L S
H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1976).

8.

Employment by industry, selected years, 1950-81

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands
Service-producing

Goods-producing

Year

Total

Private
sector

Total

Mining Construe- Manufacturing
tion

Total

Transportation
and
public
utilities

Wholesale and retail trade
Total

Wholesale
trade

trade

Finance,
insurance, Services
and real
estate

Government
Total

Federal

State
and
local

1950 .........................
1955 .........................
I9601 .......................
1964 .........................
1965 .........................

45,197
50,641
54,189
58,283
60,765

39,170
43,727
45,836
48,686
50,689

18,506
20,513
20,434
21,005
21,926

901
792
712
634
632

2,364
2,839
2,926
3,097
3,232

15,241
16,882
16,796
17,274
18,062

26,691
30,128
33,755
37,278
38,839

4,034
4,141
4,004
3,951
4,036

9,386
10,535
11,391
12,160
12,716

2,635
2,926
3,143
3,337
3,466

6,751
7,610
8,248
8,823
9,250

1,888
2,298
2,629
2,911
2,977

5,357
6,240
7,378
8,660
9,036

6,026
6,914
8,353
9,596
10,074

1,928
2,187
2,270
2,348
2,378

4,098
4,727
6,083
7,248
7,696

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

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

63,901
65,803
67,897
70,384
70,880

53,116
54,413
56,058
58,189
58,325

23,158
23,308
23,737
24,361
23,578

627
613
606
619
623

3,317
3,248
3,350
3,575
3,588

19,214
19,447
19,781
20,167
19,367

40,743
42,495
44,160
46,023
47,302

4,158
4,268
4,318
4,442
4,515

13,245
13,606
14,099
14,705
15,040

3,597
3,689
3,779
3,907
3,993

9,648
9,917
10,320
10,798
11,047

3,058
3,185
3,337
3,512
3,645

9,498
10,045
10,567
11,169
11,548

10,784
11,391
11,839
12,195
12,554

2,564
2,719
2,737
2,758
2,731

8,220
8,672
9,102
9,437
9,823

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975

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

71,214
73,675
76,790
78,265
76,945

58,331
60,341
63,058
64,095
62,259

22,935
23,668
24,893
24,794
22,600

609
628
642
697
752

3,704
3,889
4,097
4,020
3,525

18,623
19,151
20,154
20,077
18,323

48,278
50,007
51,897
53,471
54,345

4,476
4,541
4,656
4,725
4,542

15,352
15,949
16,607
16,987
17,060

4,001
4,113
4,277
4,433
4,415

11,351
11,836
12,329
12,554
12,645

3,772
3,908
4,046
4,148
4,165

11,797
12,276
12,857
13,441
13,892

12,881
13,334
13,732
14,170
14,686

2,696
2,684
2,663
2,724
2,748

10,185
10,649
11,068
11,446
11,937

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

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

79,382
82,471
86,697
89,823
90,406

64,511
67,344
71,026
73,876
74,166

23,352
24,346
25,585
26,461
25,658

779
813
851
958
1,027

3,576
3,851
4,229
4,463
4,346

18,997
19,682
20,505
21,040
20,285

56,030
58,125
61,113
63,363
64,748

4,582
4,713
4,923
5,136
5,146

17,755
18,516
19,542
20,192
20,310

4,546
4,708
4,969
5,204
5,275

13,209
13,808
14,573
14,989
15,035

4,271
4,467
4,724
4,975
5,160

14,551
15,303
16,252
17,112
17,890

14,871
15,127
15,672
15,947
16,241

2,733
2,727
2,753
2,773
2,866

12,138
12,399
12,919
13,147
13,375

1981 .........................

91,105

75,081

25,481

1,132

4,176

20,173

65,625

5,157

20,551

5,359

15,192

5,301

18,592

16,024

2,772

13,253

1Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.

9.

Employment by State

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
May 1982

June 1982 p

288.3
633.4
417.7
401.4
3,136.6

288.1
617.1
416.0
393.0
3,069.9

288.8
618.2
417.6
400.5
3,110.1

New Mexico..................................................
New York.....................................................
North Carolina ...............................................
North Dakota ................................................
Ohio ..........................................................

478.9
7,363.2
2,412.6
251.6
4,384.6

475.6
7.305.2
2,348.4
252.8
4,244.4

474.1
7.346.7
2,350.6
255.1
4,257.2

2,155,0
402.4
319.1
4,637.4
2,034.6

Oklahoma ....................................................
Oregon .......................................................
Pennsylvania ................................................
Rhode Island ................................................
South Carolina ..............................................

1,195.9
1,039.6
4,802.3
406.0
1,210.2

1,222.1
974.9
4,601.2
391.0
1,180.9

1,213.4
982.9
4,593.5
394.4
1,178.3

1,063.6
939.6
1,169.8
1,621.6
409.6

1,054.0
938.2
1,159.8
1,620.1
421.0

South Dakota................................................
Tennessee ...................................................
Texas .........................................................
Utah ..........................................................
Vermont.......................................................

244.2
1,757.8
6,147.3
560.4
203.4

235.4
1,728.1
6,289.3
562.0
200.4

237.1
1,724.4
6,289.9
565.0
200.7

1,690.4
2,641.3
3,245.0
1,739.7
805.0
1,971.9

1,699.2
2,642.6
3,243.8
1,742.3
793.5
1,977.3

Virginia.........................................................
Washington ..................................................
West Virginia ................................................
Wisconsin.....................................................
Wyoming .....................................................

2,187.1
1,628.5
627.9
1,937.4
222.8

2,165.8
1,566.8
609.2
1,875.1
218.9

2,180.7
1,578.0
606.1
1,879.4
221.3

Virgin Islands ................................................

37.9

35.0

34.8

June 1981

May 1982

June 1982 p

State

Alabama ............
Alaska...............
Arizona .............
Arkansas ............
California............

1,351.1
184.7
1,029.7
740.4
10,112.0

1,334.7
185.4
1,040.1
728.7
10,026.9

1,333.5
192.1
1,016.7
719.0
10,042.9

Montana.......................................................
Nebraska.....................................................
Nevada .......................................................
New Hampshire .............................................
New Jersey ..................................................

Colorado............
Connecticut ........
Delaware............
District of Columbia.
Florida...............

1,283.4
1,457.8
264.5
614.0
3,726.4

1,284.5
1,425.2
258.3
603.3
3,785.6

1,290.6
1,429.4
257.9
606.0
3,763.4

Georgia.............
Hawaii...............
Idaho.................
Illinois ...............
Indiana...............

2,186.4
406.8
329.3
4,800.4
2,135.5

2,163.1
402.7
317.4
4,638.5
2,046.3

Iowa .................
Kansas .............
Kentucky ............
Louisiana............
Maine ...............

1,098.9
957.5
1,191.7
1,634.7
430.1

Maryland............
Massachusetts
Michigan ............
Minnesota ..........
Mississippi ..........
Missouri.............

1,735.4
2,686.0
3,416.5
1,787.0
821.8
1,991.2

State


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

June 1981

61

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data

10.

Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands]
Annual Average

1981

Industry division and group

1982

1980

1981

July

Aug.

90,406

91,105

91,396

91,322

91,363

91,224

90,996

90,642

90,460

90,459

90,304

74,166

75,081

75,432

75,428

75,459

75,307

75,088

74,725

74,596

74,609

74,445

25,658

25,481

25,718

25,637

25,583

25,393

25,176

24,908

24,684

24,631

24,450

Mining ................

1,027

1,132

1,164

1,180

1,192

1,195

1,202

1,206

1,201

1,203

1,197

Construction ........................................

4,346

4,176

4,175

4,146

4,124

4,101

4,071

4,026

3,966

3,974

20,285
14,214

20,173
14,021

20,379
14,212

20,311
14,136

20,267
14,087

20,097
13,915

19,903
13,717

19,676
13,488

19,517
13,431

Production workers...........................

12,187
8,442

12,117
8,301

12,266
8,439

12,228
8,389

12,184
8,345

12,059
8,218

11,901
8,061

11,724
7,885

Lumber and wood products ......................
Furniture and fixtures............................
Stone, clay, and glass products ..................
Primary metal industries.................
Fabricated metal products...............

690.5
465.8
662.1
1,142.2
1,613.1

668.7
467.3
638.2
1,121.1
1,592.4

683
476
644
1,132
1,617

671
475
643
1,134
1,610

661
473
638
1,125
1,604

643
469
629
1,104
1,577

628
462
620
1,082
1553

Machinery, except electrical....................
Electric and electronic equipment........
Transportation equipment..................
Instruments and related products ...............
Miscellaneous manufacturing .................

2,494.0
2,090.6
1,899.7
711.3
418.0

2,507.0
2,092.2
1,892.6
726.8
410.7

2,527
2,112
1,925
731
419

2,532
2,116
1,901
734
412

2,539
2,113
1,884
734
413

2,532
2,101
1,861
731
412

Production workers............................

8,098
5,772

8,056
5,721

8,113
5,773

8,083
5,747

8,083
5,742

Food and kindred products..................
Tobacco manufactures .......................
Textile mill products...........................
Apparel and other textile products ...............
Paper and allied products .........................

1,708.0
68.9
847.7
1,263.5
692.8

1,674.3
69.8
822.5
1,244.0
687.8

1,678
70
835
1,255
691

1,659
70
829
1,253
691

Printing and publishing..............................
Chemicals and allied products ...............
Petroleum and coal products ............
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ..,
Leather and leather products........

1,252.1
1,107.4
197.9
726.8
232.9

1,265.8
1,107.3
215.6
736.1
233.0

1,268
1,110
217
750
239

64,748

65,625

5,146

5,157

20,310

TOTAL ................
TOTAL PRIVATE..................
GOODS-PRODUCING .......

Manufacturing ....................

Production workers.........................
Durable goods....................

Nondurable goods ..................

SERVICE-PRODUCING...........
Transportation and public utilities .........
Wholesale and retail trade................
Wholesale trade..................
Retail trade ..................
Finance, insurance, and read estate

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Junep

90,083

90,166

89,860

89,843

74,231

74,313

74,043

73,993

24,289

24,255

25,992

25,878

1,182

1,152

1,121

1,107

3,934

3,938

3,988

3,942

3,932

19,454
13,290

19,319
13,179

19,169
13,042

19,115
13,008

18,929
12,868

18,839
12,818

11,622
7,793

11,575
7,759

11,490
7,685

11,375
7,576

11,332
7,553

11,205
7,458

11,157
7,437

615
457
610
1,053
1,529

607
452
596
1,038
1,515

611
449
596
1,024
1,505

607
446
590
1,007
1,496

615
443
584
976
1,481

617
443
586
945
1,472

616
444
580
926
1,454

617
445
576
923
1,448

2,511
2,077
1,830
727
411

2,486
2,049
1,791
725
409

2,459
2,055
1,777
720
403

2,446
2,048
1,778
718
400

2,419
2,038
1,774
716
397

2,389
2,034
1,748
713
392

2,377
2,034
1,755
713
390

2,317
2,027
1,746
709
386

2,274
2,025
1,756
706
387

8,038
5,697

8,002
5,656

7,952
5,603

7,895
5,548

7,879
5,531

7,829
5,494

7,794
5,466

7,783
5,455

7,724
5,410

7,682
5,381

1,658
69
827
1,253
695

1,662
69
814
1,243
685

1,664
69
804
1,235
681

1,661
68
794
1,222
677

1,657
69
780
1,201
674

1,663
68
777
1,201
670

1,658
68
760
1,186
668

1,643
67
773
1,165
664

1,652
67
759
1,165
661

1,638
67
739
1,162
658

1,621
65
744
1,150
655

1,271
1,107
216
752
235

1,274
1,110
216
746
235

1,276
1,107
215
734
233

1,276
1,103
215
725
230

1,276
1,100
214
716
224

1,275
1,095
210
712
222

1,276
1,093
208
708
215

1,278
1,088
207
703
213

1,274
1,082
206
706
214

1,274
1,079
207
708
211

1,268
1,072
205
705
210

1,263
1,069
204
705
206

65,678

65,685

65,780

65,831

65,820

65,734

65,776

65,828

65,854

65,794

65,911

65,868

65,965

5,168

5,168

5,181

5,162

5,150

5,128

5,125

5,115

5,100

5,094

5,101

5,081

5,058

20,551

20,620

20,650

20,660

20,654

20,623

20,524

20,630

20,670

20,655

20,584

20,652

20,602

20,629

5,275

5,359

5,375

5,387

5,383

5,380

5,375

5,357

5,346

5,343

5,336

5,323

5,331

5,307

5,298

15,035

15,192

15,245

15,263

15,277

15,274

15,248

15,167

15,284

15,327

15,319

15,261

15,321

15,295

15,331

July»

5,160

5,301

5,311

5,319

5,328

5,325

5,324

5,331

5,326

5,326

5,336

5,335

5,342

5,356

5,362

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

17,890

18,592

18,615

18,654

18,707

18,773

18,815

18,834

18,831

18,867

18,904

18,929

18,963

19,012

19,066

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

16,241
2,866
13,375

16,024
2,772
13,253

15,964
2,775
13,189

15,894
2,769
13,125

15,904
2,764
13,140

15,917
2,757
13,160

15,908
2,749
13,159

15,917
2,756
13,161

15,864
2,741
13,123

15,850
2,737
13,113

15,859
2,736
13,123

15,852
2,730
13,122

15,853
2,728
13,125

15,817
2,739
13,078

15,850
2,748
13,102

Federal.........................
State and local .........................

62


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

11.

Hours and earnings, by industry division, selected years, 1950-81

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls]
Year

Average
weekly
earnings

Average
weekly
hours

Average
hourly
earnings

Average
weekly
earnings

Average
weekly
hours

Average
hourly
earnings

Average
weekly
earnings

Average
hourly
earnings

Average
weekly
earnings

Average
weekly
hours

Average
hourly
earnings

Manufacturing

Construction

Mining

Total private

Average
weekly
hours

1950 ...............
1955 ...............
I9601 .............
1964 ...............
1965 ...............

$53.13
67.72
80.67
91.33
95.45

39.8
39.6
38.6
38.7
38.8

$1.335
1.71
2.09
2.36
2.46

$67.16
89.54
105.04
117.74
123.52

37.9
40.7
40.4
41.9
42.3

$1.772
2.20
2.60
2.81
2.92

$69.68
90.90
112.67
132.06
138.38

37.4
37.1
36.7
37.2
37.4

$1.863
2.45
3.07
3.55
3.70

$58.32
75.30
89.72
102.97
107.53

40.5
40.7
39.7
40.7
41.2

$1.440
1.85
2.26
2.53
2.61

1966 ...............
1967 ...............
1968 ...............
1969 ...............
1970 ...............

98.82
101.84
107.73
114.61
119.83

38.6
38.0
37.8
37.7
37.1

2.56
2.68
2.85
3.04
3.23

130.24
135.89
142.71
154.80
164.40

42.7
42.6
42.6
43.0
42.7

3.05
3.19
3.35
3.60
3.85

146.26
154.95
164.49
181.54
195.45

37.6
37.7
37.3
37.9
37.3

3.89
4.11
4.41
4.79
5.24

112.19
114.49
122.51
129.51
133.33

41.4
40.6
40.7
40.6
39.8

2.71
2.82
3.01
3.19
3.35

1971 ...............
1972 ...............
1973 ...............
1974 ...............
1975 ...............

127.31
136.90
145.39
154.76
163.53

36.9
37.0
36.9
36.5
36.1

3.45
3.70
3.94
4.24
4.53

172.14
189.14
201.40
219.14
249.31

42.4
42.6
42.4
41.9
41.9

4.06
4.44
4.75
5.23
5.95

211.67
221.19
235.89
249.25
266.08

37.2
36.5
36.8
36.6
36.4

5.69
6.06
6.41
6.81
7.31

142.44
154.71
166.46
176.80
190.79

39.9
40.5
40.7
40.0
39.5

3.57
3.82
4.09
4.42
4.83

1976 ...............
1977 ...............
1978 ...............
1979 ...............
1980 ...............

175.45
189.00
203.70
219.91
235.10

36.1
36.0
35.8
35.7
35.3

4.86
5.25
5.69
6.16
6.66

273.90
301.20
332.88
365.07
397.06

42.4
43.4
43.4
43.0
43.3

6.46
6.94
7.67
8.49
9.17

283.73
295.65
318.69
342.99
367.78

36.8
36.5
36.8
37.0
37.0

7.71
8.10
8.66
9.27
9.94

209.32
228.90
249.27
269.34
288.62

40.1
40.3
40.4
40.2
39.7

5.22
5.68
6.17
6.70
7.27

1981 ...............

255.20

35.2

7.25

439.19

43.7

10.05

398.52

36.9

10.80

318.00

39.8

7.99

Transportation and public
utilities

Finance, insurance, and
real estate

Wholesale and retail trade

Services

$2 89
3.03

$44.55
55.16
66.01
74.66
76.91

40 5
394
386
37.9
37.7

$1.100
1.40
1.71
1.97
2.04

$50.52
63.92
75.14
85.79
88.91

37.7
37.6
37.2
37.3
37.2

$1.340
1.70
2.02
2.30
2.39

$70.03
73.60

36.1
35.9

$1.94
2.05

41.2
40.5
40.6
40.7
40.5

3.11
3.23
3.42
3.63
3.85

79.39
82.35
87.00
91.39
96.02

37.1
36.6
36.1
35.7
35.3

2.14
2.25
2.41
2.56
2.72

92.13
95.72
101.75
108.70
112.67

37.3
37.1
37.0
37.1
36.7

2.47
2.58
2.75
2.93
3.07

77.04
80.38
83.97
90.57
96.66

35.5
35.1
34.7
34.7
34.4

2.17
2.29
2.42
2.61
2.81

168.82
187.86
203.31
217.48
233.44

40.1
40.4
40.5
40.2
39.7

4.21
4.65
5.02
5.41
5.88

101.09
106.45
111.76
119.02
126.45

35.1
34.9
34.6
34.2
33.9

2.88
3.05
3.23
3.48
3.73

117.85
122.98
129.20
137.61
148.19

36.6
36.6
36.6
36.5
36.5

3.22
3.36
3.53
3.77
4.06

103.06
110.85
117.29
126.00
134.67

33.9
33.9
33.8
33.6
33.5

3.04
3.27
3.47
3.75
4.02

1976 ...............
1977 ...............
1978 ...............
1979 ...............
1980 ...............

256.71
278.90
302.80
325.58
351.25

39.8
39.9
40.0
39.9
39.6

6.45
6.99
7.57
8.16
8.87

133.79
142.52
153.64
164.96
176.46

33.7
33.3
32.9
32.6
32.2

3.97
4.28
4.67
5.06
5.48

155.43
165.26
178.00
190.77
209.60

36.4
36.4
36.4
36.2
36.2

4.27
4.54
4.89
5.27
5.79

143.52
153.45
163.67
175.27
190.71

33.3
33.0
32.8
32.7
32.6

4.31
4.65
4.99
5.36
5.85

1981 ...............

382.18

39.4

9.70

190.95

32.2

5.93

229.05

36.3

6.31

208.97

32.6

6.41

1950
1955
ipfin'
1964 ...............
1965 ...............

$118.78
125.14

41.1
41.3

1966 ...............
1967 ...............
1968 ...............
1969 ...............
1970 ...............

128.13
130.82
138.85
147.74
155.93

1971 ...............
1972 ...............
1973 ...............
1974 ...............
1975 ...............

1Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959.


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

63

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data

12.

Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
Annual average

1981

1982

Industry division and group
1980
TOTAL PRIVATE..................................

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Junep

July?

35.3

35.2

35.3

35.2

35.0

35.1

35.1

35.0

34.4

35.0

34.9

34.9

35.0

34.8

34.9

39.7
2.8

39.8
2.8

40.0
3.0

39.9
3.0

39.4
2.7

39.5
2.7

39.3
2.5

39.1
2.4

37.6
2.3

39.4
2.4

39.0
2.3

39.0
2.4

39.1
2.3

39.2
2.4

39.3
2.4

40.1
2.8

40.2
2.8

40.5
3.0

40.4
3.0

39.7
2.7

40.0
2.6

39.7
2.4

39.5
2.3

38.2
2.2

39.8
2.2

39.5
2.2

39.5
2.2

39.6
2.2

39.7
2.3

39.7
2.2

Lumber and wood products......................
Furniture and fixtures ...........................
Stone, clay, and glass products..................
Primary metal industries ...........................
Fabricated metal products.........................

38.5
38.1
40.8
40.1
40.4

38.7
38.4
40.6
40.5
40.3

38.7
38.6
40.8
40.7
40.5

38.4
38.4
40.7
40.8
40.4

37.6
37.4
40.3
40.6
39.6

37.8
38.0
40.1
40.0
40.0

37.7
37.6
40.1
39.6
39.7

37.7
37.9
39.7
39.2
39.5

35.0
33.6
38.6
38.3
38.1

37.9
37.7
40.1
39.4
39.7

37.6
37.3
40.0
38.8
39.5

37.6
37.4
40.0
38.5
39.4

38.5
37.5
40.2
38.5
39.5

38.5
37.8
40.4
38.9
39.4

38.3
37.9
40.6
38.9
39.5

Machinery, except electrical .....................
Electric and electronic equipment.................
Transportation equipment ....................
Instruments and related products.................
Miscellaneous manufacturing......................

41.0
39.8
40.6
40.5
38.7

40.9
39.9
40.9
40.4
38.8

41.2
40.4
41.2
40.5
39.0

41.1
40.3
41.2
40.6
38.9

40.3
39.7
40.1
40.4
38.4

40.8
39.8
40.6
40.3
38.9

40.7
39.4
40,4
40.2
39.0

40.4
39.5
39.7
39.9
38.5

39.3
38.3
39.0
39.0
37.3

40.7
39.8
40.5
39.9
38.6

40.2
39.4
40.4
39.9
38.6

40.1
39.3
41.1
39.9
38.5

39.8
39.4
41.1
40.2
38.7

39.8
39.5
41.6
40.2
38.5

40.0
39.8
41.1
40.0
38.6

Overtime hours ............................

39.0
2.8

39.1
2.8

39.2
2.9

39.2
2.9

38.9
2.8

38.9
2.8

38.7
2.7

38.6
2.6

36.8
2.5

38.9
2.6

38.5
2.5

38.4
2.6

38.5
2.5

38.6
2.5

38.6
2.6

Food and kindred products .......................
Textile mill products .........................
Apparel and other textile products...............
Paper and allied products .......................

39.7
40.1
35.4
42.2

39.7
39.6
35.7
42.5

39.5
40.1
35.8
42.7

39.4
39.8
35.9
42.5

39.3
38.8
35.2
43.0

39.5
39.0
35.5
42.4

39.5
38.7
35.5
42.0

39.8
37.8
35.1
41.8

39.1
32.3
31.4
41.3

40.2
38.3
35.5
42.3

39.5
37.6
35.0
41.8

39.4
37.7
34.7
42.1

39.4
37.9
34.8
41.8

39.5
37.9
35.1
42.0

39.5
38.1
35.1
42.2

Printing and publishing..............................
Chemicals and allied products...........
Petroleum and coal products......................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ...
Leather and leather products.................

37.1
41.5
41.8
40.0
36.7

37.3
41.6
43.2
40.3
36.8

37.3
41.7
43.1
40.5
36.4

37.3
41.7
42.9
40.5
36.7

37.1
42.2
43.1
39.7
36.2

37.1
41.5
42.2
39.9
36.7

37.1
41.2
42.5
39.6
36.5

37.1
41.3
42.7
39.4
36.1

36.9
41.0
44.3
37.9
34.1

37.4
41.2
43.5
40.0
35.6

37.1
40.7
43.5
39.6
35.8

37.1
40.7
44.0
39.8
35.6

36.8
41.0
44.1
39.9
35.6

37.0
41.1
44.0
40.1
35.8

36.9
41.0
43.3
40.2
35.5

32.2

32.1

32.0

32.1

32.0

31.7

32.0

31.9

31.8

32.0

31.9

31.9

MANUFACTURING................................

Overtime hours ..............................
Durable goods...........................

Overtime hours ..............................

Nondurable goods .........................

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ................

32.2

32.2

'32.2

WHOLESALE TRADE.......................

38.5

38.6

38.6

38.6

38.5

38.4

38.5

38.4

38.1

38.5

38.4

38.3

38.5

38.6

38.4

RETAIL TRADE...........................

30.2

30.1

30.1

30.1

30.1

29.9

30.0

29.9

29.7

29.9

29.8

29.8

30.0

29.8

29.9

SERVICES.............................

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.5

32.5

32.6

32.6

32.6

32.5

32.6

32.6

32.7

32.7

32.6

32.6

N ote : The industry divisions of mining; construction; tobacco manufactures (a major
manufacturing group, nondurable goods); transportation and public utilities; and finance, insurance,
and real estate are no longer shown. This is because the seasonal component in these is small

64


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

relative to the trend-cycle, or irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be precisely
separated,
r=revised.

13.

Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
1982

1981

Annual average
Industry division and group

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Junep

JulyP

1980

1981

July

Aug.

Seasonally adjusted .........................

$6.66
<’ )

$7.25
(’ )

$7.24
7.27

$7.30
7.34

$7.40
7.37

$7.42
7.40

$7.47
7.45

$7.45
7.46

$7.55
7.52

$7.54
7.53

$7.55
7.54

$7.58
7.59

$7.63
7.65

$7.63
7.66

$7.67
7.70

MINING........................................................

9.17

10.05

10.09

10.12

10.27

10.25

10.39

10.41

10.65

10.62

10.62

10.65

10.66

10.82

10.86

CONSTRUCTION...........................................

9.94

10.80

10.79

10.92

11.07

11.65

11.18

11.26

11.59

11.32

11.33

11.32

11.46

11.41

11.52

8.27

8.42

8.34

8.37

8.42

8.45

8.50

8.55

TOTAL PRIVATE......................................

MANUFACTURING ........................................

7.27

7.99

8.02

8.03

8.16

8.16

8.20

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

Lumber and wood products .................
Furniture and fixtures.........................
Stone, clay, and glass products ...........
Primary metal industries.....................
Fabricated metal products ..................

7.75
6.55
5.49
7.50
9.77
7.45

8.53
7.00
5.91
8.27
10.81
8.20

8.57
7.15
5.92
8.40
10.78
8.21

8.59
7.13
5.99
8.41
10.99
8.26

8.70
7.16
6.01
8.53
11.22
8.33

8.73
7.10
6.06
8.50
10.97
8.39

8.77
7.16
6.05
8.54
11.10
8.42

8.83
7.16
6.12
8.56
11.08
8.53

8.92
7.38
6.28
8.70
11.23
8.55

8.89
7.27
6.19
8.62
11.20
8.57

8.91
7.28
6.21
8.65
11.15
8.64

8.94
7.24
6.21
8.72
11.24
8.69

9.01
7.41
6.23
8.80
11.23
8.79

9.06
7.54
6.30
8.86
11.32
8.82

9.10
7.62
6.34
8.92
11.42
8.83

Machinery, except electrical.................
Electric and electronic equipment..........
Transportation equipment....................
Instruments and related products ..........
Miscellaneous manufacturing ...............

8.00
6.94
9.35
6.80
5.46

8.81
7.62
10.39
7.43
5.96

8.83
7.65
10.44
7.43
5.97

8.84
7.73
10.37
7.55
5.96

8.96
7.75
10.49
7.59
6.05

9.04
7.80
10.74
7.60
6.05

9.08
7.83
10.74
7.68
6.11

9.18
7.90
10.76
7.81
6.19

9.19
7.98
10.79
7.93
6.27

9.20
7.96
10.82
7.94
6.29

9.18
8.01
10.89
8.00
6.32

9.24
8.03
10.89
8.07
6.35

9.26
8.05
11.08
8.16
6.38

9.28
8.11
11.20
8.22
6.41

9.34
8.17
11.20
8.26
6.41

Nondurable goods..................................

Food and kindred products..................
Tobacco manufactures.......................
Textile mill products...........................
Apparel and other textile products ........
Paper and allied products....................

6.55
6.85
7.74
5.07
4.56
7.84

7.18
7.43
8.88
5.52
4.96
8.60

7.22
7.45
9.46
5.50
4.92
8.73

7.23
7.48
8.70
5.65
4.96
8.67

7.36
7.56
8.76
5.69
5.04
8.95

7.33
7.51
8.67
5.72
5.05
8.82

7.38
7.61
9.04
5.73
5.04
8.89

7.44
7.67
8.96
5.72
5.04
8.96

7.67
7.82
9.21
5.76
5.18
9.06

7.54
7.74
9.56
5.76
5.13
8.99

7.57
7.79
9.72
5.76
5.15
9.03

7.65
7.90
10.05
5.79
5.18
9.11

7.66
7.92
9.93
5.79
5.16
9.14

7.71
7.91
10.39
5.80
5.18
9.27

7.78
7.91
10.57
5.81
5.17
9.40

Printing and publishing.......................
Chemicals and allied products .............
Petroleum and coal products ...............
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products
Leather and leather products ...............

