Gender Differences in Employment Worldwide

In a recent report from Gallup World, it was found that, worldwide, men are almost twice as likely to have a "good" job than women. The report shows that 34% of men report having a good job compared to 18% of women who report the same. Gallup defines a "good' job as one that requires full-time work for an employer. The data for this report were gathered from 2005/2006 through 2013 in face to face or landline telephone interviews of 225,975 individuals aged 15 and older throughout the world. 

The table shows that women's highest deficit in full-time employment are in South Asia (-26%) and Non-EU Europe (-22%), while Sub-Sarahan Africa has the lowest deficit (-7%) followed by the Commonwealth of Independent States (-8%).  The deficit for women in Northern America stands at -19%. 

themostsearched.org offers several teaching/learning tools on the topics of worldwide employment and gender in employment: Gallup's Global Tracking Tool, Employment to Population Ratio , and Occupational Segregation and Earning Differences .

Read more:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/164666/globally-men-twice-likely-women-good-job.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx?ref=logo
http://www.gallup.com/poll/world.aspx?ref=logo

themostsearched.org Resources:
http://themostsearched.org/resource/3898
http://themostsearched.org/resource/2936
http://themostsearched.org/resource/3109

Depression and Employment

In a recent report of the Gallup-Healthways Well-being Index, a survey conducted by landline or cell phone interview between January 1 and July 25, 2013 of a random sample of 101,195 American adults who have depression, Alyssa Brown and Kyley McGeeney say that "being unemployed, out of the workforce, or working part-time but wanting to work full-time are strong indicators of depression."

Respondents who report being out of the workforce are the most likely to be depressed (16.6%), followed by those who report being unemployed (11.4%) and part-time workers who prefer full-time work (10.6%). 

Read more: 
http://www.gallup.com/poll/164090/employment-linked-depression-free.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/wellbeing.aspx?ref=logo

Deteriorating Jobs Outlook Across the EU

Across the European Union, the jobs outlook is steadily worsening. According to a Gallup report, over 90% of citizens in Greece (98%), Italy (95%), Spain (94%), and Ireland (92%) think that it is a "bad time" to find a job in their area. The majority of citizens in 25 of the 27 countries in the European Union report a pessimistic job outlook. This finding coincides with Eurostat's findings that the EU is currently experiencing some of the highest unemployment levels ever recorded in Europe. Countries with the most staggering unemployment rates include Spain (23.8%), Greece (25.1%), Latvia (15.9%), Portugal (15.7%), Ireland (15.1%), and Slovakia (13.9%). The jobs outlook across the EU has worsened since 2011, and in recent months (August 2012-September 2012), unemployment levels have continued to decrease. Since 2011, the jobs outlook has gotten significantly worse in Finland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, Sweden, France, Austria, Denmark, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and the United Kingdom.

It is important to note that since 2011, there have been improvements in the jobs outlook in Latvia and Estonia. Additionally, the majority of Germans (46% compared to 43%) and approximately 1/3 of Swedes (32%) and Austrians (35%) feel that it is a "good time" to find a job in their country. Comparatively, 25% of Americans feel it is a "good time" to find jobs in their area. Also, the estimated percentage of the population that is employed by a full time employer has remained stable in most EU countries in 2012.

However, the countries that have severely pessimistic jobs outlooks also have the lowest percentage of full-time employees. Less than 1 in 3 adults are employed full time in Greece, Romania, Italy, Belgium, Spain, and Ireland. Because of the decreasing percentage of the population that is employed full time, the tax-base is shrinking. Therefore, countries across the EU are not just facing high unemployment levels and dismal job outlooks; they are facing long-term economic instability.

Underemployment Continues to Fall, But Is Still Double Pre-Recession Level

With the jobs numbers released this past Friday, highlighting Gallup's underemployment statistics provides another look into the employment situation in America.  Gallup defines underemployed workers as those who work part-time but desire a full-time job, along with Americans who are simply unemployed. This figure is an important supplement to the BLS' jobs numbers, as it illustrates the lingering frustration within the American economy that is not quite as apparent in Friday's optimistic report.  While underemployment has tailed off in recent months, it's still well above levels seen before the recession.  16.5% of workers are underemployed, down from over 20% in 2010 and 18.1% this time one year ago.  Before the housing bubble burst and drove the economy into a downward spiral unseen since the Great Depression, underemployment had sunk to below 8%, but as companies laid off workers and scaled back domestic operations, Americans were left struggling to find full-time employment, prompting a spike in unemployment and underemployment.  Still, though, the 16.5% underemployment rate is the lowest since the start of the recession, and it continues to steadily drop as the year progresses.  