7.53
8.30
10.10
6.52
4.58

8.18
9.12
11.38
7.16
4.99

8.20
9.16
11.43
7.18
4.97

8.25
9.19
11.32
7.23
4.97

8.37
9.38
11.55
7.29
5.09

8.40
9.37
11.47
7.30
5.09

8.42
9.42
11.58
7.31
5.11

8.48
9.53
11.59
7.38
5.15

8.58
9.68
11.91
7.51
5.19

8.56
9.68
12.29
7.49
5.22

8.59
9.71
12.32
7.45
5.24

8.59
9.81
12.50
7.52
5.32

8.61
9.83
12.52
7.56
5.32

8.68
9.95
12.52
7.65
5.36

8.74
10.04
12.51
7.70
5.32

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES . .

8.87

9.70

9.67

9.87

9.95

9.94

10.05

10.06

10.10

10.13

10.07

10.14

10.17

10.19

10.24

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ..................

5.48

5.93

5.91

5.94

6.04

6.01

6.04

6.02

6.17

6.16

6.16

6.18

6.20

6.19

6.20

7.94

7.94

7.93

7.97

8.03

8.00

8.07

5.43

5.42

5.43

5.44

5.47

5.47

5.46

6.59

6.64

6.77

6.69

6.75

6.77

6.81

6.85

6.82

6.88

WHOLESALE TRADE......................................

6.96

7.57

7.58

7.65

7.70

7.73

7.79

7.81

RETAIL TRADE.............................................

4.88

5.25

5.24

5.25

5.37

5.29

5.32

5.31

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE . . . .

5.79

6.31

6.28

6.38

6.39

6.43

6.52

6.47

6.56

6.62

SERVICES.....................................................

5.85

6.41

6.34

6.41

6.52

6.58

6.67

6.66

6.79

6.79

1Not available.

14.

Hourly Earnings Index, for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry division

[1977= 100]
Seasonally adjusted

Not seasonally adjusted

Industry

TOTAL PRIVATE (In current dollars)

Manufacturing ................................
Transportation and public utilities..........
Wholesale and retail trade .................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.......
Services ......................................
TOTAL PRIVATE (in constant dollars)

July
1981

Mar.
1982

Apr.
1982

May
1982

June
1982 p

July
1982 p

Percent
change
from:
June 1982
to
July 1982

July
1981

May
1982

June
1982 p

138.8

147.4

147.5

148.4

6.9

139.1

145.4

146.3

147.7

148.0

148.7

0.4

149.0
132.3
142.3
138.5
138.2
137.5
136.5

156.8
139.3
151.5
147.2
145.2
147.9
146.5

159.6
139.1
152.4
147.2
144.8
146.5
146.3

160.5
140.5
153.3
147.4
145.1
147.8
147.9

7.7
6.2
7.7
6.4
5.0
7.4
8.3

(’ )
132.2
142.4
139.0
138.4
137.8
137.4

(’ )
138.1
149.9
146.3
142.8
143.8
143.9

(' )

(1)
139.9
151.8
148.2
145.1
148.0
146.5

(' )

139.7
152.5
149.0
145.2
146.8
147.1

(1)
140.3
153.3
148.0
145.3
148.1
148.8

n

138.7
150.8
146.9
143.7
144.9
145.1

.5
.5
-.7
.1
.9
1.1

91.7

93.4

92.3

<2)

(2)

92.2

93.3

93.7

93.7

93.0

(2)

( 2>

1This series is not seasonally adjusted because the seasonal component is small relative to
the trend-cycle, irregular components, or both, and consequently cannot be separated with


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

Percent
change
from:
July 1981
to
July 1982

July
1982 p

sufficient precision,
2Not available.

65

M O N T H L Y LA BO R R EV IEW September 1982 • C u rre n t L a b o r S ta tistics: E sta b lish m e n t D a ta
15.

Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group

[Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls]
Industry division and group

Annual average
1980

TOTAL PRIVATE:
Current dollars............................
Seasonally adjusted....................
Constant (1977) dollars....................

1981

$235.10 $255.20
(1)
(’ >
172.74 170.13

1981
July

Aug.

SepL

Oct

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

397.06

439.19

439.92

447.30

450.85

456.13

461.32

466.37

456.89

463.03

CONSTRUCTION ..............................

367.78

398.52

407.86

408.41

396.31

419.62

414.78

417.75

385.95

406.39

MANUFACTURING
Current dollars............................
Constant (1977) dollars ................

288.62
212.06

318.00
212.00

317.59
209.91

320.40
210.37

322.32
209.57

323.95
210.22

325.54
210.71

329.97
213.02

312.38
201.02

326.93
209.70

Durable goods.................................
Lumber and wood products...............
Furniture and fixtures ......................
Stone, clay, and glass products..........
Primary metal industries ..................
Fabricated metal products................

310.78
252.18
209.17
306.00
391.78
300.98

342.91
270.90
226.94
335.76
437.81
330.46

342.80
276.71
223.78
342.72
434.43
327.58

345.32
278.07
231.21
344.81
442.90
332.88

346.26
271.36
226.58
346.32
457.78
330.70

350.07
271.22
233.92
344.25
435.51
337.28

351.68
269.93
230.51
345.87
440.67
337.64

356.73
272.80
238.07
343.26
438.77
345.47

336.28
248.71
204.10
325.38
431.23
323.19

Machinery except electrical...............
Electric and electronic equipment........
Transportation equipment .................
Instruments and related products........
Miscellaneous manufacturing.............

328.00
276.21
379.61
275.40
211.30

360.33
304.04
424.95
300.17
231.25

357.62
303.71
425.95
296.46
229.85

359.79
309.20
421.02
305.02
231.84

361.98
307.68
418.55
306.64
234.14

367.93
311.22
440.34
307.04
237.77

372.28
311.63
438.19
313.34
241.35

381.89
319.16
445.46
317.87
242.03

Nondurable goods............................
Food and kindred products ...............
Tobacco manufactures ....................
Textile mill products .......................
Apparel and other textile products.......
Paper and allied products ................

255.45
271.95
294.89
203.31
161.42
330.85

280.74
294.97
344.54
218.59
177.07
365.50

282.30
295.02
365.16
217.80
177.12
370.15

284.86
298.45
354.09
225.44
180.05
367.61

287.78
300.89
352.15
221.34
177.41
386.64

286.60
296.65
341.60
225.37
180.79
373.97

288.56
302.88
350.75
224.62
180.43
376.05

Printing and publishing.....................
Chemicals and allied products...........
Petroleum and coal products.............
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products.........................
Leather and leather products.............

279.36
344.45
422.18

305.11
379.39
491.62

305.04
380.14
499.49

309.38
380.47
486.76

313.04
395.84
512.82

312.48
388.86
494.36

260.80
168.09

288.55
183.63

286.48
181.41

292.09
183.39

289.41
183.24

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES

351.25

382.18

383.90

389.87

WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ..........

176.46

190.95

193.85

194.83

WHOLESALE TRADE ..........................

267.96

292.20

294.10

RETAIL TRADE...................................

147.38

158.03

161.92

FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE

209.60

229.05

SERVICES.....................

190.71

208.97

66

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

Apr.

May

Junen

July p

$257.74 $259.88 $259.74 $261.18 $262.20 $262.24 $255,95 $262.39 $261.99 $262.27 $265.52 $266.70 $269.98
256.63 258.37 257.95 259.74 261.50 261.10 258.69 263.55 263.15 264.89 267.75 266.57 268.73
170,35 170.64 168.88 169.49 169.71 169.30 164.70 168.31 168.37 167.80 168.16 167.12
(')

MINING .........................................

1Not available.

Mar.

465.16

454.76

454.12

462.01 $466.98

415.44

429.75

427.88

437.76

327.27
210.33

325.85
208.48

329.55
208.71

334.05
209.04

332.60
<’)

352.93
272.63
231.51
337.90
443.52
337.66

352.84
273.73
233.50
344.27
434.85
342.14

350.45
270.05
230.39
347.93
434.99
338.91

355.90
285.29
231.76
355.52
430.11
346.33

360.59 $356.72
294.06 291.85
238.77 235.21
361.49 362.15
440.35 439.67
349.27 343.49

360.25
304.04
414.34
306.10
229.48

374.44
316.81
437.13
317.60
241.54

370.87
316.40
439.96
320.80
244.58

367.75
313.17
441.05
318.77
242.57

367.62
315.56
455.39
327.22
245.63

369.34
320.35
465.92
330.44
246.79

367.06
319.45
455.84
325.44
244.22

291.65
309.87
341.38
220.79
178.92
382.59

277.65
302.63
332.48
179.71
155.40
374.18

291.04
307.28
366.15
219.46
180.58
377.58

289.93
303.81
362.56
217.15
180.77
376.55

291.47
306.52
367.83
215.39
178.19
380.80

294.14
312.05
369.40
219.44
180.08
379.31

298.38
312.45
397.94
221.56
183.89
389.34

300.31
313.24
387.92
218.46
182.50
393.86

314.07
391.87
499.10

321.39
398.35
493.73

312.31
394.94
514.51

317.58
397.85
518.64

318.69
395.20
522.37

316.11
399.27
550.00

315.99
401.06
549.63

319.42
407.95
552.13

321.63
409.63
549.19

293.46
186.80

291.67
187.03

295.94
187.46

283.88
172.83

29885
184.27

295.77
186.54

297 04
187.26

300.13
191.52

306.77
197.25

304.92
188.86

390.04

388.65

393.96

395.36

388.85

397.10

392.73

393.43

394.60

398.43

400.38

194.49

192.32

192.68

194.45

191.89

194.66

194.66

195.91

197.78

199.32

202.12

296.06

296.45

298.38

300.69

302.25

300.13

303.31

303.72

304.45

308.35

308.80

311.50

162.23

162.17

157.64

158.54

160.89

157.47

159.35

159.64

161.02

163.01

164.65

167.62

227.96

232.23

230.04

232.77

236.02

234.21

237.47

239.64

239.22

240.37

245.75

241.51

245.03

209.85

210.89

211.25

213.85

216.78

217.12

219.32

2 2 0 .6 8

220.03

221.33

222.63

223.01

227.73

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DATA

N a t i o n a l u n e m p l o y m e n t i n s u r a n c e d a t a are compiled
monthly by the Employment and Training Administration of
the U.S. Department of Labor from monthly reports of unem­
ployment insurance activity prepared by State agencies. Rail­
road unemployment insurance data are prepared by the U.S.
Railroad Retirement Board.

ployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about 10
percent of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet
earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. In i­
tial claim s are notices filed by persons in unemployment insurance
programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiv­
ing compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a
full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The
rate of insured unem ploym ent expresses the number of insured unem­
ployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a
12-month period.

Definitions
Data for all program s represent an unduplicated count of insured
unemployment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation
for Ex-Servicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal
Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act.

An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the be­
ginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no ap­
plication is required for subsequent periods in the same year. N u m ­
ber of paym ents are payments made in 14-day registration periods.
The average am ount of ben efit paym ent is an average for all com­
pensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or set­
tlement of underpayments. However, total b en efits paid have been
adjusted.

Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs
for civilian employees, insured workers must report the completion of
at least 1 week of unemployment before they are defined as unem­

16.

Unemployment insurance and employment service operations

[All items except average benefits amounts are In thousands]
1981
June

All programs:
Insured unemployment ....................
State unemployment insurance
program:1
Initial claims2 ................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)...........................
Rate of insured unemployment ..........
Weeks of unemployment
compensated ............................
Average weekly benefit amount
for total unemployment ................
Total benefits paid .........................
Unemployment compensation for exservicemen: 3
Initial claims1 ................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)...........................
Weeks of unemployment
compensated ............................
Total benefits paid .........................
Unemployment compensation for
Federal civilian employees:4
Initial claims .................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)...........................
Weeks of unemployment
compensated ............................
Total benefits paid .........................

July

Aug.

1982

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

2,949

3,012

2,874

2,680

2,753

1,741

2,114

1,610

1,681

1,996

2,286

3,272

3,328

2,272

2,418

2,596
3.0

2,743
3.1

2,656
3.0

2,488
2.9

2,592
3.0

3,061
3.5

3,778
4.3

4,470
5.1

4,376
5.0

4,282
4.9

9,928

10,486

9,594

9,565

9,424

10,052

14,592

15,962

15,631

18,144

16,156

$99.02
$103.47
$105.94
$107.39
$1,012,764 $1,061,899 $1,004,864 $1,001,020

3,228

3,935

4,681

4,723

4,892

4,760

Junep

4,388

4,328

2,347

1,988

2,369

4,067
4.6

3,729
4.3

3,707
4.3

13,670

14,628

$108.92
$110.52
$112.83
$114.83
$116.95
$117.10
$117.51
$118.07
$118.65
$997,757 $1,080,810 $1,592,546 $1,764,206 $1,781,830 $2,072,642 $1,848,260 $1,572,503 $1,690,109

19

22

19

15

11

9

11

8

8

10

9

8

42

44

44

34

26

22

19

16

13

11

10

9

8

192
$21,145

203
$22,785

190
$21,425

153
$17,144

116
$12,952

91
$10,043

93
$10,155

65
$7,098

49
r$5,304

48
$5,141

37
$4,029

31
$3,416

29
$3,210

13

15

17

18

20

16

17

17

12

13

13

11

14

10

25

25

25

29

32

36

39

40

40

38

33

29

28

105
$10,705

105
$10,805

102
$9,543

100
$10,495

112
$11,719

127
$13,491

174
$18,891

162
$18,040

154
$17,517

172
$19,677

147
$16,821

119
$13,569

122
$13,597

Railroad unemployment insurance:
Applications .................................
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)...........................
Number of payments ......................
Average amount of benefit
payment...................................
Total benefits paid .........................

26

41

13

15

21

13

19

22

11

9

5

5

36

30
86

28
32

29
63

34
74

40
86

44
83

54
117

75
153

67
140

65
154

57
130

44
95

44
93

$201.06
$16,206

$199.63
$11,541

$202.53
$7,071

$207.98
15,046

$197.26
15,994

$207.08
$16,377

$212.33
$25,292

$213.39
$30,544

$214.07
$28,011

$215.71
$33,853

$209.48
$26,262

$200.75
$19,110

$199.15
$18,57.4

Employment service:5
New applications and renewals ..........
Nonfarm placements.......................

12,868
2,446

16,502
3,509

11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican
sugarcane workers.
2Excludes transition claims under State programs.
3Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs.


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

4,081
731

7,439
1,232

9,907
1,692

4Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs,
5Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1-September 30). Data computed quarterly.
N ote : Data for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands included. Dashes indicate data not available.
r=revised.

67

PRICE DATA

r i c e d a t a are gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
from retail and primary markets in the United States. Price
indexes are given in relation to a base period (1967 = 100,
unless otherwise noted).

P

Definitions
The C onsum er P rice In d ex is a monthly statistical measure of the
average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and ser­
vices. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics began publishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. One
index, a new CPI for All Urban Consumers, covers 80 percent of the
total noninstitutional population; and the other index, a revised CPI
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covers about half the
new index population. The All Urban Consumers index includes, in
addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, manageri­
al, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the
unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force.
The CPI is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs,
transportation fares, doctor’s and dentist’s fees, and other goods and
services that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quali­
ty of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revi­
sions so that only price changes will be measured. Prices are collected
from over 18,000 tenants, 24,000 retail establishments, and 18,000
housing units for property taxes in 85 urban areas across the country.
All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are
included in the index. Because the CPI’s are based on the expendi­
tures of two population groups in 1972—73, they may not accurately
reflect the experience of individual families and single persons with
different buying habits.
Though the CPI is often called the “Cost-of-Living Index,” it meas­
ures only price change, which is just one of several important factors
affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the
level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in
prices for each area since the base period.
P roducer P rice In d ex es measure average changes in prices received
in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodities
in all stages of processing. The sample used for calculating these in­
dexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations
per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all com­
modities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing,
mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe
includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial
transactions in primary markets in the United States.
Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or
by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products
by degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or
semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure
organizes products by similarity of end-use or material composition.
To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price In­
dexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the Unit­
ed States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data
are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire.

68

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

Most prices are obtained directly from producing companies on a vol­
untary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the
Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month.
In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the vari­
ous commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights
representing their importance in the total net selling value of all com­
modities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain in­
dexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, dura­
bility of product groupings, and a number of special composite
groupings.
P rice in d exes for the output of se lecte d S IC in d ustries measure av­
erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries,
as defined in the S ta n d a r d I n d u s tr ia l C la ssifica tio n M a n u a l 1 9 7 2
(Washington, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1972). These
indexes are derived from several price series, combined to match the
economic activity of the specified industry and weighted by the value
of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive in­
dustrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Notes on the data
Beginning with the May 1978 issue of the R ev ie w , regional CPI’s
cross classified by population size, were introduced. These indexes will
enable users in local areas for which an index is not published to get a
better approximation of the CPI for their area by using the appropri­
ate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified
indexes will be published bimonthly. (See table 19.)
For further details about the new and the revised indexes and a
comparison of various aspects of these indexes with the old unrevised
CPI, see F a c ts A b o u t th e R e v is e d C o n s u m e r P ric e I n d e x , a pamphlet in
the Consumer Price Index Revision 1978 series. See also T h e
C o n s u m e r P ric e I n d e x : C o n c ep ts a n d C o n te n t O v e r th e Years, Report
517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978).
For interarea comparisons of living costs at three hypothetical stand­
ards of living, see the family budget data published in the H a n d b o o k
o f L a b o r S ta tistic s, 1 9 7 7 , Bulletin 1966 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1977), tables 122-133. Additional data and analysis on price changes
are provided in the C P I D e ta ile d R e p o r t and P r o d u c e r P ric e s a n d P rice
I n d e x es, both monthly publications of the Bureau.
As of January 1976, the Wholesale Price Index (as it was then
called) incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 val­
ues of shipments. From January 1967 through December 1975, 1963
values of shipments were used as weights.
For a discussion of the general method of computing consumer,
producer, and industry price indexes, see B L S H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s
f o r S u r v e y s a n d S tu d ie s, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1976), chapters 13-15. See also John F. Early, “Improving the meas­
urement of producer price change,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , April
1978, pp. 7-15. For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “In­
dustry and Sector Price Indexes,” M o n th ly L a b o r R ev ie w , August
1965, pp. 974-82.

17.

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-81

[1967 = 100]
Food and
beverages

All items
Year
Index

Percent
change

Index

Percent
change

Apparel and
upkeep

Housing
Index

Percent
change

Index

Transportation

Percent
change

Index

Percent
change

Medical care
Percent
change

Index

Other goods
and services

Entertainment
Index

Percent
change

Index

Percent
change

1967 ...............
1968 ...............
1969 ...............
1970 ...............

100.0
104.2
109.8
116.3

4.2
5.4
5.9

100.0
103.6
108.8
114.7

3.6
5.0
5.4

100.0
104.0
110.4
118.2

4.0
6.2
7.1

100.0
105.4
111.5
116.1

5.4
5.8
4.1

100.0
103.2
107.2
112.7

3.2
3.9
5.1

100.0
106.1
113.4
120.6

6.1
6.9
6.3

100.0
105.7
111.0
116.7

5.7
5.0
5.1

100.0
105.2
110.4
116.8

5.2
4.9
5.8

1971 ...............
1972 ...............
1973 ...............
1974 ...............
1975 ...............

121.3
125.3
133.1
147.7
161.2

4.3
3.3
6.2
11.0
9.1

118.3
123.2
139.5
158.7
172.1

3.1
4.1
13.2
13.8
8.4

123.4
128.1
133.7
148.8
164.5

4.4
3.8
4.4
11.3
10.6

119.8
122.3
126.8
136.2
142.3

3.2
2.1
3.7
7.4
4.5

118.6
119.9
123.8
137.7
150.6

5.2
1.1
3.3
11.2
9.4

128.4
132.5
137.7
150.5
168.6

6.5
3.2
3.9
9.3
12.0

122.9
126.5
130.0
139.8
152.2

5.3
2.9
2.8
7.5
8.9

122.4
127.5
132.5
142.0
153.9

4.8
4.2
3.9
7.2
8.4

1976 ...............
1977 ...............
1978 ...............
1979 ...............
1980 ...............

170.5
181.5
195.3
217.7
247.0

5.8
6.5
7.6
11.5
13.5

177.4
188.0
206.2
228.7
248.7

3.1
6.0
9.7
10.9
8.7

174.6
186.5
202.6
227.5
263.2

6.1
6.8
8.6
12.3
15.7

147.6
154.2
159.5
166.4
177.4

3.7
4.5
3.4
4.3
6.6

165.5
177.2
185.8
212.8
250.5

9.9
7.1
4.9
14.5
17.7

184.7
202.4
219.4
240.1
267.2

9.5
9.6
8.4
9.4
11.3

159.8
167.7
176.2
187.6
203.7

5.0
4.9
5.1
6.5
8.5

162.7
172.2
183.2
196.3
213.6

5.7
5.8
6.4
7.2
8.8

1981...............

272.3

10.2

267.8

7.7

293.2

11.4

186.6

5.2

281.3

12.3

295.1

10.4

219.0

7.5

233.3

9.2

18. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers and revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers,
U.S. city average— general summary and groups, subgroups, and selected items
[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

All Urban Consumers
General summary

1981

1981

1982

1982

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

All Items..............................................................................

271.3

282.5

283.4

283.1

284.3

287.1

290.6

271.4

282.1

282.9

282.5

283.7

286.5

290.1

Food and beverages .........................................................
Housing.........................................................................
Apparel and upkeep..........................................................
Transportation .................................................................
Medical care ...................................................................
Entertainment .................................................................
Other goods and services....................................................

266.5
292.2
185.8
279.9
291.5
220.8
233.4

273.6
306.1
187.3
289.9
313.4
229.2
248.4

275.8
307.3
188.0
288.0
316.2
231.2
250.3

275.6
306.7
191.1
285.1
318.8
232.8
252.2

276.5
309.4
191.9
282.9
321.7
233.9
253.8

278.1
313.8
191.5
285.6
323.8
234.4
255.0

280.2
317.5
190.8
292.8
326.4
235.6
255.8

267.0
291.9
185.8
281.0
292.9
218.3
231.4

273.9
305.6
186.5
291.6
312.0
226.1
245.0

276.0
306.7
187.3
289.6
314.9
228.1
247.1

275.9
306.2
190.5
286.6
317.4
229.5
249.3

276.8
309.2
191.2
284.3
320.2
230.5
250.9

278.4
313.7
190.6
287.1
322.3
231.1
252.4

280.5
317.5
189.6
294.5
324.8
232.3
253.1

Commodities ...................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ..............................
Nondurables less food and beverages............................
Durables...............................................................

253.2
243.1
263.5
226.6

258.8
248.0
265.6
233.4

259.5
248.1
265.3
233.7

258.8
247.1
263.4
233.5

258.9
247.0
259.7
235.8

261.5
249.8
261.0
239.8

265.1
254.0
266.3
243.2

253.8
243.8
266.3
225.2

259.3
248.7
267.8
232.4

259.9
248.6
267.5
232.5

259.1
247.5
265.3
232.4

259.2
247.2
261.3
234.8

261.7
250.1
262.6
238.9

265.4
254.5
268.2
242.3

Services ........................................................................
Rent, residential.......................................................
Household services less rent ......................................
Transportation services...............................................
Medical care services................................................
Other services.........................................................

303.5
206.8
366.7
269.6
314.4
236.3

323.9
217.8
392.4
286.6
339.4
251.7

325.3
218.6
393.7
287.6
342.4
253.0

325.5
219.6
392.5
288.8
345.1
254.0

328.4
220.1
397.3
290.3
348.0
255.3

331.8
221.8
403.0
291.3
350.2
255.9

334.9
222.6
407.7
294.7
353.0
257.0

303.9
206.4
307.1
268.2
315.8
235.6

324.3
217.4
396.5
285.9
337.5
250.0

325.5
218.1
397.7
286.7
340.6
251.3

325.8
219.1
396.6
287.9
343.0
252.4

329.1
219.6
402.3
289.2
345.8
253.8

332.4
221.3
408.2
290.0
348.0
254.4

335.7
222.1
413.3
293.2
350.7
255.5

All items less food ............................................................
All items less mortgage interest costs .....................................
Commodities less food.......................................................
Nondurables less food .......................................................
Nondurables less food and apparel........................................
Nondurables ...................................................................
Services less rent ............................................................
Services less medical care..................................................
Domestically produced farm foods ........................................
Selected beef cuts............................................................
Energy .........................................................................
All items less energy .........................................................
All items less food and energy .....................................
Commodities less food and energy..............................
Energy commodities ...............................................
Services less energy...............................................

269.5
256.9
241.1
258.0
298.0
266.2
321.9
300.1
255.9
271.6
414.0
260.2
255.6
217.5
453.1
299.8

281.4
266.1
245.9
260.2
301.0
270.8
344.2
320.0
262.4
269.6
416.4
272.1
268.5
223.7
446.4
320.5

282.1
267.1
246.0
260.1
300.5
271.7
345.7
321.1
265.1
271.7
413.0
273.4
269.5
224.5
440.1
321.9

281.7
267.2
245.2
258.4
296.6
270.7
345.7
321.1
263.8
272.0
406.1
273.6
269.8
225.3
424.5
321.5

282.9
267.9
245.0
255.0
291.4
269.3
349.1
324.0
264.5
275.1
395.7
275.7
272.2
227.2
406.6
324.5

286.0
270.3
247.8
256.2
293.4
270.7
352.8
327.5
267.1
281.6
402.1
278.3
274.9
229.9
410.2
327.2

289.7
273.6
251.9
261.2
301.0
274.4
356.5
330.7
270.3
289.1
418.6
280.7
277.3
232.1
430.8
329.9

269.7
257.5
241.8
260.7
300.0
267.6
322.6
300.4
255.3
274.3
417.3
259.3
254.5
216.6
453.7
300.2

281.3
266.4
246.6
262.4
302.6
271.9
345.0
320.5
261.4
271.1
419.0
270.9
267.1
222.8
447.0
321.0

281.7
267.2
246.6
262.2
302.0
272.8
346.3
321.6
264.0
273.1
415.4
272.1
268.0
223.6
440.7
322.2

281.3
267.3
245.6
260.2
297.8
271.6
346.4
321.6
262.7
273.3
407.9
272.3
268.3
224.5
425.0
321.8

282.5
267.9
245.3
256.6
292.3
270.1
350.2
324.9
263.5
276.4
396.9
274.5
270.9
226.4
406.9
325.2

285.6
270.3
248.1
257.8
294.4
271.5
353.8
328.3
266.0
283.1
403.1
277.0
273.6
229.1
410.5
327.9

289.4
273.7
252.4
263.0
302.4
275.4
357.7
331.7
269.2
290.6
420.4
279.4
276.0
231.3
431.6
330.6

Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 = $1 ................

$0,369

$0,354

$0,353

$0,353

$0,352

$0,348

$0,344

$0,368

$0,354 $0,353

$0,354

$0,352

$0,349

$0,345

Special indexes:


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

69

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
18.

Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary

70

1981

Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

1982

1981

,

1982

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

FOOD AND BEVERAGES .............................

266.5

273.6

275.8

275.6

276.5

278.1

280.2

267.0

273.9

276.0

275.9

276.8

278.4

280.5

Food..................................

273.6

281.0

283.3

283.0

283.9

285.5

287.8

274.0

281.1

283.4

283.1

284.1

285.7

288.0

Food at home.....................................
Cereals and bakery products....................
Cereals and cereal products (12/77 = 100)........
Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 100) ................
Cereal (12/77 = 100).................................
Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 = 100) ......................
Bakery products (12/77 = 100)........................................
White bread......................................
Other breads (12/77 = 100)......................................
Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 = 100) ...............
Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 = 100)......................
Cookies (12/77 = 100)............................
Crackers, bread, and cracker products (12/77 = 100) ....
Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts (12/77 = 100) ...
Frozen and refrigerated bakery products
and fresh pies, tarts, and turnovers (12/77 = 100) . .

268.7
271.5
148.3
139.0
152.4
150.9
142.1
236.0
140.2
141.7
142.3
143.3
130.7
142.9

275.3
279.8
153.0
139.1
163.1
151.1
146.4
243.3
143.9
146.5
147.2
148.1
133.4
146.2

278.0
280.9
154.0
139.1
164.8
152.4
146.8
243.8
143.7
146.4
147.0
149.2
135.4
147.0

277.1
281.3
153.9
139.2
165.2
151.2
147.1
242.3
145.1
148.4
148.0
149.4
135.3
146.3

277.9
281.7
153.6
139.7
165.4
149.6
147.5
242.8
145.2
147.6
148.4
150.2
137.3
146.8

279.8
283.3
154.5
141.8
165.7
150.2
148.3
243.8
146.3
149.7
149.0
150.5
139.6
147.3

282.6
283.6
154.5
142.1
166.1
149.4
148.6
242.4
145.6
149.9
149.2
150.7
140.9
148.9

268.2
270.7
150.0
141.4
154.0
152.7
141.0
233.1
142.5
139.7
141.2
143.3
131.5
142.3

274.4
278.6
153.9
139.6
165.1
152.4
145.3
239.4
145.7
142.5
145.8
148.9
134.7
148.9

277.0
279.8
155.0
139.6
166.8
153.6
145.7
240.0
145.5
142.8
145.8
150.1
136.8
149.3

276.2
280.0
154.8
139.6
167.2
152.4
146.0
238.3
147.0
144.6
146.4
150.2
136.5
148.7

277.0
280.4
154.6
140.1
167.4
150.8
146.3
238.8
147.1
143.8
146.8
151.2
138.7
149.3

278.8
282.0
155.4
142.1
167.8
151.5
147.2
240.0
148.2
146.0
147.4
151.4
141.0
149.9

281.6
282.3
155.5
142.5
168.2
150.6
147.4
238.3
147.5
146.2
147.5
151.5
142.3
151.5

146.1

151.2

151.5

153.5

153.4

153.6

156.3

140.3

144.7

144.8

146.8

146.5

146.7

149.4

Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs ...................................
Meats, poultry, and fish ...........................................
Meats .....................................................
Beef and veal .................................
Ground beef other than canned..............................
Chuck roast...............................................
Round roast...............................
Round steak ....................................
Sirloin steak.................................
Other beef and veal (12/77 = 100) ....................
Pork........................................
Bacon .........................................
Chops ......................................
Ham other than canned (12/77 = 100)....................
Sausage ...........................................
Canned ham ...................................
Other pork (12/77 = 100) ...................................
Other meats ................................................
Frankfurters.....................................................
Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 = 100) ..........
Other lunchmeats (12/77 = 100) ...........................
Lamb and organ meats (12/77 = 100) ....................
Poultry.....................................................
Fresh whole chicken...........................
Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 = 100) ........
Other poultry (12/77 = 100) .......................
Fish and seafood ..............................
Canned fish and seafood (12/77 = 100).............
Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 100) .......
Eggs ........................................................................

248.7
255.0
254.2
271.1
264.6
281.0
246.2
255.1
274.6
159.9
221.2
216.5
209.8
98.0
278.9
229.8
126.7
255.9
250.7
143.9
127.6
146.5
196.8
193.8
128.3
128.9
352.1
139.3
131.0
172.1

253.7
259.1
257.8
269.4
262.2
279.6
241.6
257.5
258.2
160.9
234.7
235.5
219.2
107.3
297.6
245.4
129.5
258.1
256.7
145.4
132.2
138.6
194.2
193.1
128.5
123.2
373.3
140.6
143.2
189.4

256.8
261.2
260.2
271.5
265.0
285.8
245.3
256.1
257.1
161.4
238.9
245.6
222.1
107.0
300.0
246.1
133.8
258.1
258.0
146.1
131.7
137.7
195.7
196.3
128.9
123.2
373.8
140.9
143.2
205.1

256.9
262.1
261.2
271.7
265.8
284.3
243.0
258.8
260.6
161.5
239.5
249.6
216.3
109.2
305.8
247.6
132.6
262.4
260.5
149.2
133.7
141.0
194.7
195.1
127.5
123.9
376.3
141.0
144.7
195.2

258.3
264.2
263.6
274.8
266.9
285.4
244.9
262.8
271.1
163.7
241.6
255.9
223.4
105.4
305.7
245.6
135.2
262.8
259.5
150.2
133.2
142.6
193.3
194.1
127.6
121.3
382.0
141.5
147.9
186.9

261.0
268.2
269.7
281.1
269.4
287.2
252.4
269.2
282.3
169.0
249.9
267.7
230.0
111.1
313.3
249.9
138.9
264.0
262.7
150.7
134.3
141.2
196.0
196.8
128.3
124.3
366.3
139.8
139.4
172.3

266.0
274.3
277.2
288.2
274.6
295.4
257.0
278.8
294.1
173.3
295.9
280.7
241.2
112.6
326.3
253.2
145.4
268.5
268.8
154.6
135.5
143.1
197.5
199.1
129.3
124.6
365.2
139.9
138.6
162.5

248.4
254.5
253.9
273.0
267.9
288.9
249.5
253.6
278.6
159.2
221.3
220.5
209.8
95.1
278.7
230.1
127.7
253.1
249.8
141.9
126.0
147.1
194.4
190.3
127.0
128.2
349.8
137.9
130.4
173.0

253.3
258.6
257.3
270.1
263.7
288.5
244.7
256.1
258.9
159.3
234.4
239.3
217.6
104.8
298.8
249.0
128.8
257.3
256.1
145.4
130.2
141.4
192.4
190.9
126.9
123.0
372.4
140.0
143.0
190.6

256.4
260.7
259.7
272.2
266.3
295.0
248.9
254.4
257.8
159.7
238.5
249.3
220.2
104.7
301.0
249.9
133.1
257.4
257.1
146.2
129.7
141.0
193.8
194.4
127.1
122.6
373.2
140,4
143.2
206.1

256.4
261.5
260.6
272.3
266.9
293.1
245.9
256.4
262.2
159.8
238.9
253.3
214.7
106.5
306.6
251.2
131.7
261.7
260.0
149,4
131.7
144.2
192.8
192.8
125.9
123.3
375.5
140.5
144,6
196.3

257.8
263.6
262.8
275.3
267.9
294.1
247.9
260.8
272.4
162.1
241.0
259.7
221.7
102.8
306.3
248.9
134.5
261(8
258.4
150.3
131.2
145.6
191.5
192.0
125.9
120.8
381.4
140.8
148.0
187.9

260.7
267.7
269.0
281.9
270.7
296.2
255.9
267.8
283.8
167.5
249.2
271.9
228.2
108.3
314.2
253.2
138.2
263.2
261.8
150.7
132.3
144.4
194.1
194.7
126.5
123.9
365.0
139.2
138.9
173.4

265.8
273.9
276.5
289.0
275.9
304.9
260.1
277.2
295.5
171.9
258.9
285.3
239.6
109.6
327.2
256.4
144.7
267.8
268.3
154.6
133.4
146.5
195.8
197.0
127.5
124.3
364.2
139.4
138.3
163.4

Dairy products..................................................
Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) .............
Fresh whole milk..............................
Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 =100)............
Processed dairy products (12/77 = 100).......................
Butter.......................................................
Cheese (12/77 = 100) ...................................
Ice cream and related products (12/77 = 100)...........
Other dairy products (12/77 = 100)...........................

243.8
134.8
220.7
134.6
142.0
245.1
140.5
146.4
136.3

245.8
135.1
221.2
135.1
144.4
249.3
142.0
150.8
138.4

246.5
135.5
221.5
135.8
144.8
248.9
142.8
150.0
140.0

246.5
135.3
221.7
135.1
144.9
250.1
143.3
149.5
139.5

247.5
135.9
222.2
136.2
145.6
250.1
143.7
150.9
139.9

247.0
135.7
222.0
135.7
145.2
251.1
144.0
148.7
139.7

246.3
135.2
221.3
135.4
144.9
250.9
143.2
149.6
138.7

243.9
134.5
220.0
135.1
142.9
248.7
140.9
147.8
136.8

245.2
134.6
220.2
134.7
144.7
252.0
142.3
149.9
139.1

245.8
134.9
220.5
135.5
145.1
251.4
143.1
149.1
140.8

245.9
134.8
220.8
134.6
145.3
252.7
143.6
148.9
140.3

246.8
135.3
221.3
135.7
145.9
252.7
144.0
150.2
140.8

246.3
135.1
221.1
135.2
145.5
253.7
144.3
147.9
140.4

245.7
134.7
220.4
134.9
145.2
253.4
143.6
148.7
139.4

Fruits and vegetables ................................................
Fresh fruits and vegetables ........................................
Fresh fruits........................................
Apples........................................................
Bananas ..........................................
Oranges ...................................
Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 100)...........................
Fresh vegetables.......................
Potatoes .................................
Lettuce ...................................
Tomatoes ...............................................
Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 100) ....................

278.1
285.2
278.9
239.9
260.5
287.1
154.4
291.1
414.3
238.7
205.2
151.8

294.7
308.0
276.7
273.0
253.5
283.1
145.9
337.3
288.8
514.4
245.6
174.8

301.5
319.6
291.2
279.5
251.0
313.1
154.5
346.2
297.4
408.9
288.5
199.1

293.1
302.1
297.8
288.7
263.0
316.3
157.2
306.1
301.0
270.9
258.1
185.0

294.0
304.1
306.7
287.5
268.5
330.8
163.4
301.8
306.1
355.2
220.5
166.3

297.9
311.7
318.8
299.8
261.6
362.1
168.2
305.1
320.3
291.6
226.5
179.3

305.6
325.9
340.8
321.4
267.9
406.8
177.1
311.9
344.9
269.1
275.6
177.5

275.3
281.0
272.1
241.0
259.0
274.0
149.9
289.0
402.7
237.1
200.8
153.6

291.3
303.1
267.0
272.6
251.1
255.1
141.0
335.8
282.7
515.8
248.8
173.9

297.4
313.4
280.1
279.9
247.9
281.1
149.0
343.5
291.5
408.0
293.2
197.2

289.1
296.1
287.3
288.5
261.1
285.9
151.8
304.2
294.8
271.3
261.8
184.0

290.3
298.9
295.5
287.8
266.1
300.2
157.6
302.0
300.8
358.6
224.9
166.7

293.6
305.1
306.9
300.1
259.3
328.3
162.4
303.7
313.6
293.5
230.6
178.6

301.0
318.6
327.0
321.9
265.5
367.5
170.3
311.1
339.7
270.0
279.9
177.0

Processed fruits and vegetables ..............................
Processed fruits (12/77 =100) ................................
Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 100).................
Fruit juices other than frozen (12/77 = 100) .............
Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 100) .............
Processed vegetables (12/77 = 100).......................
Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100)...........................

272.8
142.0
143.4
145.5
137.1
132.1
130.8

282.7
146.4
143.5
151.4
143.6
137.6
140.7

284.2
147.9
147.8
151.5
144.3
137.7
141.7

285.8
149.0
149.2
152.4
145.3
138.2
142.0

285.5
148.2
147.1
151.5
145.6
138.6
144.0

285.4
148.3
145.7
152.2
146.4
138.5
143.9

285.9
148.0
144.4
151.7
147.0
139.3
145.6

271.4
142.1
142.3
145.8
137.9
131.2
131.9

280.6
146.0
142.8
150.1
144.0
136.5
141.8

282.0
147.4
146.6
150.3
144.8
136.6
143.1

283.7
148.6
148.2
151.4
145.9
137.2
143.4

283.3
147.7
146.1
150.4
146.2
137.5
145.3

283.3
147.9
144.6
151.0
147.0
137.4
145.2

283.9
147.6
143.4
150.7
147.6
138.2
146.9


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

18.

Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary

1981

Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

1982

1982

1981

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Fruits and vegetables—Continued
Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77=100) ....
Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77=100)............
Other foods at home ............................................................
Sugar and sweets..........................................................
Candy and chewing gum (12/77=100) ...........................
Sugar and artificial sweeteners (12/77=100)....................
Other sweets (12/77-100) ........................................
Fats and oils (12/77=100) ...............................................
Margarine ..............................................................
Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (12/77=100) ..........
Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12/77=100) .............
Nonalcoholic beverages ..................................................
Cola drinks, excluding diet cola.....................................
Carbonated drinks, Including diet cola (12/77=100)............
Roasted coffee .......................................................
Freeze dried and instant coffee.....................................
Other noncarbonated drinks (12/77=100).......................
Other prepared foods .....................................................
Canned and packaged soup (12/77=100).......................
Frozen prepared foods (12/77-100)..............................
Snacks (12/77=100)................................................
Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish (12/77=100)...........
Other condiments (12/77=100) ...................................
Miscellaneous prepared foods (12/77=100) ....................
Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12/77=100) ...

134.6
131.4
323.6
361.3
145.2
168.2
142.6
269.6
256.1
181.8
129.6
412.8
297.0
140.8
353.1
335.2
134.5
254.4
132.6
142.2
147.2
141.1
140.8
139.3
137.7

139.9
135.0
328.7
361.6
150.1
155.6
147.1
261.6
257.8
157.7
130.5
418.7
302.4
141.9
353.3
336.9
138.0
134.3
147.8
152.6
149.7
146.4
146.9
142.5

140.7
134.1
330.7
364.2
150.0
160.0
146.9
260.5
256.7
157.8
129.8
423.4
304.6
143.8
364.4
342.8
138.4
265.3
135.9
146.2
153.4
151.3
146.9
147.0
143.0

141.2
134.8
331.7
365.5
150.3
161.0
147.4
259.6
256.7
156.1
129.5
424.8
306.6
143.4
366.6
343.6
138.9
266.5
135.6
147.0
153.4
153.2
148.2
147.7
143.2

140.5
135.0
331.6
365.3
150.9
159.9
147.2
260.4
259.6
157.3
129.0
424.1
304.9
143.4
369.6
343.4
138.7
266.6
135.7
147.2
152.9
153.6
148.7
147.6
143.3

140.7
134.6
332.6
365.7
150.0
160.5
148.9
260.6
259.7
156.0
129.6
425.6
306.1
144.3
369.3
344.3
138.9
267.5
135.7
147.8
153.5
152.8
150.2
148.5
143.5

141.1
135.2
332.6
366.8
150.4
161.4
148.9
260.7
261.2
156.5
129.1
424.8
305.9
143.1
365.1
344.3
140.0
267.8
136.3
147.3
153.2
153.3
150.6
148.3
144.5

133.6
129.7
324.5
363.0
146.5
169.3
140.8
269.5
256.0
180.5
129.6
414.6
294.1
139.3
348.5
337.1
134.4
255.8
133.5
140.8
149.1
140.3
143.2
139.9
138.5

137.5
133.5
329.6
361.6
150.0
157.0
145.2
261.5
257.2
156.0
131.0
420.5
300.0
139.7
348 8
336.5
138.2
266.3
136.4
147.4
154.6
148.6
148.0
147.0
143.9

138.3
132.6
331.5
364.1
149.8
161.3
145.1
260.6
256.1
156.3
130.2
425.0
302.0
141.7
359.9
342.5
138.6
266.9
137.9
145.6
155.2
150.3
148.4
147.1
144.5

138.8
133.3
332.6
365.4
150.1
162.4
145.5
259.7
256.1
154.4
130.0
426.6
303.8
141.4
362.2
343.4
139.1
268.1
137.8
146.5
155.4
152.2
149.9
147.9
144.5

137.9
133.5
332.6
365.2
150.8
161.1
145.3
260.4
259.1
155.6
129.5
426.0
302.4
141.5
365.0
343.0
138.9
268.3
137.8
146.7
155.0
152.7
150.4
147.7
144.6

138.5
133.2
333.5
365.6
149.9
161.8
147.0
260.6
259.3
154.2
130.2
427.3
303.6
142.3
364.3
343.9
139.1
269.3
137.7
147.3
155.6
151.9
151.9
148.7
144.9

138.8
133.8
333.5
366.9
150.5
162.8
146.9
260.7
260.8
154.9
129.7
426.6
303.3
141.2
360.1
343.8
140.2
269.5
138.3
146.8
155.2
152.4
152.4
148.5
145.8

Food away from home...............................................................
Lunch (12/77=100) ............................................................
Dinner (12/77=100) ............................................................
Other meals and snacks (12/77-100)......................................

290.6
141.5
140.7
140.3

299.8
146.1
144.8
145.4

301.2
146.6
145.2
146.9

302.4
147.0
145.7
147.9

303.6
147.5
146.3
148.6

304.8
148.2
147.1
148.5

305.9
148.9
147.4
149.2

293.5
142.8
142.6
141.3

302.8
147.7
146.4
146.2

304.2
148.2
146.8
147.6

305.4
148.6
147.3
148.7

306.7
149.1
147.9
149.3

307.8
149.8
148.8
149.2

309.0
150.5
149.1
149.9

Alcoholic beverages .....................................................................

199.8

204.0

205.6

206.6

207.4

208.0

208.4

202.1

206.0

207.6

208.8

209.5

210.1

210.4

Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77=100)......................................
Beer and ale......................................................................
Whiskey ...........................................................................
Wine................................................................................
Other alcoholic beverages (12/77-100).....................................
Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77=100)............................

129.7
202.0
143.0
224.6
116.1
133.1

132.2
205.0
145.9
232.2
117.5
137.0

133.3
207.4
146.8
234.2
117.8
137.6

134.0
209.2
147.0
235.3
118.1
138.2

134.6
210.5
147.2
236.4
118.2
138.4

135.0
210.3
148.2
236.9
119.0
139.1

135.0
210.6
148.3
235.3
119.7
140.3

131.5
202.4
144.0
233.4
115.7
133.4

133.4
204.3
146.8
239.8
117.5
138.6

134.6
206.5
147.7
241.6
117.8
139.1

135.4
208.3
147.8
243.3
118.0
139.7

136.0
209.6
148.0
244.4
118.0
139.9

136.2
209.4
149.0
244.9
118.9
140.6

136.3
209.6
149.1
242.7
119.6
141.6

HOUSING.....................................................................................

292.2

306.1

307.3

306.7

309.4

313.8

317.5

291.9

305.6

306.7

306.2

309.2

313.7

317.5

Shelter.........................................................................................

312.6

328.3

329.5

327.6

331.4

336.7

340.9

313.7

329.4

330.3

328.5

332.8

338.3

342.6

Rent, residential........................................................................

206.8

217.8

218.6

219.6

220.1

221.8

222.6

206.4

217.4

218.1

219.1

219.6

221.3

222.1

Other rental costs ....................................................................
Lodging while out of town.......................................................
Tenants'Insurance (12/77=100) .............................................

289.5
311.8
133.1

313.6
331.1
141.8

316.9
335.9
143.5

320.1
340.9
144.1

323.7
346.6
144.9

323.6
346.6
144.4

327.3
352.2
145.5

289.7
310.6
133.4

312.3
328.4
142.0

315.6
333.0
143.6

318.9
337.9
144.3

322.8
343.9
144.7

322.6
344.0
143.8

326.3
349.4
144.8

Homeownership........................................................................
Home purchase...................................................................
Financing, taxes, and insurance ...............................................
Property insurance .........................................................
Property taxes ..............................................................
Contracted mortgage interest cost......................................
Mortgage interest rates...............................................
Maintenance and repairs .......................................................
Maintenance and repair services ........................................
Maintenance and repair commodities ...................................
Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and
equipment (12/77-100) ..........................................
Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77=100)............
Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling
supplies (12/77-100).............................................
Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (12/77-100) ..........

350.4
266.6
467.2
386.6
200.3
610.4
226.4
315.5
344.4
247.6

367.5
269.3
506.0
393.0
212.9
665.2
244.4
326.7
358.2
252.5

368.7
270.4
507.2
393.7
215.1
666.1
243.9
328.2
359.4
254.6

365.7
269.2
500.9
394.1
216.6
655.5
240.7
327.2
357.8
255.0

370.6
272.3
508.4
393.6
217.2
667.1
242.1
331.6
363.6
256.2

377.4
279.3
516.2
396.7
218.3
678.5
240.2
334.5
367.0
257.8

382.8
285.6
521.8
400.6
218.8
686.7
238.3
336.1
369.1
258.3

352.7
266.2
473.8
388.1
202.2
612.9
227.2
308.2
338.7
241.5

369.9
267.4
512.2
395.6
214.5
666.3
245.7
323.3
359.2
246.4

370.8
268.3
513.2
396.0
217.2
666.6
245.4
324.6
360.1
248.2

367.9
267.1
507.0
396.5
218.5
656.4
242.3
323.7
358.6
248.6

373.6
270.5
516.0
396.0
219.1
670.2
244.4
328.3
365.0
249.7

380.5
278.1
523.8
399.2
220.2
681.4
242.1
330.9
368.0
251.3

386.0
284.4
529.7
402.7
220.7
690.0
240.2
332.4
370.0
252.1

145.3
124.7

149.4
124.6

150.9
124.6

151.8
123.9

153.1
124.5

154.2
124.5

153.3
124.7

138.4
122.7

142.3
121.9

143.7
121.7

144.7
121.2

145.8
121.9

147.0
121.9

146.0
122.1

131.2
128.5

131.9
133.6

133.8
134.8

133 4
135.1

133.4
135.6

135.1
136.3

136.2
138.4

128.5
131.7

131.8
135.7

133.4
136.9

133.1
137.1

133.1
137.4

134.9
138.2

136.0
140.6

Fuel and other utilities...................................................................

320.2

336.2

337.1

339.3

339.2

345.4

352.2

321.2

337.0

337.9

340.2

340.3

346.5

353.6

Fuels ...................................................................................
Fuel oil, coal, and bottled gas..................................................
Fuel oil........................................................................
Other fuels (6/78 - 100) ................................................
Gas (piped) and electricity .....................................................
Electricity....................................................................
Utility (piped) gas ..........................................................

411.7
682.0
715.7
164.3
350.2
296.7
416.9

426.9
686.0
716.8
170.9
367.4
306.6
447.2

427.6
683.1
713.8
170.0
368.7
306.8
450.8

430.5
664.0
692.3
168.0
375.9
313.3
458.6

428.2
641.3
666.2
168.4
377.8
312.8
465.3

438.0
644.6
670.6
165.7
388.6
314.9
493.4

448.4
656.6
684.8
165.6
398.5
327.5
496.0

411.2
685.1
718.4
165.5
349.0
296.6
413.2

426.2
688.9
719.3
172.1
366.0
305.3
445.2

426.8
686,0
716.3
171.4
367.3
305.5
448.7

429.9
666.7
694.4
169.5
374.8
312.3
456.6

427.8
644.0
668.4
167.9
376.8
311.8
463.6

437.4
647.7
673.3
167.1
387.4
314.4
489.7

448.3
659.7
687.5
166.9
397.8
327.7
492.7

FOOD AND BEVERAGES - Continued
Food —Continued

Food at home—Continued


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

264.6

71

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
18.

Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary

1981

Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

1982

1981

1982

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Other utilities and public services....................................................
Telephone services ..............................................................
Local charges (12/77 = 100) ...........................................
Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ......................................
Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 100) ......................................
Water and sewerage maintenance ...........................................

177.1
143.5
114.9
101.8
101.5
291.2

192.7
157.2
124.0
116.8
109.2
309.8

193.9
157.9
125.3
116.6
109.1
313.3

195.0
158.5
125.6
117.7
109.0
316.9

197.7
160.8
127.9
119.9
108.9
320.7

198.9
161.6
128.9
120.0
109.3
323.5

200.4
163.2
131.2
119.6
109.8
324.9

177.3
143.6
115.1
101.9
101.3
292.5

193.1
157.3
124.2
116.9
109.0
312.2

194.3
158.0
125.4
116.7
108.8
315.7

195.4
158.6
125.7
117.8
108.7
319.7

198.2
161.0
128.1
120.2
108.7
323.6

199.5
161.9
129.2
120.4
109.0
326:7

201.1
163.5
131.6
120.1
109.4
328.0

Household furnishings and operations.............................................

221.1

228.4

230.2

231.6

232.6

233.4

233.7

217.8

224.9

226.7

228.0

229.1

230.0

230.4

Housefurnishings ....................................................................
Textile housefurnishings .........................................................
Household linens (12/77 = 100) ........................................
Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) .
Furniture and bedding.................................................................
Bedroom furniture (12/77 = 100)........................................
Sofas (12/77 = 100).......................................................
Living room chairs and tables (12/77 = 100) .........................
Other furniture (12/77 = 100) ......................... ...............
Appliances including TV and sound equipment ..............................
Television and sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ......................
Television...............................................................
Sound equipment (12/77 - 100)...................................
Household appliances .....................................................
Refrigerators and home freezers ...................................
Laundry equipment (12/77 = 100).................................
Other household appliances (12/77 - 100) ......................
Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing
machines (12/77 = 100) ......................................
Office machines, small electric appliances,
and air conditioners (12/77 = 100) ...........................
Other household equipment (12/77 = 100).................................
Floor and window coverings, infants', laundry,
cleaning, and outdoor equipment (12/77 = 100) ..................
Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 = 100).......................
Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric
kitchenware (12/77 = 100) ...........................................
Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 = 100) .

185.2
202.5
125.1
127.4
204.6
134.6
116.2
116.9
135.4
146.3
108.2
105.3
111.9
173.2
172.4
128.0
118.9

189.8
210.1
127.3
134.8
209.5
139.7
117.3
118.9
138.5
148.8
108.8
104.4
113.8
178.0
180.8
132.2
120.6

191.4
216.0
131.0
138.5
209.4
140.5
116.4
118.6
138.1
149.9
109.2
104.5
114.5
179.7
182.6
133.5
121.6

192.7
217.7
134.7
136.7
212.1
140.8
118.0
121.6
140.5
150.1
109.1
104.7
114.0
180.3
183.7
133.3
122.2

193.8
218.7
135.8
136.9
214.7
142.3
119.3
123.2
142.3
150.6
108.7
104.2
113.7
182.1
184.8
136.4
122.9

194.7
220.9
135.4
140.1
215.1
144.5
119.1
122.8
141.6
151.4
108.8
104.3
113.9
183.6
186.2
136.6
124.3

194.7
220.2
134.6
140.1
214.4
143.0
117.5
123.2
142.3
151.4
108.6
104.4
113.5
183.8
187.7
136.7
123.9

182.8
204.4
125.7
129.5
200.1
129.2
116.0
118.2
130.5
145.6
107.3
104.3
110.9
172.6
177.1
127.1
116.6

187.7
212.5
128.6
137.0
205.9
136.5
117.6
119.0
133.9
148.5
107.9
103.1
113.0
178.1
186.1
132.4
118.5

189.3
218.5
132.1
141.0
205.5
137.1
116.5
118.8
133.4
149.6
108.4
103.3
113.8
179.9
187.9
133.8
119.7

190.4
219.9
135.6
138.7
208.2
137.2
118.2
121.8
135.8
149.7
108.2
103.5
113.2
180.4
189.3
133.5
120.0

191.7
221.4
137.0
139.1
211.0
138.9
119.6
123.3
137.9
150.3
107.7
103.0
112.8
182.3
190.6
136.6
120.7

192.5
223.9
136.8
142.8
211.3
140.7
119.4
122.9
137.0
151.1
107.9
103.0
113.0
183.8
191.8
136.8
122.3

192.6
223.3
135.9
143.0
210.9
139.7
118.2
123.3
137.7
151.2
107.7
103.1
112.7
184.2
193.2
136.9
122.3

118.4

119.4

121.0

121.9

122.3

123.7

123.1

116.5

117.4

118.9

119.3

119.7

121.4

121.6

119.4
131.0

121.9
134.9

122.4
136.7

122.5
137.3

123.5
137.8

124.9
138.3

124.8
139.0

116.7
129.3

119.7
132.9

120.5
134.7

120.7
135.3

121.8
135.6

123.3
136.0

123.0
136.9

132.1
124.6

136.3
128.6

139.1
129.8

140.9
129.0

140.3
130.2

141.4
131.4

142.3
132.2

125.3
121.9

128.6
124.8

131.0
126.0

133.3
125.4

132.9
126.5

133.9
127.4

134.9
128.2

139.5
122.6

142.3
127.8

143.3
130.3

143.1
132.1

145.0
130.8

144.4
132.1

145.6
131.9

136.0
127.1

138.2
133.2

139.5
135.5

139.0
137.3

140.6
136.0

139.8
137.4

141.4
137.1

Housekeeping supplies ...............................................................
Soaps and detergents ..........................................................
Other laundry and cleaning products (12/77 = 100) ......................
Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins (12/77 = 100) ..
Stationery, stationery supplies, and gift wrap (12/77 = 100).............
Miscellaneous household products (12/77 = 100) .........................
Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 = 100)...................................

269.8
266.0
133.4
137.6
125.8
139.5
138.4

279.1
275.5
139.6
145.1
128.8
146.2
137.1

282.4
278.0
141.0
145.7
130.4
146.9
141.8

284.2
279.5
142.1
145.7
130.7
147.5
144.7

284.9
280.0
142.7
146.4
131.4
147.5
144.7

285.5
278.8
143.3
146.0
132.0
149.3
144.8

286.5
280.8
143.8
146.5
132.5
150.2
144.0

266.9
263.6
132.3
138.2
127.2
136.1
131.3

275.7
272.0
138.4
145.1
131.7
141.2
129.2

278.8
274.4
139.8
145.6
133.4
141.8
134.1

280.4
275.7
140.9
145.4
133.8
142.4
136.7

281.2
276.3
141.6
146.2
134.6
142.4
136.8

281.8
275.2
142.3
145.6
135.3
144.1
136.6

283.1
277.0
142.7
146.1
136.0
144.9
136.7

Housekeeping services...............................................................
Postage.............................................................................
Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and
drycleaning services (12/77 = 100)........................................
Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 = 100)................................

292.9
308.0

307.4
337.5

308.1
337.5

309.9
337.5

310.4
337.5

311.3
337.5

311.7
337.5

291.7
308.1

305.9
337.5

306.8
337.5

308.2
337.5

309.2
337.5

310.2
337.5

310.9
337.5

141.9
126.3

148.4
133.6

149.4
134.2

150.8
135.0

152.1
135.6

153.1
136.6

154.2
137.0

141.8
125.4

148.0
132.2

149.1
132.8

150.6
133.5

152.2
134.1

153.3
135.1

154.5
135.5

HOUSING

Continued

Fuel and other utilities —Continued

APPAREL AND UPKEEP..........................................................