The rate of unemployment in the U.S. will fall to 6.2% by 2014

On March 1, 2012 we predicted (in a Seeking Alpha post) the rate of unemployment in the U.S. to fall down to 7.8% by 2013. The BLS announced 7.8% for September 2012. Here we present our basic model and predict the evolution of unemployment in 2013.

In 2006, we developed three individual empirical relationships between the rate of unemployment, u(t), price inflation, p(t), and the change rate of labour force, LF(t), in the United States. We also built a general relationship balancing all three variables simultaneously. Since measurement (including definition) errors in all three variables are independent it may so happen that they cancel each other (destructive interference) and the general relationship might have better statistical properties than the individual ones. For the USA, the best fit model for annual estimates was a follows:

u(t) = p(t-2.5) + 2.5dLF(t-5)/dtLF(t-5) + 0.0585 (1)

where inflation (CPI) leads unemployment by 2.5 years (30 months) and the change in labor force leads by 5 years (60 months). We have already postedon the performance of this model several times.

For the model in this post, we use monthly estimates of the headline CPI, u, and labor force, all reported by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The time lags are the same as in (1) but coefficients are different since we use month to month-a-year-ago rates of growth. We have also allowed for changing inflation coefficient. The best fit models for the period after 1978 are as follows:

u(t) = 0.63p(t-2.5) + 2.0dLF(t-5)/dtLF(t-5) + 0.07; between 1978 and 2003

u(t) = 0.90p(t-2.5) + 4.0dLF(t-5)/dtLF(t-5) + 0.30; after 2003

There is a structural break in 2003 which is needed to fit the predictions and observations in Figure 1. Due to strong fluctuations in monthly estimates of labor force and CPI we smoothed the predicted curve with MA(24).

The structural break in 2003 may be associated with the change of sensitivity of the rate of unemployment to the change of inflation and labor force. Alternatively, definitions of all three (or two) variables were revised around 2003, which is the year when new population controls were introduced by the BLS. The Census Bureau also reports major revisions to the Current Population Survey, where the estimates of labor force and unemployment are taken from.

On March 1, 2012 the monthly model predicted a drop from 8.3% in February to 7.8% by the end of 2012. Figure 1 depicts the original prediction (upper panel) and the observed fall in the rate of unemployment (lower panel). Figure 2 shows that the observed and predicted time series are well  correlated (Rsq.=0.81). This is a good statistical support to the model.

Figure 3 depicts the predicted rate of unemployment for the next 12 months. The model shows that the rate will fall to 6.2% by September 2013. For 105 observations since 2003, the modelling error is 0.4% with the precision of unemployment rate measurement of 0.2% (Census Bureau estimates in Technical Paper 66).

 

Hence, one may expect 6.2% [±0.4%].

 

 

Figure 1. Observed and predicted rate of unemployment in the USA as obtained in March and October 2012.

Figure 2.  Observed vs. predicted rate of unemployment between 1967 and 2012. The coefficient of determination   Rsq=0.81.

Figures 3. The predicted rate of unemployment. We expect the rate to fall down to 6.2% in September 2013.

Household Income Left Behind In Recovery

Rakesh Kochar, writing for the Pew Research Center, examined household income during the recent recession and recovery.  From 2007 to 2009, the median household income fell 4.2%, and while the economy began to turn around and businesses started to rebuild, incomes continued to drop.  From 2009 to 2011, as the U.S. embarked on a sluggish recovery, the median income failed to improve.  In fact, the median household income fell almost as much (4.1%) during the recovery years as during the recession.  After a 5.7% decrease in household income due to the 1973 recession, incomes salvaged a 2.3% increase in the following 2 year recovery period.  The 1980 to 1982 recession drove incomes down 5.0%, but in the subsequent two-year recovery, incomes rebounded with a 2.4% improvement.  This prolonged period of income losses reflects a greater trend from the past decade.  The highest median household income was $54,932 in 1999, and since then, that level has only been approached in 2007, when incomes were $54,489.  

Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage

On Wednesday, the Census released its yearly report on "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2011."  Median household income fell for the fourth straight year to $50,054.  Men still earn more than women; the median income for men was over $11,000 more than for women.  Looking at various ethnicities, Asians possess the highest median household income at $65,129, followed by Whites with $55,412, Hispanics at $38,624, then and Blacks with $32,229. 