185.8

187.3

188.0

191.1

191.9

191.5

190.8

185.8

186.5

187.3

190.5

191.2

190.6

189.6

Apparel commodities .....................................................................

176.4

177.0

177.6

180.8

181.4

180.9

180.0

177.0

176.7

177.4

180.8

181.3

180.5

179.4

Apparel commodities less footwear...........................................
Men’s and boys' .................................................................
Men’s (12/77 = 100) .....................................................
Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) ..................
Coats and jackets (12/77 = 100) .................................
Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 = 100) .................
Shirts (12/77 = 100) ................................................
Dungarees, jeans, and trousers (12/77 = 100)..................
Boys’ (12/77 = 100).......................................................
Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 = 100) ............
Furnishings (12/77 = 100) ..........................................
Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100)........
Women’s and girls’ ...............................................................
Women's (12/77 = 100)..................................................
Coats and jackets.....................................................
Dresses .................................................................
Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) .......................
Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100) .............
Suits (12/77 = 100)..................................................
Girls’ (12/77 = 100) .......................................................
Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 100)...............
Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100) .......................
Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and
accessories (12/77 = 100) ......................................

172.5
176.6
111.0
104.3
98.1
129.7
117.9
105.0
115.4
108.7
123.9
117.3
155.4
102.7
149.5
163.7
98.0
119.8
86.3
106.4
100.4
105.9

172.8
178.7
112.9
104.3
96.4
133.6
120.7
108.2
114.6
104.7
127.3
117.2
154.3
102.3
158.4
153.1
96.7
124.0
84.2
104.4
93.4
106.3

173.4
179.3
113.0
104.8
95.8
134.7
119.3
108.6
116.0
105.9
128.2
119.1
154.7
102.9
156.4
152.8
96.3
126.2
87.0
102.7
92.6
103.4

176.8
181.7
114.5
107.2
98.1
136.8
119.9
108.6
117.8
109.4
128.7
120.1
160.3
106.8
162.0
163.1
100.3
127.1
927
105.6
98.2
104.6

177.4
183.1
115.5
107.6
99.1
138.2
121.3
109.7
118.3
111.2
130.3
119.0
160.9
107.1
163.4
166.6
100.1
127.4
89.4
106.7
98.8
105.4

176.7
183.8
115.9
108.1
99.9
138.7
121.2
110.3
118.8
111.5
131.2
119,6
159.1
105.7
158.3
162.0
101.2
128.1
83.4
106.3
96.9
105.9

175.6
183.1
115.4
107.3
99.5
138.0
121.5
109.7
118.5
110.7
131.9
119.4
157.3
104.4
156.4
160.1
100.2
127.9
78.6
105.8
95.1
106.0

173.0
177.2
111.6
98.4
101.2
124.1
120.4
111.8
114.3
109.8
119.5
115.9
158.1
104.9
148.9
156.6
101.0
120.0
103.6
106.2
98.1
108.1

172.2
178.6
113.3
97.8
97.6
129.8
123.3
113.6
112.9
105.3
123.3
114.7
156.4
103.9
161.6
140.7
97.3
123.7
104.0
104.2
91.2
108.2

173.0
179.4
113.5
98.2
97.2
131.1
121.8
114.1
114.3
106.3
124.2
116.7
157.1
104.8
163.1
140.9
96.8
126.0
105.6
103.1
91.5
106.0

176.6
181.6
114.7
100.4
99.7
133.1
122.3
114.2
116.1
109.7
124.7
117.8
163.0
109.0
173.1
148.1
101.2
126.9
114.1
106.0
97.2
106.9

177.1
182.9
115.7
101.1
100,7
134.5
123.4
115.1
116.5
111.5
126.0
116.8
163.4
109.1
172.9
151.1
101.0
127.3
111.0
106.9
97.6
107.6

176.0
183.7
116.2
101.4
101.5
135.3
123.1
115.6
117.1
112.0
127.2
117.3
160.8
107.1
165.7
147.1
101.9
127.9
100.6
106.2
95.0
108.0

174.7
183.2
115.8
100.6
101.1
134.7
123.8
115.2
116.9
111.5
128.0
117.1
158.4
105.4
162.9
145.4
101.0
127.6
92.7
105.2
92.4
107.7

117.2

119.2

118.0

119.6

122.0

122.4

122.9

116.2

118.2

117.0

118.7

121.0

121.5

121.9

72


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

18.

Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

All Urban Consumers
General summary

1981

1981

1982

1982

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan,

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Apparel commodities less footwear—Continued
Infants’ and toddlers’ ..........................................................
Other apparel commodities ..................................................
Sewing materials and notions (12/77 = 100) .......................
Jewelry and luggage (12/77 = 100) .................................

260.0
212.2
114.5
146.8

259.6
212.9
116.2
146.7

262.2
214.3
117.6
147.4

264.7
212.7
118.1
145.7

267.0
210.8
118.5
143.8

269.0
209.7
119.3
142.5

268.7
209.9
119.2
142.8

273.0
204.8
113.2
141,2

270.1
201.4
114.3
137.5

271.4
202.8
115.9
138.1

275.4
201.6
116.5
136.7

278.2
199.5
116.9
134.5

279.3
198.8
117.7
133.5

278.2
198.9
117.6
133.6

Footwear..............................................................................
Men’s (12/77 = 100) ........................................................
Boys’ and girls’ (12/77 - 100) .............................................
Women’s (12/77 =100).....................................................

200.4
127.7
129.1
121.6

202.8
130.3
130.1
122.6

202.8
130.7
129.5
122.7

204.9
132.5
129.2
124.7

205.6
132.3
130.4
125.1

206.5
132.4
131.5
125.8

206.6
132.1
132.1
125.8

200.6
129.5
128.6
120.2

203.1
132.2
132.5
118.9

203.3
132.6
132.3
119.0

205.2
134.5
132.1
120.8

206.1
134.4
133.6
121.1

206.9
134.5
134.6
121.6

206.7
134.1
134.8
121.6

Apparel services .........................................................................

Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 - 100)..........
Other apparel services (12/77 = 100) ..........................................

257.8
153.2
136.0

267.6
160.0
139.4

269.4
161.4
139.8

271.3
162.4
141.1

273.4
163.5
142.5

274.7
164.4
142.9

275.3
164.8
143.1

255.7
152.5
135.0

265.5
158.5
139.9

267.2
159.9
140.3

269.0
160.9
141.5

271.0
162.0
142.7

272.3
162.8
143.1

273.0
163.3
143.4

TRANSPORTATION .....................................................................

279.9

289.9

288.0

285.1

282.9

285.6

292.8

281.0

291.6

289.6

286.6

284.3

287.1

294.5

Private.......................................................................................

277.9

286.6

284.5

281.3

278.8

281.5

288.9

279.7

289.0

286.9

283.7

281.2

284.0

291.6

New cars .............................................................................
Used cars.............................................................................
Gasoline ..............................................................................
Automobile maintenance and repair..............................................
Body work (12/77 - 100)....................................................
Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous
mechanical repair (12/77 - 100) ........................................
Maintenance and servicing (12/77 - 100) ................................
Power plant repair (12/77 - 100) .........................................
Other private transportation .......................................................
Other private transportation commodities .................................
Motor oil, coolant, and other products (12/77 = 100) .............
Automobile parts and equipment (12/77 - 100)....................
Tires ..................................................................
Other parts and equipment (12/77 = 100) ....................
Other private transportation services........................................
Automobile insurance ....................................................
Automobile finance charges (12/77 = 100) .........................
Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) ...
State registration ...................................................
Drivers’ licenses (12/77 = 100) .................................
Vehicle inspection (12/77 - 100) ...............................
Other vehicle-related fees (12/77 = 100) .....................

192.2
252.9
414.4
291.9
142.3

197.4
280.5
406.0
305.5
151.5

195.5
279.7
399.1
307.7
153.7

194.4
280.9
383.9
310.2
154.5

196.0
285.1
366.7
311.9
155.0

197.5
291.4
370.4
313.6
155.7

198.1
298.2
392.3
316.0
156.3

192.5
252.9
415.6
292.6
142.2

197.3
280.5
407.5
306.2
149.8

195.3
279.7
400.6
308.4
152.1

194.2
280.9
385.4
311.1
152.7

195.9
285.2
367.9
312.8
153.3

197.3
291.4
371.7
314.4
154.0

197.9
298.2
393.8
316.8
154.7

138.9
137.1
139.2
241.0
208.5
144.5
133.4
186.1
130.2
252.0
257.4
178.5
117.8
148.0
105.8
125.7
136.3

145.7
142.0
146.2
253.3
215.5
148.2
138.1
192.8
134.3
265.8
266.8
190.9
127.6
166.9
117.3
129.2
142.5

146.5
142.7
147.3
253.4
214.8
149.3
137.4
191.3
134.6
266.1
268.1
188.9
128.9
167.1
121.7
129.3
144.8

148.7
143.9
148.0
254.5
215.6
150.2
137.9
191.7
135.7
267.2
269.8
188.9
129.7
168.5
122.9
129.3
145.3

149.5
144.5
149.1
255.1
214.9
150.7
137.2
190.1
136.2
268.2
270.4
187.2
133.3
174.2
123.0
129.0
149.5

150.8
145.0
150.1
255.7
216.9
149.9
138.8
192.3
138.0
268.4
271.6
186.3
133.3
174.2
127.7
126.7
149.2

151.6
146.8
150.8
258.7
217.5
150.7
139.2
192.8
138.3
272.2
274.0
192.0
133.3
174.3
127.7
126.7
149.3

141.7
136.9
138.3
243.9
211.1
142.7
135.5
189.9
130.7
255.0
256.9
177.2
118.2
148.1
105.6
126.5
142.6

149.5
141.5
145.7
256.9
218.0
146.9
140.0
196.5
134.5
269.7
266.6
190.3
128.4
166.2
117.1
130.5
150.4

150.2
142.3
146.8
256.8
217.3
147.8
139.4
195.1
134.9
269.8
268.0
188.3
129.5
166.5
121.7
130.6
152.4

152.8
143.4
147.5
257.8
218.2
148.7
139.9
195.5
135.9
270.8
269.6
188.2
130.1
167.8
123.0
130.6
152.5

153.7
144.0
148.6
258.2
217.3
149.2
139.2
193.7
136.6
271.6
270.2
186.7
133.7
173.8
123.0
130.4
156.4

154.9
144.4
149.6
258.8
219.4
148.4
140.9
196.0
138.4
271.8
271.3
185.9
133.7
173.8
127.9
128.3
156.2

155.7
146.2
150.3
261.8
220.0
149.0
141.2
196.4
138.6
275.5
273.5
191.2
133.8
173.9
127.9
128.3
156.3

APPAREL AND UPKEEP - Continued
Apparel commodities

Continued

Public.........................................................................................

303.9

334.9

336.8

336.7

339.3

342.1

345.6

293.6

329.4

331.0

331.0

333.3

335.1

337.9

Airline fare.............................................................................
Intercity bus fare ....................................................................
Intracity mass transit ...............................................................
Taxi fare ..............................................................................
Intercity train fare....................................................................

360.7
337.6
253.5
281.7
304.1

375.5
367.3
305.9
296.3
318.1

379.3
365.7
306.7
296.7
314.0

379.0
365.6
306.6
297.2
314.1

382.7
367.0
308.1
297.6
332.1

388.9
366.0
308.3
297.6
337.9

396.0
363.7
309.2
298.0
338.2

359.3
366.8
251.5
289.2
304.6

372.7
368.9
305.1
305.6
317.9

376.3
367.4
305.8
306.1
314.5

376.3
367.0
305.7
306.6
314.5

379.8
368.7
307.2
307.3
332.1

385.2
367.5
307.1
307.2
337.9

392.4
365.4
307.9
307.6
338.2

MEDICAL CARE ..........................................................................

291.5

313.4

316.2

318.8

321.7

323.8

326.4

292.9

312.0

314.9

317.4

320.2

322.3

324.8

Medical care commodities............................................................

186.3

195.9

197.7

200.0

202.4

204.1

205.6

187.3

196.4

198.3

200.6

203.0

204.8

206.3

Prescription drugs ...................................................................
Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 100)..........................................
Tranquilizers and sedatives (12/77 = 100)................................
Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 - 100).................................
Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologicals, and
prescription medical supplies (12/77 - 100) ...........................
Pain and symptom' control drugs (12/77 = 100) .........................
Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and
respiratory agents (12/77 - 100)........................................

172.3
132.2
137.3
125.5

181.9
138.2
145.4
132.2

183.7
138.4
146.8
134.0

186.1
139.3
148.6
135.7

188.8
140.9
152.0
136.7

190.4
142.5
153.8
137.0

191.8
143.3
154.9
138.4

173.5
134.3
136.5
126.8

182.8
140.1
144.9
132.1

184.7
140.4
146.5
134.0

187.0
141.1
148.3
135.6

189.7
142.5
151.8
136.6

191.4
144.1
153.8
136.8

192.7
145.1
154.7
138.2

157.2
137.7

165.6
147.3

168.4
148.8

170.8
150.8

173.3
153.1

175.4
153.7

177.2
154.6

158.1
138.9

166.9
148.7

169.7
150.3

172.0
152.3

174.6
154.6

176.9
155.2

178.6
156.0

131.1

138.8

139.9

142.7

144.7

145.9

146.3

132.0

138.8

139.9

142.7

144.8

146.0

146.4

Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 = 100) .................
Eyeglasses (12/77 - 100) ..................................................
Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs ...........................
Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 - 100).......

133.5
125.3
211.5
128.6

139.9
128.3
222.8
135.9

141.1
128.9
225.1
137.1

142.5
129.5
228.1
138.1

143.9
130.1
231.1
138.9

145.1
130.9
233.4
139.5

146.3
131.6
235.2
141.1

134.4
124.7
212.6
130.7

140.4
127.1
223.9
136.6

141.6
127.6
226.4
137.7

143.2
128.1
229.6
138.8

144.6
128.7
232.5
139.7

145.9
129.7
235.0
140.4

147.1
130.4
236.8
142.0

Medical care services .................................................................

314.4

339.4

342.4

345.1

348.0

350.2

353.0

315.8

337.5

340.6

343.0

345.8

348.0

350.7

Professional services ...............................................................
Physicians’ services............................................................
Denta services.................................................................
Other professional services (12/77 - 100)................................

275.8
297.5
260.2
134.2

292.0
315.5
275.8
140.3

294.2
318.8
276.8
141.5

295.8
320.3
278.6
142.4

297.8
322.2
281.1
142.5

299.2
324.0
282.1
143.4

301.2
326.4
283.9
143.8

279.4
302.4
264.0
132.6

292.2
318.6
274.1
137.2

294.3
321.7
274.9
138.5

295.9
323.2
276.6
139.4

297.9
325.2
279.2
139.4

299.3
327.0
280.3
140.2

301.3
329.4
282.1
140.7

Other medical care services.......................................................
Hospital and other medical services (12/77 = 100)......................
Hospital room..............................................................
Other hospital and medical care services (12/77 = 100)..........

361.1
149.6
470.4
148.7

396.8
165.6
529.4
162.2

400.8
167.1
533.8
163.8

404.7
168.5
538.5
165.2

408.7
169.8
542.2
166.4

411.9
170.6
543.8
167.6

415.7
171.6
546.8
168.5

360.3
148.6
467.1
147.6

393.8
164.0
522.0
161.2

398.0
165.7
527.0
163.0

401.6
166.9
531.0
164.2

405.4
168.3
535.2
165.5

408.5
169.1
536.7
166.6

412.1
170.0
539.4
167.5


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

73

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
18.

Continued -Consum er Price Index— U.S. city average

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
General summary

1981

Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)

1982

1981

1982

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May.

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

ENTERTAINMENT......................

220.8

229.2

231.2

232.8

233.9

234.4

235.6

218.3

226.1

228.1

229.5

230.5

231.1

232.3

Entertainment commodities.......................

225.4

232.0

234.3

236.6

238.0

238.8

239.6

220.8

226.7

228.9

230.8

232.0

232.8

233.8

Reading materials (12/77 = 100)...............
Newspapers .....................................
Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 = 100)........

136.2
264.9
137.9

142.9
270.5
149.0

144.1
273.1
149.9

146.1
276.4
152.4

146.8
280.1
151.6

148.5
281.6
154.4

149.4
283.9
155.0

136.1
264.8
138.2

142.1
270.1
148.8

143.3
272.8
149.7

145.3
276.0
152.2

146.1
279.7
151.4

147.7
281.2
154.2

148.6
283.4
154.8

Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100)......................
Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) .............
Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 = 100)..........
Bicycles ......................................
Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100) ............

126.8
128.7
116.9
191.0
122.7

129.5
(')
120.1
194.8
125.3

131.5
133.9
119.6
197.3
127.0

132.3
135.4
119.9
197.6
125.6

132.9
136.1
120.4
198.9
126.3

132.8
135.4
121.0
199.4
127.6

132.7
135.7
119.6
197.6
127.9

120.4
118.4
116.9
192.0
122.2

122.4
(’ )
118.2
196.2
125.2

123.9
121.9
117.7
198.9
127.4

124.3
122.5
118.1
198.9
126.0

124.7
122.8
118.6
200.2
126.5

124.9
122.6
119.2
200.7
127.9

125.3
123.9
117.1
198.8
128.3

Toys, hobbles, and other entertainment (12/77 = 100)............
Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 100) ......
Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 = 100). ..
Pet supplies and expenses (12/77 = 100) ................

129.3
127.9
126.2
134.2

132.2
130.8
125.2
139.7

133.2
131.7
126.9
140.6

134.5
133.4
128.3
140.8

135.4
134.1
129.8
141.9

135.5
134.8
130.0
141.0

136.1
135.9
130.3
140.6

128.1
125.3
126.5
134.3

131.2
127.7
126.3
140.5

132.3
128.6
127.9
141.6

133.5
130.2
129.5
141.7

134.3
130.7
131.0
142.7

134.4
131.4
131.2
141.8

134.9
132.4
131.5
141.5

Entertainment services .............................

214.7

225.5

227.1

227.8

228.5

228.7

230.5

215.1

226.1

227.8

228.4

229.2

229.2

230.9

Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 100).........................
Admissions (12/77 = 100)..............................
Other entertainment services (12/77 = 100)...............

131.3
124.9
122.2

139.6
131.2
124.2

140.9
131.6
125.0

141.9
131.2
125.1

142.0
132.2
125.2

141.6
133.0
125.7

142.5
133.5
127.9

131.4
124.8
123.4

141.2
130.1
124.7

142.5
130.6
125.9

143.5
130.3
125.9

143.7
131.2
125.9

142.9
132.1
126.4

143.8
132.6
128.7

OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES.......................

233.4

248.4

250.3

252.2

253.8

255.0

255.8

231.4

245.0

247.1

249.3

250.9

252.4

253.1

Tobacco products ....................................

219.1

227.1

230.7

234.1

235.1

237.4

237.8

218.4

226.2

229.8

233.2

234.0

236.6

237.0

Cigarettes...........................................
Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 = 100)

221.4
132.3

230.0
134.7

233.6
136.8

237.3
138.1

238.0
139.9

240.4
141.0

2407
141.8

220.8
132.7

229.1
135.0

232.7
136.9

236.3
138.2

236.9
140.1

239.6
141.1

239.9
142.0

Personal care ...........................

232.1

240.9

242.3

243.7

245.9

246.5

247.8

229.7

238.8

240.4

241.8

244.1

244.7

246.0

Toilet goods and personal care appliances...........................
Products for the hair, hairpieces, and wigs (12/77 = 100) ... .
Dental and shaving products (12/77 = 100)
Cosmetics, bath and nail preparations, manicure
and eye makeup implements (12/77 = 100) ........
Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100)

228.6
132.8
139.4

236.4
137.2
144.0

238.5
138.4
145.6

240.6
140.8
148.0

243.8
142.9
149.0

244.5
142.1
150.1

246.3
143.2
150.5

227.2
130.4
136.6

236.9
136.4
142.6

239.2
137.8
144.2

241.5
140.0
146.6

244.7
142.3
147.6

245.4
141.7
148.6

247.0
142.6
148.9

129.0
132.0

134.1
135.9

135.0
137.0

135.1
137.4

136.5
140.3

137.6
140.5

139.6
140.8

128.0
135.4

134.5
138.9

135.8
140.2

136.1
140.7

137.5
143.5

138.5
144.0

140.1
144.4

Personal care services............................
Beauty parlor services for women............................
Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100)

236.0
237.7
131.9

245.7
246.9
138.0

246.5
247.7
138.4

247.3
248.9
138.4

248.7
250.7
138.8

249.2
251.3
138.9

250.1
252.3
139.4

232.5
232.7
131.3

241.0
240.5
136.8

241.8
241.3
137.2

242.6
242.5
137.2

244.0
244.3
137.6

244.4
245.0
137.7

245.4
245.9
138.2

Personal and educational expenses ...........................

257.8

288.1

289.2

290.4

291.9

292.8

293.3

258.5

288.9

290.2

291.7

293.5

294.6

295.2

Schoolbooks and supplies ..............................
Personal and educational services...........................
Tuition and other school fees .........................
College tuition (12/77 = 100) ....................
Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 = 100) ............
Personal expenses (12/77 = 100)..................

230.9
264.2
132.9
132.4
134.4
146.3

260.7
294.8
150.5
149.9
152.1
154.3

262.9
295.8
150.6
150.1
152.2
156.1

263.3
297.1
151.1
150.7
152.2
157.4

263.8
298.7
151.4
151.0
152.2
160.9

264.2
299.8
151.4
151.0
152.2
163.6

264.6
300.3
151.5
151.2
152.2
164.5

234.7
264.6
133.1
132.4
134.4
144.8

264.8
295.2
150.7
149.6
152.8
153.7

267.1
296.3
150.9
149.8
152.9
155.3

267.5
298.0
151.7
150.9
152.9
156.7

268.0
300.0
152.0
151.3
152.9
160.5

268.4
301.4
152.0
151.3
152.9
163.6

268.8
302.0
152.1
151.4
152.9
164.6

408.4
393.4
278.5
328.6

400.5
423.9
297.7
343.0

393.9
424.8
299.1
344.0

379.3
420.9
302.7
344.0

362.6
426.3
305.1
347.5

366.1
431.5
310.8
349.8

387.3
436.5
316.4
351.2

409.5
393.1
276.7
325.1

401.8
422.8
296.4
343.3

395.3
423.5
297.7
344.2

380.6
419.9
301.5
344.0

3637
425.9
304.0
348.2

367.2
430.9
309.6
350.4

388.6
436.0
315.5
351.8

Special indexes:

Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products..........
Insurance and finance ...................................
Utilities and public transportation............................
Housekeeping and home maintenance services ..........
1Not available.

74


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

19. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Cross classification of region and population size class by expenditure
category and commodity and service group
[December 1977 = 100]
Size class A
(1.25 million or more)
Category and group

Size class B
(385,000-1.250 million)

Apr.

1982

1982

1982
Feb.

June

Feb.

Apr.

Size class D
(75,000 or less)

Size class C
(75,000-385,000)

June

Feb.

1982

Apr.

June

Feb.

Apr.

June

Northeast

' •;.
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY

All Items ..........................................................................................
Food and beverages ......................................................................
Housing .....................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................
Medical care................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services ...............................................................

144.2
143.3
146.0
117.0
156.5
145.1
133.3
136.9

143.6
143.7
144.5
119.1
153.7
146.4
135.5
139.0

147.7
145.9
151.6
118.6
157.2
147.5
136.5
139.8

150.7
142.7
155.7
120.5
164.2
147.0
132.4
140.6

150.0
142.2
155.3
122.5
160.0
148.9
136.2
141.1

155.5
144.1
165.2
122.8
164.6
150.2
137.5
142.1

158.1
145.7
172.5
123.1
161.6
148.7
136.1
142.9

158.6
147.4
173.3
127.4
158.6
150.4
135.8
145.3

163.5
148.8
182.1
128.3
162.2
152.7
136.4
146.7

151.4
140.4
159.5
119.9
161.7
144.8
137.6
140.6

151.9
140.4
160.5
125.1
158.1
151.5
139.0
142.9

156.9
142.9
169.3
123.4
161.2
155.4
141.1
144.0

142.1
141.4
146.9

140.8
139.0
147.4

144.6
143.8
151.8

147.9
150.5
155.1

146.6
148.7
155.4

151.5
155.1
161.9

150.1
152.2
171.0

149.6
150.6
173.4

153.8
156.2
179.1

147.6
151.0
157.3

146.5
149.4
160.4

150.6
154.3
166.8

COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP

Commodities.....................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ................................................
Services ..........................................................................................

North Central region
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY

All items ..........................................................................................
Food and beverages ......................................................................
Housing .....................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................
Medical care................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services ...............................................................

153.6
141.6
164.9
112.7
161.1
148.4
137.1
138.8

155.2
141.9
168.8
114.8
158.7
150.9
137.0
140.3

159.6
144.1
175.1
114.0
165.1
153.0
137.1
141.4

151.9
140.8
159.9
121.1
159.7
150.8
126.4
145.1

155.1
141.7
167.2
122.7
156.9
152.8
130.3
146.5

155.3
142.8
163.3
123.0
163.2
155.2
129.5
152.5

149.1
143.1
152.7
121.8
161.0
150.3
136.1
137.3

151.2
143.1
157.2
125.8
158.4
153.8
138.1
139.0

155.2
145.0
162.1
124.7
165.7
155.6
139.2
141.2

151.0
144.7
155.5
119.5
160.3
154.5
132.5
144.6

153.3
146.2
160.7
123.5
157.2
157.0
130.9
146.4

156.4
148.7
164.0
120.5
163.1
158.3
131.5
148.3

145.2
146.9
166.1

145.4
147.0
169.8

149.4
151.9
174.8

145.4
147.3
162.6

146.4
148.3
169.3

148.5
150.9
166.2

143.5
143.6
158.4

144.3
144.8
162.4

148.8
150.5
165.6

142.1
141.0
165.0

143.7
142.6
168.7

147.9
147.6
169.8

COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP

Commodities.....................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ................................................
Services ..........................................................................................

South
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY

All items ..........................................................................................
Food and beverages ......................................................................
Housing .....................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................
Medical care................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services ...............................................................

152.6
144.2
160.2
122.6
161.5
145.9
129.3
141.2

152.9
145.0
161.1
125.6
157.5
149.5
130.1
142.8

156.3
146.7
165.2
124.9
163.4
152.8
132.0
144.1

157.2
144.8
168.3
121.1
162.8
150.5
140.0
140.7

155.7
144.9
165.2
124.3
159.7
152.3
141.2
142.4

158.4
146.9
167.2
123.6
167.0
154.5
143.1
143.3

154.0
144.1
162.7
117.0
160.7
155.4
140.4
142.0

152.3
144.0
159.1
120.2
157.1
160.1
141.1
143.7

157.6
146.0
167.0
118.6
165.1
162.5
142.7
144.5

152.3
146.1
158.8
105.7
159.9
162.5
140.4
147.9

153.5
145.9
161.5
111.1
155.8
165.1
145.7
150.2

156.5
147.7
164.6
109.4
163.3
166.6
145.2
150.4

146.8
148.0
160.7

146.3
146.9
162.1

149.1
150.1
166.5

148.4
149.9
170.4

147.6
148.8
167.8

150.9
152.6
169.8

146.0
146.8
166.3

144.3
144.5
164.5

149.2
150.6
170.6

145.0
144.6
163.3

146.0
146.0
164.8

149.7
150.5
166.8

COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP

Commodities.....................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ................................................
Services ..........................................................................................

West
EXPENDITURE CATEGORY

All items ..........................................................................................
Food and beverages ......................................................................
Housing .....................................................................................
Apparel and upkeep ......................................................................
Transportation..............................................................................
Medical care................................................................................
Entertainment ..............................................................................
Other goods and services ...............................................................

157.9
143.9
167.2
121.7
164.2
157.8
135.1
144.5

158.5 '
144.5
168.1
120.6
162.9
160.7
137.7
147.5

160.8
146.4
170.1
120.0
167.7
164.4
138.5
147.0

157.1
147.9
164.9
126.4
163.6
153.7
135.5
145.3

157.0
147.6
164.8
126.6
161.7
156.0
136.8
148.9

158.6
148.9
165.6
125.2
165.9
159.5
139.4
149.1

150.2
143.4
154.4
118.8
160.9
154.8
130.4
137.1

151.1
143.5
156.3
119.7
158.3
157.3
133.9
139.5

149.7
145.1
150.3
122.3
163.5
159.6
134.2
139.9

153.3
148.1
153.9
131.9
164.5
157.9
147.8
147.6

157.9
148.5
163.5
140.4
160.5
162.4
148.9
149.8

159.9
149.9
165.5
140.5
162.8
166.2
150.6
153.3

146.0
146.9
173.7

145.5
145.9
175.9

147.8
148.4
178.1

148.4
148.6
169.1

148.1
148.3
169.3

149.5
149.7
171.1

145.2
145.9
157.3

146.4
147.5
157.9

147.5
148.5
152.8

147.5
147.3
161.8

148.9
149.1
171.2

151.3
152.0
172.5

COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP

Commodities .....................................................................................
Commodities less food and beverages ................................................
Services ..........................................................................................


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

75

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices
20.

Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average, and selected areas

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
All Urban Consumers
Area1

U.S. city average2 .....................................
Anchorage, Alaska (10/67=100) .................................
Atlanta, Ga..................................
Baltimore, Md...............................
Boston, Mass..............................................
Buffalo, N.Y...........................................

1981
Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

June

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

271.3

282.5

283.4

283.1

284.3

287.1

290.6

271.4

282.1

282.9

282.5

283.7

286.5

290.1

291.1

268.8

253.0
269.2

260.0
279.8

282.1
274.0
257.2
269.1

Detroit, Mich..............................................
Honolulu, Hawaii .....................................
Houston, Tex......................................
Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas ...................................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif..........................

280.5
252.8
292.9
270.5
267.9

281.9
269.8
274.9

305.4

285.8

265.4
271.3

San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.............................
Seattle-Everett, Wash.........................................
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.............................................

274.0

268.5
272.5
275.7

306.0
269.0
275.5
278.6

278.2

286.6

267.4
267.2
274.7

295.8

285.9

287.1

291.8

267.9

297.8
304.8

283.8
284.0

289.1
269.5
313.9
281.6
290.1

275.9
253.8
289.4
269.1
271.7

301.7
268.2
275.1
275.3

270.9
270.2
275.1

258.0
275.9
288.4

275.4

289.8
156.4
295.3

304.1
276.7

276.6
257.9

279.7
285.1

265.6
273.0

282.1
285.7
329.2

267.5
274.5
275.1

304.6

274.3

305.3
267.8
275.1
280.0

Area is used for New York and Chicago.
2Average of 85 cities.

264.1
287.0
291.2

285.7
292.7
275.1

290.4

265.9
268.4
274.3

297.0
300.5
282.7

290.6

286.0
269.5
310.9
280.1
293.9

157.0
296.0
301.2
266.5
274.5
276.7

269.4
272.1
274.7

303.8
275.3
279.1
285.9

279.7
284.5
323.3
297.8

289.6
283.8

291.5

319.5
280.3
264.7
302.1
272.1
290.5

283.9
279.3
313.9
294.9

291.9
281.8

280.0

156.4
292.5

285.5
277.1
317.4

301.2
278.4

276.5
287.2
315.0

274.8
263.2
300.3
274.1
289.4

282.9
283.7
272.0

256.4

285.0
289.8
277.8

258.0
282.9

282.2
269.8

310.5

155.7
292.9

298.8
293.4
278.8

256.1

313.4
283.7
263.8
304.9
274.0
286.8

286.7
280.7
319.0

'The areas listed include not only the central city but the entire portion of the Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated

76

287.7
288.7

254.5
282.7

282.3
273.4
265.8

286.5
297.2

155.1
289.3

288.4
278.4
323.1
295.9
278.0

280.2

309.2
277.8
262.2
304.1
276.0
285.6

155.2
291.3
376.1
258.6

276.4
284.9

248.6

283.6
272.5
258.3

285.9
293.6
280.8

263.8
280.2

259.9
275.4
285.7

285.3
286.0

Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J............................................
Pittsburgh, Pa.........................................
Portland, Oreg.-Wash.........................................
St. Louis, Mo.-lll........................................
San Diego, Calif...........................................


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

1982

June

Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind.....................................
Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind..................................
Cleveland, Ohio...................................
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex...........................................
Denver-Boulder, Colo.............................................

Miami, Fla. (11/77= 100) .......................
Milwaukee, Wis..............................
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis......................................
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J.........................
Northeast, Pa. (Scranton)..........................................

Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised)
1981

1982

303.4
297.1
283.3

21.

Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing

[1967 = 100]
Annual
average
1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.1

Apr.

May

June

July

Finished goods.........................................................

'269.8

271.8

271.5

271.5

274.3

274.7

275.4

277.9

277.9

'277.3

276.9

277.7

279.9

281.7

Finished consumer goods......................................
Finished consumer foods.....................................
Crude.........................................................
Processed ..................................................
Nondurable goods less foods ..............................
Durable goods ................................................
Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy ....
Capital equipment ...............................................

'271.3
'253.6
'263.8
250.6
'319.6
'218.6
'208.8
264.3

273.5
257.6
262.7
255.0
322.5
218.1
209.5
265.4

273.0
256.3
256.9
254.2
322.1
218.3
210.4
265.8

273.1
256.2
253.5
254.4
324.2
215.8
211.8
265.3

275.1
254.0
253.8
252.0
324.3
224.5
212.6
271.5

275.2
252.7
260.0
249.9
325.4
224.7
213.6
273.0

275.8
252.9
273.9
249.0
326.3
225.4
213.9
274.1

278.3
256.4
280.6
252.1
329.3
226.2
217.4
276.2

278.6
258.2
282.5
254.0
330.3
224.0
219.6
275.0

'277.7
257.1
'263.3
'254.5
'328.8
'223.9
'220.5
'275.8

276.9
259.8
266.1
257.1
324.9
223.8
221.4
277.1

277.6
262.3
259.4
260.4
324.1
224.7
222.9
278.3

280.0
263.4
254.3
262.0
328.1
226.2
222.9
279.6

282.0
260.7
240.6
260.4
334.7
227.0
223.3
280.9

Intermediate materials, supplies, and components...............

306.0

308.5

310.1

309.7

309.4

309.0

309.4

311.0

311.1

'310.6

310.1

309.8

310.0

311.4

Materials and components for manufacturing...............
Materials for food manufacturing ...........................
Materials for nondurable manufacturing ..................
Materials for durable manufacturing.......................
Components for manufacturing ............................

'2861
'260.4
'285.8
'312.1
'259.3

287.9
260.5
289.2
314.4
259.5

289.8
261.0
291.0
316.0
261.8

290.2
254.6
291.2
317.1
263.8

290.2
250.9
290.9
316.7
265.1

289.5
246.8
289.4
314.9
266.9

289.3
245.6
288.8
314.0
267.8

290.4
250.7
289.0
313.6
269.8

290.9
252.8
289.3
313.1
270.9

'290.4
252.0
'288.8
'310.9
'271.8

290.9
254.3
288.1
311.2
272.9

291.5
260.0
288.1
310.6
273.8

290.0
260.9
285.8
307.3
273.9

289.6
260.0
283.6
308.2
274.2

Commodity grouping

1981

1982

FINISHED GOODS

INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS

Materials and components for construction .................

'287.6

290.4

290.7

290.0

290.1

290.2

291.1

292.0

293.0

293.3

293.8

293.4

294.2

294.0

Processed fuels and lubricants ...............................
Manufacturing industries ....................................
Nonmanufacturing industries ...............................

'595.4
'498.6
'680.8

602.0
500.3
692.0

607.8
508.3
695.6

601.4
500.5
690.5

596.9
497.5
684.7

595.1
496.4
682.2

598.1
499.0
685.6

604.4
505.9
691.3

596.8
497.8
684.2

'593.0
'496.1
'678.3

579.8
487.6
660.9

569.9
482.3
646.7

581.2
492.0
659.3

601.6
508.4
683.4

Containers........................................................

'276.1

278.8

280.3

280.6

280.9

280.6

280.2

282.5

285.5

'286.3

287.4

287.1

286.7

286.4

Supplies ..........................................................
Manufacturing industries .....................................
Nonmanufacturing industries ................................
Feeds .........................................................
Other supplies...............................................

'263.8
'253.1
269.6
230.4
276.4

266.0
255.0
272.0
232.8
278.7

266.1
256.0
271.6
229.1
279.3

266.1
256.8
271.1
221.3
280.7

266.6
258.2
271.2
215.9
282.3

267.2
259.2
271.6
212.0
283.7

268.3
261.0
272.4
214.6
284.1

269.8
262.6
273.8
214.8
285.7

270.4
263.3
274.4
212.0
287.3

'270.6
'264.5
'274.1
'208.1
'287.9

272.3
265.6
276.0
212.9
289.1

273.6
267.2
277.2
214.2
290.2

273.6
267.3
277.1
213.1
290.4

273.5
267.3
277.0
211.1
290.7

'329.0

337.3

333.0

327.4

319.9

313.9

311.5

318.4

321.6

'320.0

322.8

328.1

325.7

323.4

CRUDE MATERIALS

Crude materials for further processing ............................
Foodstuffs and feedstuffs ......................................

257.4

267.2

261.8

253.4

245.7

238.3

233.7

242.6

248.3

247.9

254.3

262.3

259.8

255.5

Nonfood materials ...............................................

'482.3

487.2

485.3

486.0

479.2

476.3

478.6

481.5

479.3

'475.2

470.4

470.4

467.9

470.0

Nonfood materials except fuel ..............................
Manufacturing industries...................................
Construction ................................................

'413.7
'429.4
'261.8

413.1
428.7
262.6

413.9
429.6
263.1

410.2
425.4
263.6

404.1
418.6
264.7

397.8
411.7
264.8

396.2
409.8
265.2

399.5
413.2
267.6

394.8
407.5
270.5

'387.1
'398.4
'273.2

379.0
389.0
275.3

376.6
386.4
274.0

370.0
378.9
273.7

369.1
378.4
270.4

Crude fuel .....................................................
Manufacturing industries...................................
Nonmanufacturing industries..............................

'751.2
'864.9
'674.0

781.2
902.6
698.1

766.7
883.0
687.8

788.7
911.4
704.8

779.0
898.4
697.8

792.5
915.8
708.2

813.0
942.5
724.0

812.9
940.3
725.6

824.5
954.4
735.4

'839.7
'974.7
'746.6

853.7
992.4
757.6

866.1
1,008.2
767.4

885.2
1,033.6
781.7

903.1
1,056.0
796.0

Finished goods excluding foods.....................................
Finished consumer goods excluding foods ..................
Finished consumer goods less energy.......................

'273.3
'276.5
233.6

274.7
277.9
235.0

274.6
277.7
235.0

274.7
277.9
234.9

279.1
281.6
237.2

280.0
282.4
237.2

280.9
283.2
237.6

283.0
285.2
240.5

282.4
284.9
241.3

'281.9
'284.0
'241.3

280.6
281.7
242.4

280.9
281.6
244.1

283.4
284.6
244.9

286.7
288.7
244.5

Intermediate materials less foods and feeds......................
Intermediate materials less energy ...........................

310.1
285.2

312.7
287.2

314.5
288.5

314.6
288.7

314.6
288.8

314.5
288.5

314.9
288.7

316.4
289.9

316.4
290.7

'316.0
'290.5

315.3
291.2

314.6
291.7

314.8
290.9

316.4
290.6

Intermediate foods and feeds ......................................

'250.3

251.1

250.2

243.5

239.3

235.2

235.2

238.8

239.4

'237.7

240.7

245.0

245.3

244.1

Crude materials less agricultural products .......................
Crude materials less energy...................................

'545.6
254.0

550.6
261.8

549.1
258.0

551.4
250.4

543.4
243.2

540.7
235.8

543.5
231.6

546.1
239.1

543.9
243.4

'538.4
242.8

532.2
247.3

531.7
252.5

529.4
248.6

531.8
245.0

SPECIAL GROUPINGS

1Data for March 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.


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

r=revised,

77

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
22.

Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Code

Commodity group and subgroup

Annual
average

1981

1982

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.’

Apr.

May

June

July

All commodities .................................................................
All commodities (1957-59 = 100)......................................

2934
311.3

296.2
314.3

296.4
314.5

295.7
313.7

296.1
314.2

295.5
313.5

295.8
313.8

2983
316.5

298.6 '298.0
316.8 '316.2

297.9
316.1

298.6
316.8

299.4
317.7

300.6
318.9

Farm products and processed foods and feeds......................
Industrial commodities........................................................

251.5
304.1

256.8
306.2

254.2
307.2

250.3
307.4

246.0
309.0

242.5
309.3

241.0
310.0

246.0
311.8

248.4
311.6

247.5
311.0

251.4
309.9

255.6
309.5

255.3
310.7

252.5
313.0

FARM PRODUCTS AND PROCESSED FOODS
AND FEEDS

01
01-1
01-2
01-3
01-4
01-5
01-6
01-7
01-8
01-9

Farm products ...............................................................
Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables .................................
Grains.......................................................................
Livestock ...................................................................
Live poultry.................................................................
Plant and animal fibers....................................................
Fluid milk ...................................................................
Eggs.........................................................................
Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ...........................................
Other farm products .....................................................

254.9
267.3
'248.4
248.0
201.2
242.0
287.4
187.1
274.1
'273.8

263.3
265.6
257.4
266.5
215.3
251.3
284.3
185.1
290.0
250.2

257.9
258.1
242.7
262.0
210.3
232.5
285.0
180.7
284.3
263.9

251.1
252.8
227.0
257.3
196.7
206.5
287.3
193.2
267.2
268.9

243.1
248.8
227.6
244.5
185.7
211.7
294.3
193.8
230.4
263.3

237.4
254.0
226.5
231.1
175.0
198.5
288.2
209.7
221.1
273.1

234.6
280.5
213.6
225.0
171.4
188.4
286.7
195.5
218.8
280.2

242.2
289.2
225.2
236.8
186.8
198.2
287.6
187.0
2184
280.1

247.1
290.1
223.2
251.2
197.3
193.5
285.8
200.6
217.6
273.7

'244.7
'257.3
220.9
255.6
197.7
'199.5
282.5
204.0
213.7
273.0

250.6
266.7
226.0
267.6
186.2
207.4
280.3
192.1
222.8
274.2

256.1
270.7
228.2
282.9
192.7
214.1
278.8
164.3
224.3
273.9

252.7
263.8
225.7
277.5
207.2
203.1
278.9
159.3
219.3
271.8

246.5
238.4
212.8
270.3
212.5
220.8
279.0
171.7
220.0
265.5

02
02-1
02-2
02-3
02-4
02-5
02-6
02-7
02-8
02-9

Processed foods and feeds................................................
Cereal and bakery products.............................................
Meats, poultry, and fish ..................................................
Dairy products..............................................................
Processed fruits and vegetables........................................
Sugar and confectionery ................................................
Beverages and beverage materials.....................................
Fats and oils...............................................................
Miscellaneous processed foods ........................................
Prepared animal feeds....................................................

248.7
255.5
246.2
'245.6
'261.2
'275.9
'248.0
'227.4
250.1
'230.2

252.2
258.3
257.1
245.1
265.9
266.0
249.0
234.8
252.2
232.2

251.2
257.7
254.4
245.3
267.3
267.3
249.4
229.5
252.1
228.9

248.9
258.5
253.3
245.5
270.0
246.8
249.1
224.3
253.0
222.9

246.6
256.9
246.6
246.8
271.7
246.7
250.0
223.4
249.9
218.1

244.3
256.5
240.0
246.9
270.5
244.1
251.4
221.5
250.1
214.7

243.6
255.1
236.1
247.2
271.8
247.6
251.9
219.1
250.1
217.2

247.1
256.6
243.7
247.7
273.2
256.8
253.9
216.6
251.0
217.4

248.1
253.3
247.9
248.0
276.3
257.2
255.1
216.8
250.9
214.9

248.1
'253.3
'250.0
248.0
'275.9
255.0
'256.4
'213.7
'249.5
'211.4

250.8
253,8
257.1
248.4
274.5
256.4
256.6
218.6
249.5
216.1

254.4
253.9
267.1
248.5
273.4
265.8
256.7
222.2
248.0
217.4

255.8
253.3
271.1
248.7
275.4
269.5
256.5
222.0
248.6
216.4

254.8
253.6
266.1
248.8
275.9
276.1
256.7
221.4
248.0
214.6

INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES

03
03-1
03-2
03-3
03-4
03-81
03-82

Textile products and apparel ...............................................
Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 100)..........................................
Processed yarns and threads (12/75 = 100) .......................
Gray fabrics (12/75 = 100).............................................
Finished fabrics (12/75 = 100) ........................................
Appare......................................................................
Textile housefurnishings..................................................

'199.7
'156.3
'138.0
'146.8
125.2
'186.0
'226.7

201.3
159.7
140.3
148.2
126.0
187.2
227.1

202.4
161.2
142.0
149.0
126.8
187.8
228.8

202.9
161.0
142.3
149.1
126.8
188.0
232.2

204.0
162.7
144.4
148.0
126.7
189.9
233.0

203.6
161.6
140.3
147.4
126.5
190.8
233.4

203.4
161.5
139.6
147.2
125.6
191.0
233.6

205.0
162.9
139.2
148.2
126.8
192.7
237.6

205.6
163.2
140.7
147.3
127.1
193.2
240.8

205.0
'161.3
'140.5
'146.6
'125.6
'193.4
'241.4

204.7
162.1
140.4
145.8
125.5
192.2
246.5

205.1
164.3
141.0
145.5
125.4
192.7
246.4

204.5
163.8
139.4
145.8
124.0
193.0
244.4

204.1
162.4
139.2
144.8
123.8
193.1
243.0

04
04-2
04-3
04-4

Hides, skins, leather, and related products ..............................
-eather ......................................................................
Footwear ...................................................................
Other leather and related products.....................................

'260.9
'319.8
'240.9
'241.8

261.1
319.0
242.4
242.9

261.3
313.7
242.5
245.1

261.7
313.2
242.9
245.0

260.0
313.7
239.6
245.0

259.8
311.3
239.8
245.4

260.7
312.3
240.1
245.4

261.8
319.0
238.9
247.5

261.6
317.7
238.6
248.1

'260.6
'313.3
'239.8
'248.1

264.4
313.2
2437
253.2

263.4
309.5
242.5
253.2

262.7
306.7
243.8
250.5

261.3
307.4
241.7
252.0

05
05-1
05-2
05-3
05-4
05-61
05-7

Fuels and related products and power ...................................
Coa;.........................................................................
Coke ........................................................................
Gas fuels2 .................................................................
Electric power..............................................................
Crude petroleum3 .........................................................
Petroleum products, refined4 ...........................................

'694.5
'497.2
'456.4
'939.4
'367.2
'803.5
-805.9

704.9
505.5
469.7
969.4
374.6
798.9
816.3

704.3
507.0
469.7
949.3
385.8
796.8
813.4

703.5
510.2
469.7
976.6
383.8
796.8
806.1

698.1
510.8
469.7
965.6
378.4
788.2
802.3

698.1 702.5
512.7 515.2
469.7 469.7
983.0 1,003.7
378.3 384.2
785.9 787.2
798.3 798.6

705.1
525.3
469.7
987.9
392.8
787.2
801.9

697.8
529.9
469.7
987.6
392.9
770.3
789.7

'689.7
'529.6
'467.5
'990.5
'403.7
'744.8
'770.6

671.2
661.9 677.4 701.8
534.4 534.1 538.6
532.5
468.1
468.2 462.7 463.9
996.6 1,003.4 1,029.7 1,055.4
406.7
405.5 406.6 416.9
718.0
718.2 718.5 718.7
733.4
712.7 738.5 777.1

06
06-1
06-21
06-22
06-3
06-4
06-5
06-6
06-7

Chemicals and allied products.............................................
Industrial chemicals5 .....................................................
Prepared paint..............................................................
Paint materials ............................................................
Drugs and pharmaceuticals .............................................
Fats and oils, inedible ....................................................
Agricultural chemicals and chemical products .......................
Plastic resins and materials .............................................
Other chemicals and allied products...................................

'287.6
'363.3
'249.8
'300.1
'193.5
295.6
'285.0
289.2
'254.2

291.3
370.4
250.7
304.5
195.5
290.9
288.9
295.9
254.8

293.3
371.5
250.7
308.5
195.0
305.6
293.4
297.5
257.3

293.3
371.8
250.7
308.0
197.8
285.6
292.6
296.8
257.4

292.4
367.9
250.7
308.1
198.5
277.7
293.1
299.5
256.9

292.0
363.7
254.5
308.3
198.2
282.5
295.7
293.2
259.9

291.8
362.8
256.4
305.8
198.9
280.4
2949
294.2
260.0

292.9
362.9
258.9
306.6
202.2
272.8
296.8
286.1
263.8

293.6
362.2
258.9
306.4
204.4
274.2
298.0
287.3
264.9

294.6
'361.4
'258.9
'306.8
'205.9
'290.1
'297.1
'285.5
'268.5

294.5
359.6
259.3
306.8
208.6
282.6
296.3
286.1
269.0

296.2
358.1
265.1
306.2
209.4
288.4
294.9
285.4
275.9

293.5
352.9
265.1
304.2
209.6
287.5
294.0
2819
273.0

291.6
349.7
265.1
304.3
209.9
278.2
291.5
280.6
270.7

07
07-1
07-11
07-12
07-13
07-2

Rubber and plastic products ...............................................
Rubber and rubber products.............................................
Crude rubber ..............................................................
Tires and tubes............................................................
Miscellaneous rubber products..........................................
Plastic products (6/78 = 100) ..........................................

'232.6
'256.2
'281.8
'250.6
'251.4
'128.5

232.1
254.7
284.2
246.8
251.4
128.7

234.1
256.9
284.7
249.9
253.1
129.8

235.7
260.3
283.1
256.5
253.9
129.9

237.3
262.9
279.8
257.1
261.1
130.3

238.0
264.4
279.0
255.9
266.7
130.3

238.3
264.6
280.8
255.4
267.2
130.6

237.3
262.5
281.8
253.6
263.8
130.5

239.3
266.0
282.1
256.7
268.8
131.0

'240.8
'266.7
'283.5
'253.7
'274.3
'132.3

241.9
268.7
283.2
254.4
278.8
132.4

242.9
271.2
283.6
255.0
284.6
132.3

243.3
271.5
282.4
255.3
285.4
132.6

243.1
271.6
280.2
255.6
286.1
132.3

08
08-1
08-2
08-3
08-4

Lumber and wood products................................................
Lumber......................................................................
Millwork ....................................................................
Plywood ....................................................................
Other wood products.....................................................

292.8
'325.1
273.4
245.7
'239.1

296.5
332.4
273.6
247.8
240.7

294.5
329.9
272.3
245.6
239.8

289.3
320.2
271.4
240.8
240.5

284.3
311.7
271.3
234.3
239.9

282.1
306.6
271.8
233.5
239.3

285.4
309.9
273.7
239.7
239.4

285.5
310.0
277.1
237.4
238.2

285.2
308.1
278.6
235.1
238.7

'285.3
'308.2
'276.5
' 236.5
'238.6

286.1
311.5
276.4
234.1
237.7

283.9
309.2
275.8
230.6
237.3

288.7
315.2
280.1
238.9
237.1

288.3
319.2
281.8
232.4
236.0

See footnotes at end of table.

78


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

22.

Continued — Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Code

Commodity group and subgroup

Annual
average
1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.1

Apr.

May

June

July

1981

1982

INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES-Continued

09
09-1
09-11
09-12
09-13
09-14
09-15
09-2

Pulp, paper, and allied products...........................................
Pulp, paper, and products, excluding building paper and board ...
Woodpulp...................................................................
Wastepaper ...............................................................
Paper ........................................................................
Paperboard .................................................................
Converted paper and paperboard products...........................
Building paper and board................................................

r273.8
r270.8
'397.1
175.7
'279.8
'258.1
'258.8
'231.7

274.9
272.3
394.2
182.1
279 7
259.4
261.2
235.5

275.9
273.7
394.2
182.1
2821
260.6
262.4
234.2

277.8
274.8
394.2
178.5
285 9
261.6
262.8
234.2

279.2
275.7
402.3
165.1
287 8
261.7
263.2
233.3

280.4
275.8
413.7
144.5
287 4
261.6
263.1
232.1

281.0
275.6
413.7
143.4
287.2
260.0
263.2
230.3

285.5
276.1
410.3
135.2
289.2
259.7
263.9
233.8

286.3
276.8
410.3
128.8
289.8
261.4
264.7
231.4

'287.4
'276.6
'411.6
129.2
'289.6
261.1
’ 264.5
'239.6

287.9
276.4
392.3
128.1
291.7
261.2
265.0
235.5

289.1
275.4
398.2
121.5
288.8
258.8
264.7
239.5

289.3
274.6
390.3
115.2
288.2
255.9
265.0
239.4

288.9
272.9
370.5
115.6
287 0
255.0
264.6
239.2

10
10-1
10-17
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-5
10-6
10-7
10-8

Metals and metal products ................................................
Iron.and steel ..............................................................
Steel mill products.........................................................
Nonferrous metals.........................................................
Metal containers ..........................................................
Hardware...................................................................
Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings.....................................
Heating equipment.........................................................
Fabricated structural metal products...................................
Miscellaneous metal products...........................................

300.4
333.8
337.6
'285.8
'315.6
'263.2
'267.5
'224.2
'295.5
'270.5

302.0
338.8
344.9
282.8
315.2
263.8
270.9
226.4
297.9
272.0

304.1
339.9
344.9
287.3
318.7
265.3
271.2
227.9
299.3
272.9

304.9
339.8
345.3
289.4
318.8
267.8
271.6
228.5
300.0
273.7

305.3
341.3
348.7
285.4
318.2
269.5
272.9
229.0
302.6
276.1

304.2
340.0
348.6
281.1
318.1
271.5
273.1
228.8
303.2
278.0

303.3
339.9
348.9
277.1
316.8
272.0
274.0
229.9
303.0
278.3

304.7
343.1
350.6
274.4
324.3
274.1
274.6
233.4
303.4
281.2

304.2
342.9
350.3
273.6
326.2
274.8
276.4
233.1
304.0
278.7

'302.9
'342.5
350.5
'267.2
'327.2
'278.2
'279.1
'235.4
304.5
'279.0

303.8
342.6
352.2
266.1
329.7
276.2
280.3
235.8
305.0
285.3

303.4
341.2
352.1
263.5
330.1
276.7
281.0
237.3
304.8
290.0

300.1
338.3
349.9
253.7
330.2
277.9
282.5
238.6
305.2'
289.5

300.2
337.4
349.1
256.1
329.9
278.9
283.0
239.1
303.8
288.8

11
11-1
11-2
11-3
11-4
11-6
11-7
11-9

Machinery and equipment ..................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment.................................
Construction machinery and equipment................................
Metalworking machinery and equipment ..............................
General purpose machinery and equipment...........................
Special industry machinery and equipment ...........................
Electrical machinery and equipment ...................................
Miscellaneous machinery................................................

'263.3
'288.3
320.8
'301.3
'288.7
'307.9
'220.2
'252.6

264.8
288.1
323.8
302.9
290.6
311.0
221.1
254.0

266.2
290.3
325.0
303.5
292.3
310.3
222.8
256.0

268.1
292.8
326.5
305.3
293.9
312.8
224.2
258.5

269.3
295.5
328.3
306.6
295.1
314.6
225.3
259.0

270.4
300.8
329.6
307.9
296.2
315.0
226.0
259.8

272.0
302.8
332.0
312.9
297.9
316.4
227.0
260.4

274.1
303.1
337.0
315.9
300.0
320.4
228.7
261.4

275.4
304.6
337.9
317.2
301.3
320.7
229.5
264.0

'276.2
'306.4
'339.2
'317.8
'302.0
'321.3
'230.3
'264.9

277.3
306.1
341.4
318.7
302.9
323.1
231.6
265.4

278.1
307.0
343.4
320.3
303.3
324.1
231.7
267.2

278.4
308.8
343.7
320.8
303.1
324.7
231.9
268.0

279.4
310.2
346.1
321.9
304.4
327.1
232.0
268.9

12
12-1
12-2
12-3
12-4
12-5
12-6

Furniture and household durables ........................................
Household furniture.......................................................
Commercial furniture.....................................................
Floor coverings............................................................
Household appliances ....................................................
Home electronic equipment .............................................
Other household durable goods ........................................

'198.5
'219.7
'257.5
'178.7
'187.3
'89.2
'281.0

199.5
220.0
258.7
182.8
188.8
87.4
282.1

199.6
220.7
259.1
181.9
189.1
87.6
280.9

201.0
222.2
261.6
181.7
190.1
87.8
285.8

201.3
222.8
262.1
180.9
190.8
88.1
285.8

202.1
225.1
263.3
182.3
190.9
88.0
285.3

202.9
226.6
263.9
181.4
191.3
89.6
286.2

203.5
227.5
266.7
180.3
193.4
89.3
283.4

204.6
227.4
271.2
180.6
195.3
89.6
283.7

'205.5
'227.6
'273.6
'180.6
'197.3
'89.1
'285.0

205.6
230.6
274.5
180.3
196.3
88.2
283.5

206.1
230.9
275.5
180.5
197.8
88.1
283.1

206.6
231.1
276.2
180.7
198.5
88.2
284.6

206.8
230.9
277.8
180.1
199.3
88.2
283.6

13
13-11
13-2
13-3
13-4
13-5
13-6
13-7
13-8
13-9

Nonmetallic mineral products...............................................
Flat glass ...................................................................
Concrete ingredients .....................................................
Concrete products.........................................................
Structural clay products, excluding refractories ......................
Refractories ...............................................................
Asphalt roofing ............................................................
Gypsum products ......................... ...............................
Glass containers ..........................................................
Other nonmetallic minerals...............................................