The recession's impacts on income were wide-ranging, and as a result poverty increased drastically.  While the poverty rate fell, it did so only slightly, dropping from 15.1% in 2010 to 15.0% in 2011.  Since 1965, the poverty rate jumped above 15.0% for just five years – 1982, 1983, 1993, 2010 and 2011. 

Lastly, health insurance coverage improved slightly from 2010; however, over 48 million continue to forego coverage.  15.7% of the population lacks health insurance.  This lackluster rate finds its roots in companies' inability to provide employer-based coverage, and in Americans’ inability to simply find a job.  With an unemployment rate that has doubled since the start of the recession and businesses around the country struggling to remain profitable while still providing health benefits, 11 million less Americans received health insurance through their jobs in 2011 than in 2000.  On the other hand, the number of people relying on government health insurance programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, has shot upwards more than 31 million in that same timeframe.  

Unemployment Falls in 305 of 372 Metropolitan Areas

Unemployment in America is slowly improving.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly report on metropolitan area employment and unemployment shows that from July of 2011 to last month, unemployment rates decreased in 305 of 372 metropolitan areas.  The number of areas posting over 10.0 percent unemployment nearly halved from 112 to 67.  Overall, the unemployment rate was 8.3% in July, illustrating a comeback – albeit a sluggish comeback – from when unemployment topped off at nearly 10.0% nationally.  Still though, just 18 of the 372 metropolitan areas registered unemployment rates of less than 5.0%.  To put that figure in perspective, before the recession, the national unemployment rate dipped below 5.0% for over a year.

56.7 Million Americans Have a Disability

Last Friday, Matthew Brault from the Health and Disability Statistics Branch of the Census Bureau appeared on C-SPAN to discuss Americans with disabilities in the U.S.  There were 56.7 million people with a disability in 2010, up 2.3 million from 2005.  38.3 million possessed a severe disability – a disability that totally prevents the survey respondent from doing many different activities listed in the Survey of Income and Program Participation.  Of Americans aged 21 to 64 with a disability, just 4-in-10 were employed, and 11% of Americans aged 15 to 64 with a severe disability experienced persistent poverty.

Wages Drop

On June 28^th the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its County Employment and Wages Fourth Quarter 2011 report.  The report states that the average weekly wage decreased by 1.7% to $955 from the fourth quarter of 2010 to the fourth quarter in 2011.  This decrease marks only the fifth wage loss since the Census began tracking the figure in 1978.  Olmsted, Minnesota experienced the greatest decrease in weekly wages amongst large counties, with pay dropping 21.3%.  In Olmsted the education and health services industries faced the most severe losses with a total wage decline of $287.3 million (-29.1%).

The large counties (population of at least 75,000) leading the way in employment gains were Kern, California; Fort Bend, Texas; Weld, Colorad; Williamson, Tennessee; and Utah County, Utah.  These counties had the highest percentage increase in employment, all of them seeing gains of at least 4.3%.  On a grander scale, the U.S. added 1.8 million jobs since December 2010, putting the national employment at 131.3 million.

Brookings Institution Finds Economic Recovery in Metro Areas to be Sluggish and Uneven

The Brookings Institution released its July Metro Monitor, in which the organization inspects key economic indicators from each of America’s 100 largest metropolitan areas in order to assess the national recovery.  The findings point towards a sluggish recovery.  Since the fourth quarter of the previous year, employment among the U.S.’s most populated regions rose 0.5%, unemployment fell 0.3%, GDP grew 0.6%, and housing prices decreased 2.1%.  Brookings points out diminishing GDP growth and meager job numbers as the most troubling indicators. 

Texas metro areas, due to a booming natural gas sector, experienced a more mild recession, and have thus pulled out of the downturn better than most regions.  High-tech metro areas such as Boston, Raleigh, San Jose, and Seattle have benefited from stabilization in housing prices, while on the other hand the majority of metro areas in the west have performed poorly.

Looking for a Job? Try North Dakota

A recent Gallup survey shows that more employers in North Dakota were hiring rather than firing workers, and by a significant margin. This landed North Dakota a +34 score on Gallup’s Job Creation Index, with the District of Columbia trailing behind in second place with a +24 score. Rhode Island received the lowest score with a +4 and New Jersey placed second to last with +6. Though North Dakota may have the best job creation, Nevada appears to be making a turn around and had the strongest improvement in job creation. Michigan also improved significantly, adding 8 points to its job creation index in the past year.