309.5
'212.6
296.3
291.2
'249.8
'302.4
'407.5
256.2
'328.7
'463.8

314.3
218.3
297.7
293.4
250.9
307.1
421.9
259.7
335.5
476.2

314.1
218.3
298.0
293.4
250.9
307.1
420.9
255.3
335.5
475.3

313.2
218.3
298.5
292.9
255.3
307.1
401.6
252.9
335.5
474.3

313.3
218.5
298.4
293.3
256.2
307.8
402.9
252.4
335.5
473.3

313.7
218.5
298.5
293.4
256.5
308.9
410.2
251.3
335.5
473.5

313.5
216.1
298.7
293.6
257.5
311.3
405.6
249.7
335.5
474.7

315.6
216.2
306.2
295.5
257.5
316.8
401.3
250.4
335.4
474.7

319.0
216.2
308.4
295.9
257.7
335.1
400.4
255.0
352.2
478.7

'319.9
216.2
'309.8
'296.3
'257.7
'337.4
'394.4
260.7
'356.0
'479.6

320.0
216.2
309.2
297.3
260.7
339.7
385.2
262.8
357.4
478.8

319.1
216.2
310.7
297.1
258.1
A\)A
384.0
259.4
357.4
472.1

318.7
216.2
310.9
297.9
258.4
340.9
388.8
256.4
357.4
465.2

320.3
226.1
310.6
298.2
258.8
340.9
392.3
255.8
357.4
466.4

14
14-1
14-4

Transportation equipment (12/68 = 100)................................
Motor vehicles and equipment ..........................................
Railroad equipment .......................................................

235.4
'237.6
'336.1

235.0
237.4
338.1

235.9
238.4
338.7

231.8
232.8
338.7

244.5
247.8
338.7

246.3
248.9
341.3

246.8
249.5
340.1

248.6
250.8
345.8

245.2 '245.2
246.8 '246.8
345.8 '346.3

245.6
246.6
353.9

247.2
248.7
349.6

249.6
251.5
349.6

250.4
252.5
349.3

15
15-1
15-2
15-3
15-4
15-5
15-9

Miscellaneous products.....................................................
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, ammunition.......................
Tobacco products .........................................................
Notions......................................................................
Photographic equipment and supplies .................................
Mobile homes (12/74 = 100)...........................................
Other miscellaneous products .........................................

' 265.7
'211.9
268.3
'259.8
'210.0
156.8
'347.4

263.2
213.2
268.8
267.5
211.4
158.1
333.1

262.6
212.7
268.8
267.7
207.1
158.3
3346

267.0
213.6
274.5
267.8
208.7
158.7
345.5

268.5
213.0
278.2
269.7
208.9
159.1
348.5

269.5
212.7
278.2
269.7
209.0
159.3
344.8

267.6
213.3
278.2
269.7
209.1
159.3
344.6

268.3
218.4
278.2
270.3
209.9
159.5
342.2

273.5
220.1
306.6
270.4
210.5
159.6
341.1

'272.7
'220.7
'306.6
'271.5
'212.1
'161.9
'334.5

273.3
221.9
306.5
271.8
214.6
162.0
333.5

272.3
222.7
306.7
280.3
210.9
162.1
330.8

271.6
222.9
306.7
280.3
210.8
162.5
328.0

273.8
222.9
311.3
280.3
210.6
162.5
333.1

1Data for March 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by
respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.
2Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month.
3Includes only domestic production.


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

4Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month,
5Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month.
r=revised.

79

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
23.

Producer Price Indexes, for special commodity groupings

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
Annual
Com m odity grouping

All com m odities
A ll f o o d s

le s s fa rm p ro d u c ts

1981

1982

average

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

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

P ro c e s s e d f o o d s ...........................................................................

Industrial commodities less f u e l s ..........................................
Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 1 0 0 ) ............
H o s ie r y ......................................................................................
Underwear and n ig h tw e a r......................................................
Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber
and fibers and y a r n s ...........................................................
Pharmaceutical p re p a ra tio n s .................................................
Lumber and wood products, excluding m illwork ...............
Steel mill products, including fabricated wire products . . .
Finished steel mill products, excluding fabricated wire
p ro d u c ts .................................................................................
Finished steel miil products, including fabricated wire
p ro d u c ts .................................................................................

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r.1

Apr.

May

June

July

295.7
'251.8
'252.1
263.7
'135.8
134.3
'203.4

298.0
255.2
256.0
265.0
136.8
135.8
204.7

298.7
253.7
255.0
266.1
137.2
135.3
204.7

298.5
251.7
252.8
266.4
138.1
135.5
204.7

299.5
249.1
250.0
268.7
138.2
136.5
204.7

299.4
247.4
247.6
269.0
138.4
136.5
205.7

300.0
247.6
246.5
269.4
137.9
136.7
206.3

302.0
251.6
250.5
271.1
139.3
136.9
213.9

301.9
253.2
251.9
271.5
139.7
136.9
215.6

301.4
'251.6
252.1
'271.7
139.0
137.5
'215.9

300.9
254.4
254.9
272.2
138.9
138.1
216.4

301.1
257.9
259.0
272.8
138.9
138.5
216.3

302.3
259.0
260.9
272.5
138.1
138.5
217.8

304.1
356.8
259.8
272.7
137.5
138.5
218.0

'278.4

282.3

284.0

284.4

283.8

283.2

283.1

284.3

285.1

'285.6

285.7

287.3

284.8

283.0

'186.9
'303.0
337.6

189.0
308.7
344.9

188.4
306.2
344.9

191.6
298.0
345.3

192.8
290.1
348.7

192.5
286.4
348.6

193.3
290.7
348.9

196.8
289.9
350.6

199.3
287.9
350.3

'201.1
'288.5
350.5

204.4
289.9
352.2

205.3
287.2
352.1

205.3
294.0
349.9

205,7
294.6
348.7

336.2

343.3

343.3

343.7

347.4

347.2

347.5

349.3

348.9

349.2

351.0

350.9

348.6

347.7

336.2

343.3

343.3

343.7

347.4

347.2

347.5

349.3

348.9

349.2

351.0

350.9

348.6

347.4

285.8
294.6
180.0
271.8
305.7

286.3
294.0
179.5
272.8
307.2

Special metals and metal products .....................................
Fabricated metal products ....................................................
Copper and copper products ...............................................
Machinery and motive p ro d u c ts ............................................
Machinery and equipment, except e le c tric a l......................

279.4
280.0
'203.8
256.7
'288.5

280.2
281.7
202.5
257.4
290.4

281.9
283.1
206.2
258.6
291.7

280.1
283.9
205.1
257.7
293.8

286.7
286,0
201.9
264.3
295.0

286.8
287.0
198.9
265.8
296.4

286.6
287.1
195.4
266.9
298.4

287.9
289.4
194.5
268.9
300.7

286.0
289.0
194.1
268.1
302.3

285.3
'289.9
'190.8
'268.5
'303.1

285.7
292.5
190.5
269.3
304.1

286.4
294.3
191.6
270.5
305.2

Agricultural machinery, including tr a c t o r s ...........................
Metalworking m a c h in e ry .........................................................
Numerically controlled machine tools (Dec. 1971 = 100)
Total tr a c to r s .............................................................................
Agricultural machinery and equipment less parts ............

'297.3
'329.7
'239.3
'324.7
'289 8

295.6
330.1
241.7
325.5
288.6

298.2
331.4
241.8
327.8
291.1

301.6
333.9
241.8
330.7
294.0

305.7
336.7
241.8
338.3
297.6

312.5
338.3
242.2
342.2
303.5

314.7
341.2
242.0
342.3
305.8

315.1
343.8
240.1
346.9
306.5

316.0
344.9
239.8
346.9
307.4

'318.4
346.4
'239.9
'349.1
'309.7

317.7
348.8
240.2
351.7
309.2

318.2
349.4
240.3
352.4
309.6

319.8
350.3
240.3
353.2
311.0

320.5
352.7
239.6
354.2
311.8

Farm and garden tractors less parts ...................................
Agricultural machinery, excluding tractors less parts . . . .
Industrial v a lv e s ........................................................................
Industrial fittin g s ........................................................................
Construction m aterials ...........................................................

'300.1
'295.2
'315.9
302.1
283.0

298.0
293.9
317.5
303.0
285.7

301.4
295.8
319.8
303.0
285.5

305.5
298.7
322.7
304.3
284.4

313.0
299.9
322.4
304.1
284.6

319.6
303.5
323.4
304.1
284.1

319.7
310.9
325.3
304.1
285.2

319.7
311.6
328.6
304.1
286.6

319.7
313.2
330.2
304.1
286.9

'323.5
'314.6
'330.5
304.1
'287.5

322.3
314.3
327.7
309.1
288.1

322.9
314.7
327.9
309.1
287.9

324.3
316.5
327.2
309.1
289.1

324.2
317.7
329.2
310.2
289.0

Feb.

M a r.1

Apr.

May

1 Data for March 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.

24.

r=revised,

Producer Price Indexes, by durability of product

[1967=100]
Annual
Com m odity grouping

1982

1981

average
July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Total durable goods .................................................................
Total nondurable goods............................................................

269.8
312.4

270.8
316.8

271.9
316.2

271.8
315.0

275.0
312.8

275.4
311.4

276.0
311.4

277.6
314.7

277.4
315.4

'277.4
314.2

278.1
313.5

278.4
314.5

278.4
316.0

279.1
317.7

Total manufactures...................................................................
D urable..............................................................................
Nondurable ........................................................................

'286.0
269.7
303.6

288.0
270.6
306.9

288.6
271.7
306.9

288.3
271.7
306.3

289.8
275.1
305.5

289.7
275.8
304.5

289.9
276.5
304.3

291.9
278.0
306.8

292.0
277.8
307,2

'291.4
277.8
'305.9

290.9
278.7
303.9

291.3
279.1
304.1

292.4
279.4
306.2

293.9
280.1
308.6

Total raw or slightly processed goods ....................................
D urable..............................................................................
Nondurable .......................................................................

330.7
'271.2
334.0

337.9
271.2
341.8

335.8
275.9
339.1

332.7
270.4
336.3

326.4
263.7
330.0

323.3
253.4
327.4

323.6
247.8
328.2

328.9
253.8
333.4

330.6
253.7
335.2

'329.7
'250.1
'334.5

332.2
245.9
337.5

334.9
239.4
340.8

333.6
225.2
340.6

333.3
225.0
340.2

1 Data for March 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections
by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.

25.

June

July

1981

r=revised,

Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967=100 unless otherwise specified]
1972
SIC

Annual
Industry description

co d e

1981

1982

average
1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

M a r .1

Apr.

May

June

July

'167.6
346.0
'493.7
'898.6
'277.4
138.7

168.1
358.3
502.1
911.5
278.4
137.1

168.1
365.4
503.4
900.3
278.2
137.1

168.1
364.5
506.0
913.6
279.2
137.1

168.1
354.1
506.2
900.8
279.7
143.4

171.3
354.1
507.8
907.5
279.8
143.4

171.3
343.7
510.3
921.7
280.7
143.4

171.3
347.9
520.9
919.7
287.4
149.6

171.3
313.7
525.8
913.9
289.9
149.6

171.3
325.0
'524.9
'905.4
'293.1
149.6

171.3
327.0
527.2
894.9
292.2
151.7

177.1
308.3
529.4
902.0
294.4
151.7

177.1
307.5
529.8
915.1
295.2
151.7

177.1
306.2
533.5
925.3
295.3
151-.7

243.1
'241.4
192.0
274.8

252.6
246.0
203.6
273.8

250.9
254.0
201.2
273.7

252.7
253.9
188.8
275.0

244.1
252.2
175.5
279.2

237.0
248.9
172.8
279.5

234.1
247.0
166.7
275.0

237.6
245.6

244.4
251.0

'247.3
'248.6

253.3
253.4

264.3
265.9

265.7
273.7

258.4
272.2

(2)
275.0

( 2)
276.4

<2)
276.8

<2)
275.3

( 2)
274.9

(2)
274.9

( 2)
275.0

M IN IN G

1011
1092
1211
1311
1442
1455

Iron ores (12/75 - 1 0 0 ) ......................................................
Mercury ores (12/75 - 1 0 0 )...............................................
Bituminous coal and lignite .................................................
Crude petroleum and natural g a s ........................................
Construction sand and gravel .............................................
Kaolin and ball clay (6/76 - 100) ......................................

2011
2013
2016
2021

Meatpacking p la n ts ...............................................................
Sausages and other prepared meats ..................................
Poultry dressing plants ........................................................
Creamery b u tte r...................................................................

MANUFACTURING

See footnotes at end of table.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
80
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

25.

Continued — Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972

Annual

»

1982

1981

Industry description

SIC
code

1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.1

Apr.

May

June

July

MANUFACTURING - Continued

2022
2024
2033
2034
2041
2044
2048
2061
2063
2067

Cheese, natural and processed (12/72 = 100)............
Ice cream and frozen desserts (12/72 = 100) ............
Canned fruits and vegetables.................................
Dehydrated food products (12/73 = 100)..................
Flour mills (12/71 = 100) .....................................
Rice milling.......................................................
Prepared foods, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100).......................
Raw cane sugar ................................................
Beet sugar .......................................................
Chewing gum ....................................................

'215.7
211.9
248.5
177.6
'196.0
277.2
'124.5
273.5
'314.3
309.8

213.8
212.7
251.6
180.5
196.5
297.4
125.9
272.2
274.1
303.1

214.5
212.7
252.9
178.7
191.0
284.3
124.8
254.6
287.5
303.2

215.0
212.7
254.3
183.4
195.3
268.2
119.6
212.3
270.7
303.2

215.4
212.5
257.0
182.1
191.1
247.3
117.3
219.9
250.3
303.2

215.9
212.5
256.4
181.4
191.5
235.4
116.4
224.3
230.4
303.2

218.4
212.7
258.9
182.1
189.2
215.1
116.0
230.8
250.5
303.2

218.6
212.8
260.8
184.0
191.5
205.9
116.0
247.6
266.4
303.3

217.9
212.8
262.6
181.8
187.5
192.2
115.9
245.1
272.2
303.3

'216.7
210.9
'262.4
181.5
187.3
183.5
'114.6
233.0
'272.2
'303.3

216.6
214.2
261.5
181.5
192.5
177.9
115.4
242.9
272.6
303.4

217.1
214.2
262.3
178.5
188.4
183.0
116.7
269.2
280.2
303.4

217.9
214.2
264.6
178.5
189.1
180.3
115.7
286.7
280.2
303.4

218.6
213.6
265.5
180.4
185.5
177.6
115.4
311.5
290.5
303.3

2074
2075
2077
2083
2085
2091
2092
2095
2098
2111

Cottonseed oil mills.............................................
Soybean oil mills................................................
Animal and marine fats and oils ..............................
Malt ...............................................................
Distilled liquor, except brandy (12/75 = 100) .............
Canned and cured seafoods (12/73 = 100) ...............
Fresh or frozen packaged fish ................................
Roasted coffee (12/72 - 100)...............................
Macaroni and spaghetti ........................................
Cigarettes.........................................................

199.0
245.8
'288.0
282.5
134.7
187.8
'369.1
'238.1
252.0
277.7

212.0
253.7
288.8
286.1
134.6
187.4
367.6
236.4
259.5
278.3

206.0
245.8
294.1
286.1
135.5
188.4
347.1
235.7
259.5
278.3

182.3
234.2
281.2
275.4
135.5
188.8
353.5
237.3
259.5
284.2

172.0
229.7
274.0
275.4
135.5
188.2
356.9
238.2
259.5288.4

167.2
221.2
272.3
275.4
137.9
188.3
360.8
239.2
259.5
288.4

182.4
221.9
266.6
275.4
137.9
188.5
369.5
240.4
259.5
288.4

184.9
223.1
260.4
267.1
140.1
187.2
396.8
245.1
259.5
288.4

170.5
220.4
262.6
267.1
137.9
187.0
389.2
247.7
259.5
319.7

'158.1
'216.6
271.8
267.1
140.2
187.7
'419.1
'248.8
259.5
319.7

164.6
225.0
273.3
259.1
140.2
188.2
433.8
250.7
259.5
319.7

167.9
232.0
271.5
2598
139.8
188.0
427.5
247.9
259.5
319.8

170.2
226.4
272.3
259.8
139.8
188.4
442.8
247.6
259.5
319.8

174.6
224.1
264.3
259.8
139.8
187.8
418.9
247.0
259.5
324.9

2121
2131
2211
2221
2251
2254
2257
2261
2262

Cigars ............................................................
Chewing and smoking tobacco................................
Weaving mills, cotton (12/72 - 100) .......................
Weaving mills, synthetic (12/77 = 100) ....................
Women’s hosiery, except socks (12/75 - 100)............
Knit underwear mills ...........................................
Circular knit fabric mills (6/76 - 100).......................
Finishing plants, cotton (6/76 - 100) .......................
Finishing plants, synthetics, silk (6/76 = 100) .............

'170.0
'320.7
'232.7
'136.7
113.5
210.2
'110.9
144.9
126.5

169.7
321.0
234.7
138.0
115.5
210.7
111.0
146.3
127.1

169.7
321.3
237.4
139.3
115.0
210.8
112.0
146.2
127.8

174.5
325.3
236.0
139.5
115.0
210.9
111.9
145.4
129.0

174.5
326.1
233.2
139.4
115.2
210.9
112.0
144.9
129.1

174.5
326.1
229.8
139.8
115.1
212.8
112.4
143.5
129.1

174.5
326.1
227.6
139.5
115.2
213.0
111.8
141.4
128.6

174.5
326.1
227.3
139.8
115.6
225.2
112.4
140.5
129.4

178.6
349.4
227.1
139.7
115.6
225.2
113.2
140.3
129.9

'178.6
349.4
'226.4
'140.0
'116.1
'225.9
'110.7
140.8
'128.5

176.8
349.4
226.1
139.2
116.3
235.6
110.1
141.6
128.1

176.6
353.6
227.7
138.9
117.0
226.0
109.7
141.4
128.2

176.6
353.6
226.0
138.0
117.0
228.7
108.2
141.3
127.2

176.6
358.3
222.0
137.5
117.0
230.8
108.6
140.2
126.7

2272
2281
2282
2284
2298
2311
2321
2322
2323
2327

Tufted carpets and rugs........................................
Yarn mills, except wool (12/71 = 100) .....................
Throwing and winding mills (6/76 = 100) ..................
Thread mills (6/76 - 100)....................................
Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100)..........................
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats..............................
Men’s and boys' shirts and nightwear .......................
Men's and boys' underwear...................................
Men’s and boys' neckwear (12/75 = 100) ................
Men’s and boys' separate trousers...........................

'154.2
'221.7
'139.3
151.4
134.8
'224.0
'209.5
230.6
114.6
'186.2

158.3
225.1
142.7
151.1
134.3
225.9
210.5
230.8
113.9
186.4

157.4
225.4
146.8
151.1
134.3
226.2
210.6
230.8
113.9
186.4

157.3
223.8
148.0
154.8
139.3
226.5
211.5
230.8
113.9
186.4

155.7
222.4
154.5
157.0
139.3
227.4
212.4
230.8
113.9
186.8

157.0
219.9
145.6
157.0
139.3
228.4
212.6
233.0
113.9
186.9

156.7
217.2
146.0
156.8
140.7
230.5
213.4
233.0
113.9
187.1

155.5
216.3
145.7
156.8
141.0
233.7
173.4
246.9
115.3
188.4

155.7
215.7
150.3
156.8
141.0
233.6
215.9
246.9
117.3
188.4

155.7
'215.4
'150.0
156.8
141.0
'233.8
'216.9
247.4
117.3
'188.4

156.1
214.6
150.9
156.7
141.0
234.3
193.1
247.4
117.3
193.0

156.4
214.9
152.6
156.6
141.0
234.6
173.6
247.4
117.3
194.9

156.9
214.0
149.3
156.5
141.0
235.3
215.7
251.2
121.3
195.0

156.1
213.7
149.0
156.5
141.0
237.2
216.0
251.2
121.3
195.6

2328
2331
2335
2341
2342
2361
2381
2394
2396
2421

Men's and boys' work clothing ................................
Women's and misses’ blouses and waists (6/78 = 100) .
Women's and misses' dresses (12/77 = 100).............
Women's and children’s underwear (12/72 = 100) .......
Brassieres and allied garments (12/75 = 100) ............
Children’s dresses and blouses (12/77 = 100)............
Fabric dress and work gloves.................................
Canvas and related products (12/77 = 100)...............
Automotive and apparel trimmings (12/77 = 100)........
Sawmills and planing mills (12/71 - 100)..................

'248.6
'120.6
'121.3
'169.7
'136.7
'120.9
289.3
'132.0
131.0
228.2

250.8
121.0
123.0
170.6
138.8
121.6
289.2
130.1
131.0
233.5

251.1
121.2
124.3
170.6
138.8
121.7
289.2
133.1
131.0
231.2

251.2
121.3
123.5
170.6
138.8
121.7
289.2
134.6
131.0
225.2

253.1
126.4
123.4
170.6
138.8
122.0
289.2
137.6
131.0
219.5

253.2
126.7
124.1
171.6
138.9
122.5
289.2
137.6
131.0
216.5

253.3
126.7
122.7
171.6
140.1
123.2
289.2
139.7
131.0
218.6

252.5
126.5
123.0
174.7
145.1
123.2
293.8
144.9
131.0
218.0

254.2
126.5
123.0
174.8
148.8
123.2
297.4
144.9
131.0
216.9

'254.9
'126.5
'123.1
'175.0
'148.8
'123.2
295.5
'147.2
131.0
'216.9

253.8
123.8
122,9
175.7
149.2
121.0
295.5
146.3
131.0
218.4

253.7
123.7
122.9
177.2
148.5
121.0
295.5
146.5
131.0
216.8

254.1
123.7
123.1
179.4
148.5
121.0
294.5
143.8
131.0
219.7

252.9
123.6
123.7
179.4
148.4
119.4
294.5
143.8
131.0
221.6

2436
2439
2448
2451
2492
2511
2512
2515
2521
2611

Softwood veneer and plywood (12/75 = 100).............
Structural wood members, n.e.c. (12/75 - 100) ..........
Wood pallets and skids (12/75 - 100)......................
Mobile homes (12/74 - 100).................................
Particleboard (12/75 = 100) .................................
Wood household furniture (12/71 = 100) ..................
Upholstered household furniture (12/71 = 100)............
Mattresses and bedsprings.....................................
Wood office furniture ...........................................
Pulp mills (12/73 = 100)......................................

142.0
156.6
152.5
'156.9
'173.6
197.4
'174.0
'192.3
'254.2
'252.4

143.8
157.6
153.1
158.1
179.6
198.6
175.1
191.3
254.7
251.3

139.6
156.9
152.9
158.3
173.6
199.2
175.1
194.6
254.7
251.3

135.4
156.6
152.8
158.7
170.5
200.1
175.3
195.2
257.1
251.3

129.3
154.8
152.0
159.2
168.0
201.0
175.6
195.2
257.1
255.0

129.0
154.2
150.4
159.3
166.9
202.0
179.5
197.5
257.0
262.5

134.5
153.2
149.9
160.3
170.3
202.8
182.1
198.0
257.6
262.5

132.5
153.9
149.8
160.4
172.6
203.6
184.4
204.4
261.9
258.6

130.5
153.5
149.0
160.5
170.7
204.3
179.3
205.6
270.7
258.6

'131.8
'152.6
'148.2
162.7
'177.7
'205.1
'179.3
'205.6
'270.8
'260.7

129.2
152.9
145.8
162.9
176.8
207.0
184.6
210.1
271.9
255.8

126.0
151.5
144.6
163.1
176.7
207.3
185.1
210.3
271.9
254.8

133.3
152.9
144.2
163.4
176.9
207.6
185.1
210.3
271.9
246.5

129.6
154.5
144.1
163.4
175.4
208.1
184.1
210.1
272.0
238.5

2621
2631
2647
2654
2655
2812
2821
2822
2824
2873

Paper mills, except building (12/74 = 100)................
Paperboard mills (12/74 - 100) ............................
Sanitary paper products........................................
Sanitary food containers ......................................
Fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) ..
Alkalies and chlorine (12/73 = 100).........................
Plastics materials and resins (6/76 - 100).................
Synthetic rubber ................................................
Organic fiber, noncellulosic....................................
Nitrogenous fertilizers (12/75 - 100) .......................

'156.2
'151.7
'343.4
'244.8
163.0
'305.9
150.8
'293.3
'155.6
'142.8

157.0
151.7
344.2
246.0
163.2
306.2
155.0
297.3
159.2
143.5

157.4
152.4
344.3
252.9
163.2
310.4
155.6
299.4
160.3
143.9

158.8
153.7
344.3
253.2
163.2
316.0
156.0
299.3
160.6
142.1

159.8
153.6
344.0
253.4
167.6
317.7
156.3
301.0
164.2
142.9

159.7
153.5
344.1
253.3
167.6
317.0
153.7
301.4
162.5
144.2

159.6
152.7
344.6
253.3
170.0
324.8
154.3
302.7
161.9
142.9

162.0
152.5
344.6
254.0
176.4
329.4
150.7
303.9
161.8
142.4

162.0
153.4
344.6
256.9
176.5
335.2
152.6
306.1
162.9
142.6

'162.0
'153.0
'344.5
'260.0
176.5
'335.6
'151.0
'306.7
'161.6
142.2

161.8
153.0
345.5
261.4
176.5
322.1
151.2
306.6
161.7
142.7

160.5
151.5
344.7
261.4
176.7
338.2
151.9
307.1
161.7
141.1

160.8
150.0
347.3
261.4
176.7
338.2
150.7
303.8
161.3
139.5

160.7
149.1
346.4
261.4
176.7
324.4
150.2
301.8
160.5
136.1

2874
2875
2892
2911
2951
2952
3011

Phosphatic fertilizers ...........................................
Fertilizers, mixing only ..........................................
Explosives .......................................................
Petroleum refining (6/76 = 100) ............................
Paving mixtures and blocks (12/75 = 100).................
Asphalt felts and coatings (12/75 = 100)..................
Tires and inner tubes (12/73 = 100) .......................

254.1
'270.7
'311.9
294.4
194.3
'176.9
'215.8

249.4
275.3
315.7
299.1
197.1
182.8
213.1

260.0
273.0
319.8
297.5
196.3
182.3
215.5

259.4
272.0
316.5
295.8
196.0
174.3
220.6

259.4
273.8
318.7
294.6
196.3
174.9
221.0

258.5
273.7
316.5
293.3
196.4
178.1
220.1

259.0
270.5
315.6
293.1
196.0
176.1
221.2

261.0
274.3
314.9
293.0
197.0
174.2
222.0

263.5
276.8
317.6
289.1
198.0
173.8
222.4

'261.6
'278.4
'320.5
'281.7
'198.1
'171.2
'220.3

258.5
278.4
322.2
267.5
197.1
167.4
220.9

256.2
278.5
321.4
259.2
196.6
167.7
221.2

257.6
278.8
319.6
267.7
195.1
169.8
221.5

256.6
278.6
318.4
281.4
194.8
171.3
221.7


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

81

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices
25.

Continued— Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries

[1967= 100 unless otherwise specified]
1972
SIC
code

Industry description

Annual
average
1981

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.1

Apr.

May

June

July

1981

3021
3031
3079
3111
3143
3144
3171
3211
3221

Rubber and plastic footwear (12/71 = 100) ..
Reclaimed rubber (12/73 =100) ......
Miscellaneous plastic products (6/78 = 100)
Leather tanning and finishing (12/77 = 100)
Men’s footwear, except athletic (12/75 = 100) .
Women's footwear, except athletic....................
Women's handbags and purses (12/75 = 100) .
Flat glass (12/71 = 100) .................
Glass containers...............

184.4
r 194.1
r 128.9
r 150.7
r 169.3
r217.1
155.5
r 175.3
'328.6

185.0
192.9
129.2
151.3
170.7
218.9
158.4
180.0
335.4

185.4
200.3
130.2
148.5
171.4
217.8
158.4
180.0
335.4

185.3
200.3
130.3
148.3
170.9
218.2
158.4
180.0
335.4

1850
200.3
130.8
148.2
170.5
212.5
158.4
180.1
335.4

185.0
200.3
130.8
146.8
170.6
212.7
158.4
180.1
335.4

185.2
200.3
131.0
147.5
171.3
212.4
158.4
177.4
335.4

186.1
200.3
131.1
150.8
173.1
208.5
158.4
177.5
335.3

188.4
200.4
131.6
149.3
172.2
209.8
158.4
177.5
352.1

189.1
'207.2
'132.8
'147.9
'173.5
'210.3
158.4
177.5
'355.8

189.0
206.9
132.9
147.5
174.9
215.6
158.4
177.5
357.3

186.7
207.2
132.7
147.3
175.1
213.4
158.4
177.5
357.3

187.0
208.4
132.9
146.9
175.2
215.2
158.4
177.5
357.3

187.0
207.7
132.6
147.5
171.6
216.3
158.5
187.7
357.3

3241
3251
3253
3255
3259
3261
3262
3263
3269
3271

Cement, hydraulic..................
Brick and structural clay tile.............
Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) .
Clay refractories...................................
Structural clay products, n.e.c....................
Vitreous plumbing fixtures ....................
Vitreous china food utensils ............................
Fine earthenware food utensils...............
Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100)..................
Concrete block and brick...................................

r329.6
r296.5
'133.4
'310.2
'222.6
254.9
335.0
'309.1
160.1
270.4

331.6
298.9
132.1
312.3
223.9
258.7
336.6
309.6
160.7
271.2

331.6
298.9
132.1
312.3
223.9
259.6
336.6
309.6
160.7
274.0

332.0
299.9
140.4
312.5
227.5
259.0
336.8
313.8
161.8
274.2

330.3
299.9
140.4
313.9
231.7
259.0
336.8
313.8
161.8
274.3

330.3
300.5
140.4
315.2
231.7
259.3
344.7
315.0
163.7
274.2

330.3
300.5
140.4
319.9
236.6
260.1
344,7
315.0
163.7
275.1

339.6
298.9
140.4
329.6
225.6
261.1
347.7
315.1
164.3
274.9

341.5
299.4
140,4
354.4
226.0
260.6
347.7
315.1
164.3
276.4

'341.5
'299.4
'140.4
'355.6
'225.9
'260.8
347.3
'315.0
'164.2
'276.4

337.9
295.9
137.1
357.0
202.4
261.9
336.2
312.8
161.4
276.4

338.6
305.8
138.0
357.2
216.4
265.4
345.2
314.1
163.6
276.6

338.7
306.4
138.0
357.1
216.5
265.5
349,8
314.8
164.8
277.0

337,8
307.2
138.0
357.2
216.4
264.2
349.8
314.8
164.7
277.1

3273
3274
3275
3291
3297
3312
3313
3316
3317
3321

Ready-mixed concrete.........................
Lime (12/75 = 100)................................
Gypsum products .........................
Abrasive products (12/71 = 100) ..........................
Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 100)...............
Blast furnaces and steel mills ................
Electrometallurgical products (12/75 = 100) ... .
Cold finishing of steel shapes........
Steel pipes and tubes.........................
Gray iron foundries (12/68 = 100)......................

298.7
172.5
'256.9
'232.9
185.3
342.8
121.8
316.2
341.5
'299.7

300.7
173.1
261.8
235.0
189.7
350.1
121.2
325.0
348.2
298.8

300.0
173.9
258.9
235.1
189.7
350.0
121.5
325.7
350.6
299.9

299.2
173.7
252.9
237.3
189.7
350.3
121.4
326.2
350.5
302.0

2995
173.7
251.5
237.6
189.7
353.1
125.4
326.4
362.0
303.3

299.4
173.5
252.5
241.0
190.2
353.0
125.4
326.4
362.3
305.2

299.6
173.8
250.6
241.0
190.3
353.3
125.3
326.7
363.0
306.1

301.9
178.8
250.9
241.3
191.2
354.7
125.3
327.0
363.7
307.9

301.9
183.7
253.9
248.3
198.3
354.4
123.4
327.0
364.1
310.0

'302.5
'185.7
260.5
'249.8
'200.4
'354.4
120.3
327.0
'365.8
'311.5

303.3
186.6
262.2
248.9
202.4
356.1
120.3
327.6
365.8
310.4

303.9
188.1
258.8
251.2
203.2
355.9
120.3
327.8
365.8
311.4

304.7
188.4
256.2
252.1
203.9
353.6
120.4
325.6
365.7
311.6

305.4
188.1
256.5
252.0
203.8
352.9
120.4
325.2
364.0
311.3

3333
3334
3351
3353
3354
3355
3411
3425
3431
3465

Primary zinc...................................
Primary aluminum.................................
Copper rolling and drawing ...................................
Aluminum sheet, plate, and foil (12/75 = 100) ................
Aluminum extruded products (12/75 = 100)........
Aluminum rolling, drawing, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) .. ..
Metal cans........................................
Hand saws and saw blades (12/72 = 100) ...............
Metal sanitary ware................................
Automotive stampings (12/75 = 100) ........

'326.3
'333.1
'212.3
'175.8
180.1
159.1
'305.1
'201.4
'265.5
'146.0

335.4
334.2
209.4
177.3
181.2
157.2
305.5
204.1
269.2
146.2

353.8
334.4
212.9
177.4
181.3
157.2
306.7
204.2
269.7
146.4

355.9
333.6
214.1
178.0
181.2
157.7
306.8
204.6
270.2
146.9

337.0
333.5
212.3
179.9
181.3
163.0
307.0
204.8
270.3
147.4

337.5
332.5
209.2
180.2
181.4
166.2
306.0
205.0
271.6
149.7

315.7
332.8
207.1
180.8
181.1
166.1
304.9
206.0
271.8
149.1

308.6
324.1
204.8
181.8
180.8
166.1
310.8
211.6
271.3
150.1

311.2
320.2
203.9
181.7
180.8
166.5
314.0
214.8
272.8
144.7

'292.0
'320.8
'198.4
'181.2
180.5
'166.3
'313.6
'214.9
'275.1
'144.2

273.4
316.5
196.6
180.1
179.9
162.9
319.6
214.9
275.8
152.7

259.9
3138
197.5
178.7
180.2
163.0
320.4
220.8
275.7
153.0

259.7
308.4
189.8
178.0
180.1
165.4
319.3
220.9
276.0
153.0

266.4
305.7
189.2
178.2
179.5
164.7
318.6
221.0
276.1
153.0

3482
3493
3494
3498
3519
3531
3532
3533
3534
3542

Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100) ....
Steel springs, except wire...........................
Valves and pipe fittings (12/71 = 100).................
Fabricated pipe and fittings ..................
Internal combustion engines, n.e.c.............................
Construction machinery (12/76 = 100) ... .
Mining machinery (12/72 = 100)....................
Oilfield machinery and equipment...........................
Elevators and moving stairways..............................
Machine tools, metal forming types (12/71 = 100)__

'159.0
'245.9
'248.9
'361.3
'311.9
'156.8
'282.5
'395.8
'253.9
'306.9

157.8
243.7
250.0
364.6
312.0
159.0
282.7
401.3
252.1
307.6

159.9
248.9
251.0
370.0
314.2
159.5
285.3
406.5
252.8
309.5

159.9
252.4
252.7
375.1
322.1
160.1
286.9
411.3
254.6
312.0

159.9
253.9
252.9
377.7
323.2
161.0
288.5
415.6
257.0
311.7

159.9
254.1
253.5
378.6
326.4
161.6
290.8
418.2
260.7
312.3

163.9
256.1
255.7
379.3
325.4
159.7
292.9
420.3
265.6
319.3

167.5
255.8
257.7
378.6
329.4
162.5
295.5
427.2
264.3
319.7

167.5
257.4
258.9
377.7
332.0
162.4
297.8
429.2
269.8
322.8

'167.5
'256.4
'259.1
'379.8
'332.6
'163.3
'300.9
'435.8
'271.6
324.5

171.9
256.0
258.6
385.5
332.6
164.1
301.4
436.2
270.8
325.5

171.9
255.3
259.2
385.4
337.0
165.2
302.7
435.8
271.6
325.6

175.9
255.2
259.0
385.4
337.7
165.3
303.5
437.8
273.5
326.5

175.9
253.1
260.1
383.8
339.6
166.5
304.0
438.4
275.5
333.6

3546
3552
3553
3576
3592
3612
3623
3631
3632
3633

Power driven hand tools (12/76 = 100).............
Textile machinery (12/69 = 100)...............
Woodworking machinery (12/72 = 100) ....
Scales and balances, excluding laboratory ........
Carburetors, pistons, rings, valves (6/76 = 100)......
Transformers.........................
Welding apparatus, electric (12/72 = 100).................
Household cooking equipment (12/75 = 100)...
Household refrigerators, freezers (6/76 = 100) ..
Household laundry equipment (12/73 = 100) ...

'147.3
'243.5
'225.0
226.2
'178.0
'209.9
'227.5
'141.2
'132.8
'174.3

148.2
246.2
224.0
226.6
180.8
210.7
228.3
140.5
135.5
174.1

148.4
245.4
225.4
226.6
181.3
212.8
229.6
141.5
135.5
174.6

148.6
248.2
228.9
226.1
182.1
214.5
231.6
141.6
136.4
177.2

149.5
248.0
228.9
226.2
185.4
217.3
232.5
141.6
137.8
177.0

149.5
247.9
229.1
226.3
187.2
222.0
233.2
141.9
137.9
178.4

150.0
249.9
229.1
226.5
187.3
222.0
235.8
142.6
137.9
178.8

153.3
252.3
233.7
228.3
185.3
220.5
236.8
146.0
140.1
180.1

153.2
253.5
232.9
228.8
189.6
222.2
236.9
146.8
141.1
180.5

'153.9
'255.0
'233.4
229.8
'190.4
222.4
'232.3
'147.2
'142.3
186.2

154.0
256.2
235.0
229.6
192.6
223.2
232.9
146.2
142.5
186.9

156.1
256.5
234.7
229.5
195.2
224.7
232.9
146.8
143.2
188.6

156.4
258.1
234.4
230.6
195.7
224.8
233.1
146.9
144.3
189.0

157.4
259.8
230.0
231.9
196.6
224.7
236.9
148.2
145.5
189.1

3635
3636
3641
3644
3646
3648
3671
3674
3675
3676

Household vacuum cleaners ..................
Sewing machines (12/75 = 100)......
Electric lamps.....................
Noncurrent-carrying wiring devices (12/72 = 100)
Commercial lighting fixtures (12/75 = 100) __
Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) ..................
Electron tubes receiving type...............
Semiconductors and related devices . .
Electronic capacitors (12/75 = 100) ...
Electronic resistors (12/75 = 100)........

'159.1
'146.8
'277.3
'249.6
'154.8
'155.9
309.7
'90.9
170.3
'141.4

158.6
153.8
275.2
253.3
154.4
153.8
327.4
89.2
171.4
142.1

158.8
153.8
280.0
253.8
155.5
161.3
327.5
89.2
178.8
142.5

158.8
153.8
283.1
258.5
157.6
161.7
327.5
91.4
172.4
142.7

161.3
156.0
285.9
258.7
158.9
162.0
327.5
91.6
171.5
142.7

161.0
156.0
284.8
262.1
159.3
162.4
327.8
92.0
168.1
143.0

160.8
156.0
281.3
262.1
159.2
163.1
342.2
91.7
166.6
142.8

165.6
156.0
282.1
257.9
159.2
162.8
374.1
90.9
167.4
143.7

165.2
155.8
286.1
259.0
161.1
167.8
374.2
90.2
169.7
144.0

'165.7
'155.8
'283.6
'258.1
'162.4
168.8
'374.4
'90.0
'168.4
'143.4

158.2
153.7
290.7
259.5
163.6
170.2
375.2
90.1
167.8
144.7

158.3
153.7
294.5
263.0
167.5
170.4
375.0
89.6
166.6
145.2

158,4
153.7
293.9
261.1
167.2
170.9
375.1
89.7
166.8
144.9

158.4
153.7
291.9
2607
166.5
171.1
3760
90.8
166.7
144.4

3678
3692
3711
3942
3944
3955
3995
3996

Electronic connectors (12/75 = 100)........
Primary batteries, dry and wet........
Motor vehicles and car bodies (12/75 = 100)...
Dolls (12/75 = 100)..............................
Games, toys, and children's vehicles ............
Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 = 100) . .
Burial caskets (6/76 = 100)............................
Hard surface floor coverings (12/75 = 100)........

'154.9
182.2
'150.3
'131.3
'221.3
'138.5
139.5
151.8

155.0
181.6
150.3
130.9
222.0
140.4
138.3
153.3

155.8
182.7
150.1
130.9
222.0
140.6
140.6
153.6

156.5
182.7
143.4
130.9
222.2
140.6
143.4
153.7

156.8
182.7
158.6
130.9
222.2
140.2
143.4
153.7

155.8
182.7
158.7
130.9
222.6
140.2
143.4
153.7

155.8
182.7
159.1
130.9
223.9
140.3
142.7
153.7

155.9
182.0
159.8
135.5
228.4
140.3
142.7
155.1

156.2
184.3
155.0
136.6
232.5
140.3
143.8
155.2

'156.7
'190.5
'154.9
'136.6
'234.1
140.3
145.3
156.1

156.7
195.4
154.5
136.5
231.4
140.3
145.3
156.1

158.1
194.9
156.7
136.5
231.7
140.5
149.3
156.3

158 3
195.8
159.6
136.5
231.7
140.6
149.3
154.3

157.6
196.3
159.7
136.5
231.8
140.5
150.8
155.0

1Data for March 1982 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by
respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication.

82

1982


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

2Not available,
r=revised.

PRODUCTIVITY DATA

P roductivity data are compiled by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics from establishment data and from estimates of com­
pensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of
Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board.

Definitions
O utput is the constant dollar gross domestic product produced in a
given period. Indexes of output per hour o f labor input, or labor pro­
ductivity, measure the value of goods and services produced per hour
of labor. C om pensation per hour includes wages and salaries of em­
ployees plus employers’ contributions for social insurance and private
benefit plans. The data also include an estimate of wages, salaries, and
supplementary payments for the self-employed, except for nonfinancial corporations, in which there are no self-employed. R eal com ­
pensation per hour is compensation per hour adjusted by the

Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
U n it labor co st measures the labor compensation cost required to
produce one unit of output and is derived by dividing compensation
by output. U n it nonlabor p aym ents include profits, depreciation, in­
terest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by
subtracting compensation of all persons from the current dollar gross
domestic product and dividing by output. In these tables, unit
nonlabor co sts contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments
except unit profits. U n it profits include corporate profits and invento­
ry valuation adjustments per unit of output.

The im plicit price deflator is derived by dividing the current dollar
estimate of gross product by the constant dollar estimate, making the
deflator, in effect, a price index for gross product of the sector reported.

26.

The use of the term “man hours” to identify the labor component
of productivity and costs, in tables 26 through 29, has been discontin­
ued. H ou rs of all persons is now used to describe the labor input of
payroll workers, self-employed persons, and unpaid family workers.
O utput per all-em p loyee hour is now used to describe labor productiv­
ity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed.

Notes on the data
In the business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the basis
for the output measure employed in the computation of output per
hour is Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National Product.
Computation of hours includes estimates of nonfarm and farm propri­
etor hours.
Output data are supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.
Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly
manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to annual estimates of output (gross product originating)
from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Compensation and hours data
are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Beginning with the September 1982 issue of the R ev ie w , all of the
productivity and cost measures contained in these tables are based on
revised output and compensation measures released by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis in July as part of the regular revision cycle of the
National Income and Product Accounts. Measures of labor input
have been revised to reflect results of the 1980 census, and seasonal
factors have been recomputed for use in the preparation of quarterly
measures. The word “private” will no longer be used as part of the
series title of one of the two business sector measures prepared by
BLS; no change has been made in the definition or content of the
measures as a result of this change.

A n n u a l in d e x e s o f p r o d u c t iv ity , h o u rly c o m p e n s a tio n , u n it c o s ts , a n d p r ic e s , s e le c te d y e a rs , 1950-8 1

[1977= 100]
Item
Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ....................
Compensation per hour ............................
Real compensation per hour.......................
Unit labor cost........................................
Unit nonlabor payments ............................
Implicit price deflator ................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ....................
Compensation per hour ............................
Real compensation per hour.......................
Unit labor cost........................................
Unit nonlabor payments ............................
Implicit price deflator ................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees ................
Compensation per hour ............................
Real compensation per hour.......................
Unit labor cost........................................
Unit nonlabor payments ............................
Implicit price deflator ................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons ....................
Compensation per hour ............................
Real compensation per hour.......................
Unit labor cost........................................
Unit nonlabor payments ............................
Implicit price deflator ................................
1Not available,
r = revised.


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

1980'

1981'

1950r

1955r

I960'

1965'

1970'

1974'

1975'

1976'

1977'

1978'

1979'

50.4
20.0
50.5
39.7
43.4
41.0

583
26.4
59.6
45.2
47.6
46.0

65.2
33.9
69.5
52.0
50.6
51.6

78.3
41.7
80.1
53.3
57.6
54.7

86.2
58.2
90.8
67.5
63.2
66.0

89.8
78.0
95.9
86.9
80.9
84.8

91.8
85.5
96.3
93.2
93.1
93.2

97.6
92.9
98.9
95.1
94.0
94.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.6
108.6
100.9
108.0
106.7
107.5

99.6
119.1
99.4
119.5
112.8
117.2

98.9
131.4
96.7
132.9
119.3
128.3

100.7
144.1
96.0
143.1
135.2
140.0

56.3
21.8
55.0
38.8
42.7
40.1

62.8
28.3
64.0
45.0
47.8
46.0

68.3
35.7
73.0
52.2
50.4
51.6

80.5
42.8
82.2
53.2
58.0
54.8

86.8
58.7
91.5
67.6
63.7
66.3

90.1
78.5
96.4
87.1
78.2
84.1

91.9
86.0
96.8
93.6
91.3
92.8

97.8
93.0
99.0
95.1
93.5
94.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.6
108.6
100.9
108.0
105.3
107.1

99.3
118.8
99.2
119.6
110.3
116.5

98.5
130.9
96.3
133.0
119.1
128.3

99.9
143.6
95.7
143.8
134.8
140.8

(’ )
(’ )
<’ >
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )

(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )

66.6
36.2
74.2
54.4
54.6
54.5

80.2
43.0
82.5
53.5
60.8
56.1

85.7
58.3
90.9
68.0
63.1
66.3

91.7
77.6
95.4
84.7
75.6
81.6

94.8
85.5
96.2
90.2
90.8
90.4

97.8
92.5
98.5
94.6
95.0
94.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.0
108.6
100.8
107.5
104.2
106.4

101.2
119.2
99.5
117.8
106.9
114.1

100.8
131.6
96.8
130.5
117.7
126.1

102.7
144.4
96.2
140.6
134.8
138.6

49.4
21.5
54.0
43.4
54.3
46.6

56.4
28.8
65.1
51.0
58.5
53.2

60.0
36.7
75.1
61.1
61.1
61.1

74.5
42.8
82.3
57.5
69.3
61.0

79.1
57.6
89.8
72.7
65.0
70.5

90.8
76.3
93.8
84.1
69.3
79.8

93.4
85.4
96.2
91.5
87.3
90.3

97.5
92.3
98.3
94.6
93.7
94.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.9
108.3
100.6
107.4
102.5
106.0

101.5
118.9
99.2
117.1
99.9
112.0

101.7
132.8
97.7
130.6
97.1
120.8

104.5
146.4
97.5
140.0
108.8
130.8

Note :

For explanation of revisions, see "Notes on the data."

83

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Productivity
27.

Annual changes in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1971-81

1971'

Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour................................
Real compensation per hour..........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour ................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator...................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees ....................
Compensation per hour ................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour ................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................

1972r

1973r

1974r

1975r

1976r

1977r

19 78 '

1980'

1979'

1981'

1950-81 '

1960-81 '

3.6
6.6
2.2
2.9
7.6
4.4

3.5
6.5
3.1
2.9
4.5
3.4

-0.2
8.0
1.6
8.2
8.8
8.4

-2.6
9.4
-1.4
12.3
4.6
9.7

2.2
9.6
0.5
7.3
15.1
9.8

6.4
8.6
2.6
2.0
1.0
1.7

2.4
7.7
1.2
5.1
6.4
5.6

0.6
8.6
0.9
8.0
6.7
7.5

-0.9
9.7
-1.4
10.7
5.7
9.0

-0.7
10.4
-2.8
11.2
5.8
9.4

1.8
9.6
-0.7
7.7
13.3
9.5

2.4
6.2
2.3
3.6
3.4
3.5

2.1
7.2
1.7
5.0
4.6
4.9

3.3
6.6
2.2
3.2
7.4
4.5

3.7
6.7
3.3
2.9
3.2
3.0

-0.4
7.6
1.3
8.0
4.2
6.7

-2.7
9.4
-1.4
12.5
6.2
10.4

1.9
9.6
0.4
7.5
16.8
10.4

6.5
8.1
2.2
1.6
2.5
1.9

2.2
7.5
1.0
5.2
6.9
5.7

0.6
8.6
0.9
8.0
5.3
7.1

-1.3
9.3
-1.7
10.7
4.7
8.8

-0.9
10.2
-2.9
11.2
8.0
10.2

1.4
9.7
-0.7
8.1
13.1
9.7

2.1
5.9
2.0
3.7
3.3
3.6

1.8
7.0
1.5
5.0
4.5
4.9

4.8
6.5
2.1
1.6
7.4
3.5

3.0
5.8
2.5
2.8
2.7
2.8

2.6
7.7
1.4
4.9
1.5
3.8

-3.4
9.7
-1.1
13.6
7.1
11.4

3.4
10.1
0.9
6.5
20.1
10.9

3.2
8.2
2.3
4.9
4.6
4.8

2.3
8.1
1.6
5.7
5.3
5.6

1.0
8.6
0.8
7.5
4.2
6.4

0.2
9.8
-1.3
9.6
2.6
7.2

-0.3
10.4
-2.8
10.7
10.1
10.5

1.8
9.7
-0.6
7.8
14.6
10.0

(1)

2.0
6.9
1.4
4.8
4.0
4.5

6.1
6.1
1.8
0.0
11.2
3.1

5.0
5.4
2.0
0.3
0.8
0.5

5.4
7.2
0.9
1.7
-3.3
0.3

-2.4
10.6
-0.3
13.3
-1.8
9.0

2.9
11.9
2.5
8.8
25.9
13.1

4.4
8.0
2.1
3.4
7.4
4.6

2.5
8.3
1.8
5.7
6.7
6.0

0.9
8.3
0.6
7.4
2.5
6.0

0.7
9.7
-1.4
9.0
-2.6
5.7

0.2
11.8
-1.6
11.6
-2.7
7.8

2.8
10.2
-0.2
7.2
12.0
8.4

2.6
5.8
2.0
3.1
2.3
2.8

IV

I

’ Not available.
r=revised.

28.

Annual rate
of change

Year

Item

N ote :

<1 )

(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )

2.6
6.9
1.4
4.1
3.0
3.8

For explanation of revisions, see “Notes on the data.”

Quarterly indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted

[1977= 100]

Item

Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour ................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
Unit nonlabor payments................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees....................
Compensation per hour................................
Real compensation per hour...........................
Total unit costs ..........................................
Unit labor cost .....................................
Unit nonlabor costs................................
Unit profits ...............................................
Implicit price deflator ...................................
Manufacturing:
Output per hour of all persons .......................
Compensation per hour ................................
Real compensation per hour..........................
Unit labor cost...........................................
1Not available.
r=revised.

84

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

Annual
average

Quarterly indexes
1982'

1981'

1980'

1979'

1981'

IV

I

II

III

IV

1

II

98.9
131.4
96.7
132.9
119.3
128.3

100.7
144,1
96.0
143.1
135.2
140.4

99.1
123.0
97.8
124.1
113.2
120.4

99.3
126.7
97.0
127.6
116.0
123.7

98.2
130.0
96.4
132.2
116.2
126.9

98.9
133.1
96.9
134.7
120.6
129.9

99.3
136.1
96.2
137.0
124.6
132.8

100.7
140.0
96.2
139.0
131.8
136.5

100.7
142.5
96.4
141.5
133.4
138.8

101.0
145.6
95.7
144.2
137.4
141.9

100.2
148.2
95.6
147.9
138.3
144.6

100.0
150.9
96.5
150.9
136.4
146.0

100.7
153.4
97.1
152.4
138.9
147.8

98.5
130.9
96.3
133.0
119.1
128.3

99.9
143.6
95.7
143.8
134.8
140.8

98.8
122.7
97.6
124.1
111.3
119.8

98.7
126.2
96.6
127.8
115.2
123.6

97.6
129.3
96.0
132.5
116.7
127.2

98.4
132.6
96.5
134.7
120.3
129.9

99.2
135.7
95.9
136.8
124.4
132.7

100.4
139.5
96.0
139.0
131.5
136.5

100.0
142.0
96.0
141.9
132.8
138.9

100.0
145.1
95.4
145.1
136.7
142.3

99.1
147.7
95.3
149.0
138.4
145.5

99.2
150.4
96.3
151.6
136.7
146.6

99.8
152.7
96.6
153.0
139.3
148.4

100.8
131.6
96.8
131.0
130.5
132.5
87.9
126.1

102.7
144.4
96.2
143.4
140.6
151.4
101.6
138.6

100.6
123.1
97.9
121.4
122.4
118.7
84.1
117.1

100.8
126.8
97.0
125.0
125.8
122.7
91.1
121.1

99.8
130.0
96.4
130.4
130.2
131.0
81.9
124.8

101.1
133.4
97.1
132.9
131.9
135.7
87.8
127.7

101.7
136.3
96.3
135.8
134.1
140.7
90.5
130.6

102.8
140.4
96.5
138.3
136.5
143.4
104.7
134.5

102.7
142.7
96.5
141.7
138.9
149.6
98.8
136.8

102.8
145.7
95.8
144.7
141.7
153.1
105.2
140.2

102.2
148.6
95.9
149.1
145.4
159.6
97.6
143.2

102.3
151.7
97.1
151.8
148.3
161.8
86.1
144.3

V)
(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
<’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(’ >

101.7
132.8
97.7
130.6

104.5
146.4
97.5
140.0

101.9
122.6
97.4
120.3

102.6
127.1
97.3
123.9

100.4
130.9
97.1
130.3

100.3
135.2
98.5
134.9

103.6
138.4
97.8
133.6

105.2
142.6
98.0
135.5

105.0
144.9
97.9
138.0

105.0
147.3
96.8
140.3

102.8
150.7
97.2
146.6

102.1
154.7
99.0 —
151.5

102.3
157.5
99.7
154.0

N ote :

For explanation of revisions, see "Notes on the data."

III

II

1980'

29. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices,
seasonally adjusted at annual rate
[1977 = 100]
Quarterly percent change at annual rate
Item

Business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ........
Compensation per hour .............
Real compensation per hour..................
Unit labor costs ...................................
Unit nonlabor payments .........................
Implicit price deflator ............................
Nonfarm business sector:
Output per hour of all persons ............
Compensation per hour .................
Real compensation per hour............
Unit labor costs....................
Unit nonlabor payments ...............
Implicit price deflator ......................
Nonfinancial corporations:
Output per hour of all employees .............
Compensation per hour .........................
Real compensation per hour....................
Total unit costs .................................
Unit labor costs ...........................
Unit nonlabor costs....................
Unit profits................................
Implicit price deflator .........................
Manufacturing;
Output per hour of all persons .................
Compensation per hour .......................
Real compensation per hour...............
Unit labor costs ............................
Not available.
r=revised


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

IV 1980
to
11981r

11981
to
II 1981r

II 1981
to
III 1981r

III 1981
to
IV 1981r

IV 1981
to
I 1982'

Percent change from same quarter a year ago
I 1982
to
II 1982'

I 1980
to
I 1981'

II 1980
to
II 1981'

III 1980
to
III 1981'

IV 1980
to
IV 1981'

11981
to
I 1982'

2.2
9.4
-1.3
7.1
13.9
9.2

0.9
8.9
-0.6
7.9
11.0
8.9

-0.7
7.8
0.3
8.6
3.5
6.9

00
7.7
0.8
7.7
4.2
6.5

II 1981
to
II 1982'

5.6
11.7
0.2
5.7
25.0
11.6

0.0
7.5
0.5
7.5
4.9
6.6

1.1
9.0
-2.6
7.8
12.5
9.3

-2.9
7.4
-0.4
10.6
2.9
8.0

-1.0
7.3
3.9
8.4
-5.4
3.8

2.8
7.0
2.3
4.1
7.5
5.2

1.4
10.5
-0.7
13.7
10.4

2.5
9.7
-0.1
6.9
14.8
9.4

4.9
11.8
0.4
6.6
24.9
12.1

-1.3
7.1
0.1
8.6
4.0
7.1

-0.3
9.0
-2.6
9.3
12.1
10.2

-3.5
7.3
-0.5
11.2
5.1
9.2

0.6
7.7
4.3
7.1
-4.6
3.3

2.2
6.1
1.5
3.8
7.8
5.0

1.7
10.6
-0.6
8.8
14.1
10.4

2.5
9.8
0.0
7.1
13.8
9.2

1.6
9.4
-1.2
7.7
13.6
9.6

-0.1
8.8
-0.6
8.9
11.2
9.6

-1.1
7.8
0.3
9.0
4.0
7.4

03
7.5
0.7
7.8
4.9
69

4.7
12.4
0.9
7.5
7.4
8.0
79.5
12.3

-0.4
6.9
-0.1
10.2
7.3
18.5
-20.8
7.1

0.3
8.5
-3.0
8.6
8.2
9.8
284
10.2

-2.3
8.3
0.5
12.8
10.9
17.8
-25.9
8.9

0.5
8.6
5.2
7.4
8.1
5.7
-39.4
3.0

(’ )
(’ )
(’ )
(1)
(’ )
(’ )

2.9
9.8
0.1
8.7
6.7
14.2
20.7
9.6

1.7
9.2
-1.4
8.9
7.5
12.9
19.7
9.7

0.6
9.0
-0.5
9.8
8.4
13.4
7.9
9.6

05
8.1
0.6
9.7
8.6
12.8
-17.8
7.3

o
(1)

(')

2.1
10.7
-0.5
10.6
8.5
16.9
14.9
11.0

6.3
12.7
1.2
6.0

-0.7
6.6
-0.4
7.3

-0.1
6.8
-4.6
6.8

-8.2
9.6
1.6
19.4

-2.6
11.1
7.6
14.1

0.9
7.6
2.9
6.7

2.6
12.2
0.8
9.3

4.5
10.7
0.9
5.9

4.7
8.9
-1.7
4.0

-0.8
8.9
-0.6
9.8

-3.0
8.5
1.0
11.8

C)

8.9

n

<1)
C)
C)
C)

(’ )
26
8.8
1.8
11.6

Note: For explanation of revisions, see "Notes on the data.”