Job Openings Up in December

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), there were 3.4 million job openings on the last business day of December, an increase of "39 percent since the end of the recession in June 2009." This also signals an increase since the end of November, when the number of job openings totaled 3.1 million. The BLS Editor's Desk notes, "The job openings rate—2.5 percent in December—has trended upward since the end of the recession in June 2009, when the job openings rate was 1.8 percent."

Unemployment Rate Decreases Over Past Year in Most Metropolitan Areas

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released a report this week on metropolitan area employment over the past year, and their findings suggested economic improvement over that period. The BLS Editor's Desk writes: "Unemployment rates were lower in October than a year earlier in 281 of the 372 metropolitan areas, higher in 76 areas, and unchanged in 15 areas. Eight areas recorded jobless rates of at least 15.0 percent, while 21 areas registered rates of less than 5.0 percent." The national unemployment rate checked in at 8.5 percent this October, down from 9.0 percent a year ago.

Unemployment dropped the most in Muskegon-Norton Shores, Michigan (-2.6 percentage points), followed by El Centro, California; Farmington, New Mexico; and Flint, Michigan, all three of which saw a decrease of 2.5 percentage points in the unemployment rate. On the other end, Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, Washington, witnessed the largest increase in unemployment, as the jobless rate rose 1.7 percentage points over the year. It was followed by Yakima, Washington (+ 1.3 percentage points); Pascagoula, Mississippi (+ 1.3 points); and Jacksonville, North Carolina (+1.2 points).


A smaller percentage of metropolitan areas saw increases in nonfarm payroll employment, though a majority still did: "From October 2010 to October 2011, 233 metropolitan areas reported over-the-year increases in nonfarm payroll employment, 133 reported decreases, and 6 had no change."

Metropolitan areas with the largest percentage gains in employment were led by Kankakee-Bradley, Illinois (+ 6.5 percentage points), followed by Hot Springs, Arkansas (+ 6.2 points), and Victoria, Texas (+ 5.5 points). The largest reported losses were in Missoula, Montana (- 5.4 points), Abilene, Texas (- 5.2 points), and Dalton, Georgia (- 4.7 points)."

Private Employers Add Jobs in September But Do Little to Alleviate Concerns About Economy; Heavy Losses in Public Education

The U.S. Labor Department published its September employment report Friday, and although it showed that the private sector added 137,000 jobs in the month, concerns about the economy remain. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.1 percent and as the New York Times comments,"While the number of new jobs exceeded consensus forecasts, it was barely enough to accommodate population growth, much less help those who have been out of work for an extended period." The number of jobs added was also inflated due to the return of 45,000 Verizon employees who had been striking in August. The ranks of the unemployed are still large, and they include many people who have faced long-term unemployment: "there are still 14 million people searching for work, a little less than half of them for six months or longer," the Times writes. And with the housing market "still teetering" and the public sector hurting, there is plenty to worry about in the report. Local government cut 35,000 jobs in September, 24,400 of which were in public education. The president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, told the Times that 277,000 education jobs had been cut since 2008--and that she expects another 280,000 to go in the next year.

There were, however, other positive signs in the report. For one, according to the Times, "the government...revised its estimates upward for the previous two months, suggesting that job growth in July and August had been better than originally reported." It "reported net gains of 127,000 and 57,000 jobs in July and August, respectively, an increase from the originally released numbers."

Further, auto sales increased nearly ten percent, reaching their highest level in five months; and sales at chain stores, led by luxury goods, also saw an increase in September. Also encouraging, the economy began to chip away at the consumer confidence lows that had been reported in recent months. The health care industry added 44,000 employees; employment and business services 48,000; and the information industry added 34,000 jobs in the month.

As President Obama continues his efforts to get Congress to pass his proposed jobs bill, both parties will likely try and use new data to convince the public that their economic approach is the right one. Senator Eric Cantor has already seized on the newest opportunity, responding to Friday's release by saying: "Unfortunately, the policies being promoted by this administration are serving as a roadblock to growth. Constant threats of tax increases and excessive regulations send the wrong signal to our entrepreneurs, investors and small business people."

NH cf

Youth Summer Employment Hits New Low

According to an economic release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), youth summer employment continued its descent, dropping to its lowest rate since the BLS started the series in 1948. Only 48.8 percent--or 18.6 million--of youth aged 16 to 24 were employed in July, and the labor force participation rate for the age group was 59.5 percent, also a new low.