85

WAGE AND COMPENSATION DATA

Data for the Employment Cost Index are reported to the Bu­
reau of Labor Statistics by a sample of 2,000 private nonfarm
establishments and 750 State and local government units se­
lected to represent total employment in those sectors. On av­
erage, each reporting unit provides wage and compensation
information on five well-specified occupations.

Data on negotiated wage and benefit changes are obtained
from contracts on file at the Bureau, direct contact with the
parties, and secondary sources.

Definitions
The E m ploym ent C ost In d ex (ECI) is a quarterly measure of the
average change in the cost of employing labor. The rate of total com­
pensation, which comprises wages, salaries, and employer costs for
employee benefits, is collected for workers performing specified tasks.
Employment in each occupation is held constant over time for all se­
ries produced in the ECI, except those by region, bargaining status,
and area. As a consequence, only changes in compensation are meas­
ured. Industry and occupational employment data from the 1970 Cen­
sus of Population are used in deriving constant weights for the ECI.
While holding total industry and occupational employment fixed, in
the estimation of indexes by region, bargaining status, and area, the
employment in those measures is allowed to vary over time in accord
with changes in the sample. The rate of change (in percent) is avail­
able for wages and salaries, as well as for total compensation. Data
are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey
months of March, June, September, and December. The statistics are
neither annualized nor adjusted for seasonal influence.
W ages and salaries consist of earnings before payroll deductions, ex­
cluding premium pay for overtime, work on weekends and holidays,
and shift differentials. Production bonuses, incentive earnings, com­
missions, and cost-of-living adjustments are included; nonproduction
bonuses are included with other supplemental pay items in the bene­
fits category; and payments-in-kind, free room and board, and tips are
excluded. B e n e fits include supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and
savings plans, and hours-related and legally required benefits.
D a ta on n egotiated w age changes apply to private nonfarm industry
collective bargaining agreements covering 1,000 workers or more.
Data on compensation changes apply only to those agreements cover­
ing 5,000 workers or more. F irs t-y e a r wage or compensation changes
refer to average negotiated changes for workers covered by settle­
ments reached in the period and implemented within the first 12
months after the effective date of the agreement. C h a n g e s o v e r th e life

86


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

o f th e a g r e e m e n t refer to all adjustments specified in the contract,
expressed as an average annual rate. These measures exclude wage
changes that may occur under cost-of-living adjustment clauses, that
are triggered by movements in the Consumer Price Index. W a g e-ra te
ch a n g e s are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earnings;
c o m p e n sa tio n c h a n g e s are expressed as a percent of total wages and
benefits.

E ffective w age adjustm ents reflect all negotiated changes implemented
in the reference period, regardless of the settlement date. They include
changes from settlements reached during the period, changes deferred
from contracts negotiated in an earlier period, and cost-of-living ad­
justments. The data also reflect contracts providing for no wage ad­
justment in the period. Effective adjustments and each of their
components are prorated over all workers in bargaining units with at
least 1,000 workers.

Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index data series began in the fourth quar­
ter of 1975, with the quarterly percent change in wages and salaries in
the private nonfarm sector. Data on employer costs for employee bene­
fits were included in 1980, to produce a measure of the percent
change in employers’ cost for employees’ total compensation. State
and local government units were added to the ECI coverage in 1981,
providing a measure of total compensation change in the civilian non­
farm economy.
Data for the broad white-collar, blue-collar, and service worker
groups, and the manufacturing, nonmanufacturing, and service indus­
try groups are presented in the ECI. Additional occupation and in­
dustry detail are provided for the wages and salaries component of
total compensation in the private nonfarm sector. For State and local
government units, additional industry detail is shown for both total
compensation and its wages and salaries component.
Historical indexes (June 1981 = 100) of the quarterly rates of chang­
es presented in the ECI are also available.
For a more detailed discussion of the ECI, see chapter 25, “The
Employment Cost Index,” of the BLS H a n d b o o k o f M e th o d s (Bulletin
1910), and the M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w articles: “Employment Cost In­
dex: a measure of change in the ‘price of labor,’” July 1975; “How
benefits will be incorporated into the Employment Cost Index,” Janu­
ary 1978; and “The Employment Cost Index: recent trends and ex­
pansion,” May 1982.
Additional data for the ECI and other measures of wage and com­
pensation changes appear in C u r r e n t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts , a monthly
periodical of the Bureau.

30.

Employment Cost Index, total compensation

[June 1981 = 100]
Percent change
1980

1981

1982

Series
March

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—

—

—

—
—
—
—

—

—
—
—

88.6

_

Civilian nonfarm workers’ .........................

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ......................................
Blue-collar workers......................................
Service workers ................................
Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing.................................
Nonmanufacturing.....................................
Services........................................
Public administration2 ........................................
Private nonfarm workers.........................

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers ............................
Blue-collar workers..............................
Service workers ......................................
Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing...................................
Nonmanufacturing.........................................

3 months
ended

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

100.0

102.6

104.5

106.3

1.7

12 months
ended

March 1982

—

—

—

—

100.0
100.0
100.0

102.7
102.3
102.8

104.9
104.1
104.2

106.5
105.7
107.2

1.5
1.5
2.9

—
—
—
-

—
—
—
-

—
—
—
-

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.1
102.8
104.4
104.3

104.0
104.8
107.1
106.0

106.0
106.4
108.2
108.1

1.9
1.5
1.0
2.0

90.7

92.8

94.7

98.1

100.0

102.0

104.0

105.8

1.7

88.7
88.3
89.9

90.8
90.5
90.8

92.6
93.0
92.7

94.5
94.9
94.3

98.3
97.8
99.3

100.0
100.0
100.0

101.8
102.2
101.9

104.0
104.0
103.1

105.8
105.6
106.7

1.7
1.5
3.5

76
80
75

88.7
88.6

90.5
90.8

92.6
92.9

94.7
94.7

98.0
98.2

100.0
100.0

102.1
102.0

104.0
103.9

106.0
105.7

1.9
1.7

82
7.6

State and local government workers ....................

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers.................................
Blue-collar workers.....................................
Workers, by industry division
Services.............................................
Schools ........................................
Elementary and secondary................................
Hospitals and other services3 ......................
Public administration2 ...................................
'Excludes private household and Federal workers.
Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.

.

—

_

_

_

100.0

105.3

107.4

108.8

1.3

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

100.0
100.0

105.7
104.2

107.8
105.9

109.1
108.2

1.2
2.2

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

105.8
106.0
106.3
105.0
104.3

107.9
107.9
108.3
107.8
106.0

109.0
108.9
109.3
109.5
108.1

1.0
.9
.9
1.6
2.0

—

—
—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

-

-

includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
N o t e : Dashes indicate data not available.

»


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

87

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Compensation Data
31.

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group

[June 1981 =100]
Percent change
1982

1981

1980

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

March 1982

March

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

-

-

-

-

-

100.0

102.5

104.4

106.3

1.8

-

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers .............................................
Blue-collar workers...............................................
Service workers ..................................................

—
—
-

—
—
-

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

100.0
100.0
100.0

102.6
102.4
102.5

104.7
104.0
103.6

106.7
1055
106.8

1.9
1.4
3.1

—
—
—

Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing.....................................................
Nonmanufacturing................................................
Services.........................................................
Public administration2 ........................................

—
—
—
—

—
—
~
—

—
—
—
—

—
—
—
—

—
—
—
—

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.1
102.7
104.4
103.8

104.0
104.5
106.6
105.5

105.9
106.5
108.6
107.5

1.8
1.9
1.9
1.9

—
—

Civilian nonfarm workers1 ...........................................

89.6

91.5

93.5

95.4

98.0

100.0

102.0

103.8

105.9

2.0

8.1

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers .............................................
Professional and technical workers.........................
Managers and administrators................................
Salesworkers ..................................................
Clerical workers ...............................................
Blue-collar workers ...............................................
Craft and kindred workers ...................................
Operatives, except transport ................................
Transport equipment operatives ............................
Nonfarm laborers .............................................
Service workers ..................................................

89.7
89.2
90.6
88.5
90.3
89.3
89.3
89.4
89.1
89.6
90.8

91.4
90.8
92.0
90.7
91.9
91.6
91.4
91.5
92.2
91.8
91.9

93.3
93.2
93.5
92.2
93.8
93.8
94.0
93.6
93.5
93.9
93.4

95.2
95.3
94.7
94.8
95.7
95.7
96.1
95.5
95.3
95.7
94.8

98.1
98.2
98.6
96.2
98.6
97.7
97.8
97.8
96.8
97.5
99.2

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.8
103.3
101.6
98.0
102.7
102.3
102.9
102.1
101.0
101.5
101.8

103.9
105.5
102.8
101.9
104.2
103.9
104.3
104.1
102.7
103.3
102.7

106.2
108.0
105.8
102.2
107.0
105.4
106.2
105.4
103.2
104.1
106.7

2.2
2.4
2.9
.3
2.7
1.4
1.8
1.2
.5
.8
3.9

8.3
10.0
7.3
6.2
8.5
7.9
8.6
7.8
6.6
6.8
7.6

Workers, by industry division
Manufacturing.........................................................
Durables............................................................
Nondurables.......................................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................
Construction.......................................................
Transportation and public utilities ..............................
Wholesale and retail trade......................................
Wholesale trade ...............................................
Retail trade.....................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate............................
Services............................................................

89.9
89.3
91.0
89.5
89.3
88.2
90.5
89.7
90.8
87.1
90.5

91.8
91.2
92.7
91.3
91.9
90.2
92.2
92.1
92.2
89.4
91.9

93.6
93.5
93.8
93.4
94.5
93.1
93.6
93.0
93.8
91.2
94.2

95.7
95.7
95.7
95.2
95.9
95.6
95.1
95.9
94.8
93.1
95.7

97.9
97.9
97.8
98.1
97.6
97.7
98.2
98.5
98.1
95.7
99.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.1
102.1
102.0
102.0
103.0
102.0
101.3
102.0
101.0
98.3
103.6

104.0
104.5
103.1
103.8
104.3
103.6
102.3
103.4
101.9
102.3
105.8

105.9
106.3
105.3
105.9
105.9
105.7
103.9
106.3
103.0
103.7
108.8

1.8
1.7
2.1
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.6
2.8
1.1
1.4
2.8

8.2
8.6
7.7
8.0
8.5
8.2
5.8
7.9
5.0
8.4
9.2

State and local governments ..........................................

—

—

—

—

-

100.0

105.0

107.0

108.2

1.1

-

—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—

100.0
100.0

105.4
103.9

107.5
105.5

108.5
107.5

.9
1.9

—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—
“

—
—
—
—
—

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

105.5
105.7
106.0
104.6
103.3

107.6
107.7
107.9
107.3
105.5

108.4
108.3
108.7
108.8
107.5

.7
.6
.7
1.4
1.9

—
—
—
—

All private nonfarm workers3

Workers, by occupational group
White-collar workers .............................................
Blue-collar workers...............................................
Workers, by industry division
Services............................................................
Schools .........................................................
Elementary and secondary................................
Hospitals and other services4 ................................
Public administration2 ...........................................

—
—
—
—
—

’Excludes private household and Federal workers.
Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
3Excludes private household workers.

88

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

4Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.
Dashes Indicate data not available.
N ote

32.

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, private nonfarm workers, by bargaining status, region, and area size

[June 1981 = 100]
Percent change
1980

1981

1S82

Series

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

March

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

June

Sept.

Dec.

March

Urion .....................................................
Manufacturing ................................................
Nonmanufacturing ................................................

87.4
—
—

89.7
—
—

92.4
—
—

94.7
—
-

97.6
-

100.0
100.0
100.0

102.5
102.3
102.7

104.8
104.6
105.0

106.5
106.3
106.8

1.6
1.6
1.7

9.1
—
—

Nonunion.........................................................
Manufacturing ........................................
Nonmanufacturing ......................................

89.3
—
—

91.1
—
—

92.8
—
-

94.6
—
-

98.4
—
-

100.0
100.0
100.0

101.7
101.8
101.7

103.5
103.5
103.5

105.3
105.7
105.2

1.7
2.1
1.6

7.0
—
-

88.5
88.8

90.6
90.3

92.8
91.9

94.7
94.2

98.1
98.1

100.0
100.0

102.1
101.8

104,1
105.2

105.7
106.2

1.5
2.9

7.7
8.3

Workers, by bargaining status'
Union .........................................................
Manufacturing ................................................
Nonmanufacturing ...............................................

88.4
88.8
88.0

90.8
91.3
90.4

93.5
93.8
93.1

95.8
96.1
95.5

97.4
97.7
97.1

100.0
100.0
100.0

102.7
102.6
102.8

105.0
104.7
105.2

106.5
105.9
107.0

1.4
1.1
1.7

9.3
8.4
10.2

Nonunion........................................
Manufacturing ................................................
Nonmanufacturing ................................................

90.2
91.0
89.9

91.8
92.3
91.5

93.4
93.4
93.4

95.1
95.4
95.0

98.2
97.9
98.3

100.0
100.0
100.0

101.6
101.7
101.6

103.2
103.3
103.2

105.6
105.9
105.5

2.3
2.5
2.2

7.5
8.2
7.3

Workers, by region'
Northeast ..............................................................
South .................................................................
North Certral.........................................................
West.........................................................

90.6
89.7
89.7
88.2

92.5
91.4
91.6
90.4

94.2
93.2
93.3
93.5

96.0
94.9
95.3
95.3

98.3
98.0
98.1
97.9

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.7
101.9
101.6
103.2

104.4
102.8
103.3
105.1

106.1
105.7
104.7
107.9

1.6
2.8
1.4
2.7

7.9
7.9
6.7
10.2

Workers, by area size'
Metropolitan areas..................................................
Other areas..........................................................

89.4
90.1

91.4
91.5

93.5
92.9

95.4
95.1

97.9
98.3

100.0
100.0

102.1
101.8

104.0
103.1

105.9
106.0

1.8
2.8

8.2
7.8

March 1982

COMPENSATION

Workers, by bargaining status'

—

Workers, by area size'
Metropolitan areas....................................................
Other areas.........................................................
WAGES AND SALARIES

' The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For
a detailed description of the index calculation, see BIS Handbook of Methods, Bulletin 1910.


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

89

M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW September 1982 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data

33.

Wage and compensation change, major collective bargaining settlements, 1977 to date

[In percent]
Quarterly average
Measure

1982 p

1981

1980
II

III

IV

lr

II

7.7
7.2

11.6
10.8

10.5
8.1

11.0
5.8

1.9
1.2

2.1
1.6

8.3
6.5

7.1
6.2

11.8
9.7

10.8
8.7

9.0
5.7

3.0
2.8

2.9
2.7

8.4
5.6

7.8
5.8

6.4
5.5

8.2
6.7

9.0
7.5

6.6
5.4

2.5
2.7

1.3
1.2

10.3
8.5

9.5
5.9

8.2
6.8

8.0
7.3

11.8
9.1

8.6
7.2

9.6
5.6

2.6
2.1

6.5
5.7

12.2
10.4

15.4
13.0

14.3
12.0

11.4
10.3

12.9
11.1

16.4
12.4

11.4
11.7

9.1
8.9

5.8
6.0

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

II

III

IV

1

9.6
6.2

8.3
6.3

9.0
6.6

10.4
7.1

10.2
8.3

10.2
7.4

11.4
7.2

8.5
6.1

First year of contract...............
Annual rate over life of contract ..

7.8
5.8

7.6
6.4

7.4
6.0

9.5
7.1

9.8
7.9

9.1
7.3

10.5
7.4

Manufacturing:
First year of contract...............
Annual rate over life of contract ..

8.4
5.5

8.3
6.6

6.9
5.4

7.4
5.4

7.2
6.1

6.7
5.1

Nonmanufacturing (excluding
construction):
First year of contract...............
Annual rate over life of contract ..

8.0
5.9

8.0
6.5

7.6
6.2

9.5
6.6

9.8
7.3

Construction:
First year of contract...............
Annual rate over life of contract .

6.3
6.3

6.5
6.2

8.8
8.3

13.6
11.5

13.5
11.3

Total compensation changes covering
5,000 workers or more, all
industries:
First year of contract...............
Annual rate over life of contract ..
Wage rate changes covering at least
1,000 workers, all industries:

r=revised.

34.

Effective wage adjustments in collective bargaining units covering 1,000 workers or more, 1977 to date
Year

Year and quarter
1980

Measure
1977

Average percent adjustment (including no change):
All industries...........................................
Manufacturing......................................
Nonmanufacturing.................................
From settlements reached in period ...............
Deferred fromsettlements reached inearlier period
From cost-of-living clauses..........................

1979

1980

1982 p

II

III

IV

1

II

III

IV

II

lr

8.2
8.6
7.9

9.1
9.6
8.8

9.9
10.2
9.7

9.5
9.4
9.5

3.3
3.4
3.2

3.5
2.9
4.0

1.3
1.7
1.1

1.7
2.3
1.2

3.2
2.4
3.8

3.3
3.1
3.4

1.5
1.9
1.1

1.0
.9
1.0

1.9
.9
2.6

3.0
3.2
1.7

2.0
3.7
2.4

3.0
3.0
3.1

3.6
3.5
2.8

2.5
3.8
3.2

1.0
1.4
.8

1.7
1.2
.7

.5
.3
.6

.4
.5
.7

1.1
1.4
.7

.5
1.5
1.2

.4
.4
.6

.2
.6
.3

.3
1.3
.2

—

8,648

_

—

3,855

4,701

4,364

3,225

2,955

3,359

—
—

—

—

—

2,270

—

—

—

579

909

540

604

199

407

—
—

—
—

—
—

—
—

6,267
4,593

—
—

—
—

—
—

888
2,639

2,055
2,669

3,023
2,934

882
2,179

1,038
1,960

1,629
1,496

~

~

4,937

4,092

4,428

5,568

5,767

5,364

145

'The total number of workers who received adjustments does not equal the sum of workers that
received each type of adjustment, because some workers received more than one type of adjustment
during the period.

Digitized for
9 0 FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1981

1981

8.0
8.4
7.6

Total number of workers receiving wage change (in
thousands)' ...........................................
From settlements reached
in period.............................................
Deferred from settlements
reached in earlier period .........................
From cost-of-living clauses...........................
Number of workers receiving no adjustments (in
thousands) .............................................

1978

r=revised,

WORK STOPPAGE DATA

W ork stoppages include all known strikes or lockouts involving 1,000

Estimates of days idle as a percent of estimated working time meas­

workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data are based

ures only the impact of larger strikes (1,000 workers or more). For­

largely on newspaper accounts and cover all workers idle one shift or

merly, these estimates measured the impact of strikes involving 6

more in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. They do not

workers or more; that is, the impact of virtually

measure the indirect or secondary effect on other establishments whose

budget stringencies, collection of data on strikes involving 6 workers

employees are idle owing to material or service shortages.

or more was discontinued with the December 1981 data.

35.

a ll

strikes. Due to

Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more, 1947 to date
Number of stoppages
Month and year
month or year

In effect
during month
or year

Workers involved
Beginning in
month or year
(in thousands)

In effect
during month
(in thousands)

Days idle
Number
(in thousands)

Percent of
estimated
working time

1947
194»
1949
1950

270
245
262
424

1,629
1,435
2,537
1,698

25,720
26,127
43,420
30,390

1951952
1953
1954
1955

415
470
437
265
363

1,462
2,746
1,623
1,075
2,055

15,070
48,820
18,130
16,630
21,180

1955
1957
1953
1959
1969

287
279
332
245
222

1,370
887
1,587
1,381
896

26,840
10,340
17,900
60,850
13.260

.20
.07

1961
1962'
1965
1964
1965

195
211
181
246
268

1,031
793
512
1,183
999

10.140
11.760

.07
.08
.07

16,220
15.140

.11

1966
1967
1968
1969
1970

321
381
392
412
381

1,300
2,192
1,855
1,576
2,468

16,000
31,320
35,567
29,397
52.761

.10

.16
.29

1971
1972
1973
1974
1975

298
250
317
424
235

2,516
975
1,400
1,796
965

35,538
16,764
16.260
31,809
17,563

.19
.09
.08
.16
.09

1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

231
298
219
235
187

1,519
1,212
1,006
1,021
795

23,962
21,258
23,774
20,409
20,844

145

729

16,908

.07
.01

1981
1981

1982»:

10,020

January .
February
March ..
April ...
May ...
June ...
July

6
7
16
17
18
30
23

12
10
20
27
27
43
38

12.0
10.7
201.6
48.0
85.1
200.1
80.1

29.6
20.9
207.8
223.5
259.0
415.1
125.4

257.9
118.5
861.8
4.085.2
4,454.0
2.618.3
1,575.5

January .
February
March . .
April . . .
May ...
June ...
July ....

2
2
3
'9
14
'17
11

4
6
8
'16
'21
'25
22

6.1
2.5
8.3
'35.7
43.7
'41.4
37.3

11.4
13.9
21.3
'55.3
'60.3
'64.5
63.2

199.9
236.9
352.2
'480.3
'636.1
'894.0
851.9

.22

.38
.26
.12

.38
.14
.13
.16

.13
.43
.09

.10

.18
.20

.12
.10
.11

.09
.09

.01

.04
.20

.24
.13
.08
.01

.01
.02
.02

03

.04
.04

r=revised.


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

91

Published by BLS in July
SALES PUBLICATIONS
BLS Bulletins
Handbook o f Labor Statistics. Bulletin 2070 (reissued), 489 pp.,
$15 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-02542-4). Makes available in one
volume historical data (through 1979 in most cases) on the ma­
jor statistical series produced by BLS. Also includes related
series from other Government agencies and foreign countries.
Rent or Buy? Evaluating Alternatives in the Shelter Market.
Bulletin 2016, 21 pages plus a new 3-page supplement, $3.50
(GPO Stock No. 029-001-02309-0). Provides a step-by-step pro­
cedure to compare the financial aspects o f owning versus ren­
ting. (Available only from the Superintendent o f Documents.)
Area Wage Survey Bulletins
These bulletins cover office, professional, technical, maintenance,
custodial, and material movement occupations in major
metropolitan areas.
The annual series o f 70 publications is available by subscription
for $90 per year. Individual area bulletins are also available
separately.
Atlanta, Georgia, Metropolitan Area, May 1982. Bulletin 3015-17,
40 pp., $4.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90136-4).
Houston, Texas, Metropolitan Area, May 1982. Bulletin 3015-20,
40 pp., $4.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90139-9).
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Metropolitan Area, May 1982. Bulletin
3015-18, 42 pp., $4.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90137-2).
San Antonio, Texas, Metropolitan Area, May 1982. Bulletin
3015-19, 28 pp., $3.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-90138-1).
Toledo, Ohio—Michigan, Metropolitan Area, June 1982. Bulletin
3015-21, 30 pp., $3.75 (GPO Stock No. 0290-001-90140-2).
Worcester, Massachusetts, Metropolitan Area,
Bulletin 3015-16, 27 p p ., $3.50 (GPO
029-001-90135-0).

April 1982.
Stock N o.

Industry Wage Survey Bulletins
These studies include results from the latest BLS survey o f wages
and supplemental benefits, with detailed occupational data for
the Nation, regions, and selected areas (where available). Data
are useful for wage and salary administration, union contract
negotiation, arbitration, and Government policy considerations.
Certificated Air Carriers, September 1980. Bulletin 2129, 33 pp.,
$4.50 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-02710-9).
Cigarette Manufacturing, June 1981. Bulletin 2132, 12 pp., $3
(GPO Stock No. 029-001-02708-7).

Employment and Earnings, July. Report on national, State, and
area employment; unemployment; hourly and weekly earnings;
and hours o f work for June. 155 pp., $3.75 ($31 per year).
Producer Prices and Price Indexes, Data for May 1982. Monthly
report on producer price movements. Text, tables, and technical
notes. 114 pp., $3.25 ($20 per year).
Mailgram Service
Consumer price index data summary by mailgram within 24 hours
o f the CPI release. Provides unadjusted and seasonally adjusted
U.S. City Average Data for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) and
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, (CPI-W).
(NTISUB/158). $125 in contiguous United States.
FREE PUBLICATIONS
BLS Reports
Employment in Perspective: Working Women, Second Quarter
1982, Report 669. 3 pp. Presents highlights o f data on women in
the labor force.
Area Wage Survey Summaries
Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange and Lake Charles, Tex.-La., May
1982. 6 pp.
Des Moines, Iowa, May 1982. 3 pp.
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood and West Palm Beach-Boca Raton,
Fla., April 1982. 3 pp.
Montgomery, Ala., April 1982. 3 pp.
Salinas-Seaside-Monterey, Calif., May 1982. 3 pp.
Tulsa, Okla., June 1982. 7 pp.
Wilmington, Del.-N.J.-M d., April 1982. 3 pp.
BLS Summaries
Occupational Earnings in All Metropolitan Areas, July 1981.
Summary 82-7, 5 pp.
To order:
S a le s p u b l i c a t i o n s —Order

from BLS regional offices (see inside
front cover), or the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern­
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C . 20212. Order by title and
GPO Stock number. Subscriptions available o n l y from the
Superintendent o f Documents. Orders can be charged to a deposit
account number or checks can be made payable to the Superintend­
ent o f Documents. Visa and MasterCard are also accepted. Include
card number and expiration date.

Men’s and Boys’ Shirts and Nightwear, May 1981. Bulletin 2131,
58 pp., $5 (GPO Stock No. 029-001-02709-5).

M a ilg r a m s e r v i c e —Available

Periodicals

F ree p u b lic a tio n s —

CPI Detailed Report, May. Comprehensive report on consumer
price movements, including statistical tables and technical notes.
81 pp., $3.50 ($20 per year).


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

from the National Technical Infor­
mation Service, U.S. Department o f Commerce, 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.

Available from the Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
U.S. Department o f Labor, Washington, D.C. 20212 or from any
BLS regional office. R e q u est reg io n a l o f fic e p u b lic a tio n s fr o m th e
issu in g o ffic e . Free publications are available while supplies last.

Simplify your search with
COMMERCE PUBLICATIONS
UPDATE!

TIRED
OF HUNTING
FOR THE
INFORMATION
YOU NEED?

Tracking down needed information can be
frustrating, expensive, and time consuming. If
you’re a user of Commerce Department
publications, Commerce Publications Update
can help.
For only $22 a year, you’ll get a handy biweekly
newsletter announcing dozens of new U.S.
Department of Commerce publications, reports,
pamphlets, charts, periodicals— even news
releases. You’ll get titles, prices, complete
ordering instructions, and annotations where
appropriate.
Every two weeks, you’ll learn what we’ve issued on
exporting . . . current economic indicators
. . . housing starts . . . marketing . . . the weather
. . . foreign economic trends . . . fisheries
. . . telecommunications . . . population . . . and
much more.
Get your information the easy way. Use the order
card to subscribe to Commerce Publications
Update today.

U.S. D e p a rtm e n t of C o m m e rc e

ORDER FORM

To:

S u p e rin te n d e n t of D o cu m e n ts, U.S. G o v e rn m e n t P rin tin g O ffice , W a sh in g to n , D.C. 20402
C re d it C ard O rd ers O nly

E n c lo s e d is $

f l check.

□ m o n e y o rd e r, o r c h a rg e to m y
C re d it

D e p o s it A c c o u n t N o.

i-n

E x p ira tio n D a te — — .... .....
M o n th /Y e a r

O rd e r No.

For Office Use Only

Please enter my subscription to COMMERCE PUBLICATIONS UPDATE (CPU) (File Code 2-E)

Q uantity

at $22 per year. (Add $5.50 for other than U.S. mailing.)
Com pany Nam e

i 1 ! 1 ! l 1 11 1
.................. I I 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1
...............1 1 1 1 M

In d iv id u a l's N a m e

F irst

Last

Street Address

C ity

(or C o u n try )

P L E A S E P R IN T OR TY P E

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

II
1 1
1 1
11
11

II
11
11
11
11

11I
111
M 1
11 1
1 II

III 11
11111
11 11 1
1 Li 1 1
1 1 1 II
1

1 1 1 II 1 II
11111111
1 I I 1 1 1 1J
1 I I 11 i .LJ
1 1 1 1 1......U

To be m ailed
S ubscriptions
Postage

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

Foreign handling

S ta te
1
1

OPNR

1

Z IP C o de
1
1
1

1

1

MMOB

1

UPNS
D iscount
R efund

C harges

/

U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington D.C. 20212

Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
Lab-441

Official Business

SECOND CLASS MAIL

Penalty for private use, $300
RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED


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

L1BRA<*42L 1SSDUE007R
lib r a r y

FED RESERVE BANK OF ST LOUIS
PO BOX
L SAINT LOUIS
HP 63166