July usually signals the "summertime peak in youth employment...[as] large numbers of high school and college students search for or take summer jobs, and many graduates enter the labor market to look for or begin permanent employment." From April to July 2011 the number of employed youths increased 1.7 million, a similar increase as last summer (1.8 million) but not large enough to prevent the downward momentum in the youth employment rate.
NH cf

U.S. Employers Did Not Add Jobs in August; Economists Blame Low Consumer Confidence, Political Impasse

A new report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) indicated that job growth that began in 2010 has ended, bolstering potential claims that more needs to be done by the government to spur job creation. August marked the first time in the past eleven months that nonfarm payroll employment did not increase. Unemployment did not improve either, remaining at 9.1 percent.

According to the New York Times, "the report added to the pressure on the administration, on Republicans who have resisted any new stimulus spending, and on the Federal Reserve, which has been divided over the wisdom of using its limited arsenal of tools to get the economy moving again." Next week, President Obama will deliver the Administration's proposal to increase employment, and Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis claimed the President would appeal to the population directly if Congress was unreceptive to his plans. Republicans, however, were quick to blame President Obama's economic policy as the cause of the negative news, even dubbing him "President Zero." Economists had anticipated that 65,000 jobs would be added in August, less than the 85,000 jobs that were added as recently as July. But the report showed the situation was worse than expected. Economists took aim at low consumer demand and political inefficiency, suggesting that "both sluggish demand for goods and services and the heightened uncertainty over the economy’s direction...[led to] the slow pace of job creation," and "saying that political deadlock was creating economic paralysis."

Next up is the question of whether extended unemployment benefits and the payroll tax cut should be renewed for the upcoming year.

NH cf

Employment in Japan

We continue modeling the evolution of the employment rate in developed countries with Japan. In this study we use the trade-off between the change in unemployment and employment and Okun’s law. Figure 1 compares the change in the rate of employment (the employment/population ratio), de, and the rate of unemployment, du, in Japan. The change in the rate of unemployment is as volatile as that of unemployment and they differ drastically compared to the synchronized evolution of these variables in the U.S. That’s why we have failed to obtain a reasonable Okun’s law for Japan. As before, all data sets on unemployment and employment have been retrieved from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The estimates of real GDP per capita have been retrieved from the database provided by the Conference Board.

Figure 1. The (negative) change in the rate of unemployment compared to the change in the rate of employment in Japan.

In this blog, we have already presented several empirical relationships predicting the employment/population ratio from the growth rate of real GDP per capita. This was a natural extension of Okun’s law for unemployment.

Here we estimate an employment/GDP model for Japan similar to Okun’s law. For Japan, the best-fit model has been obtained by the least-squares (applied to the cumulative sums):

det = 0.02dlnGt – 0.53, t<1978

det = 0.14dlnGt – 0.42, t>1977 (1)

 

where dlnGt is the change rate of real GDP per capita at time t. Figure 2 shows the cumulative curves for the time series in (1). There is a structural break near 1978 which is expressed by a dramatic shift in slope and a slight break in intercept. The employment/population ratio varies between from 64%% in 1970 and 56% in 2010. The agreement is excellent. Figure 3 present results of a linear regression with R2=0.95 for the period between 1971 and 2010. We consider both variables as stationary ones over the long run despite the obviously negative trend since 1970.

Figure 2. The cumulative curves for the observed and predicted change in the employment/population ratio, de.

Figure 3. Linear regression of the measured and predicted curves in Figure 2.

Employment in France

There is a trade-off between the change in unemployment and employment. Figure 1 compares the change in the rate of employment (the employment/population ratio), de, and the rate of unemployment, du, in France. As expected, the change in the rate of unemployment is more volatile except the shift in the employment rate near 1982. This is a completely artificial break from 53.2% in 1981 to 55.3% in 1982, and we do not need to model it. All data sets on unemployment and employment have been retrieved from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Figure 1. The (negative) change in the rate of unemployment compared to the change in the rate of employment in France.

In this blog, we have already presented several empirical relationships predicting the employment/population ratio from the growth rate of real GDP per capita. This was a natural extension of Okun’s law for unemployment.

Here we estimate an employment/GDP model for France similar to Okun’s law. For France, the best-fit model has been obtained by the least-squares (applied to the cumulative sums):

de = 0.155dlnG– 0.65, t<1994

de= 0.25dlnG – 0.30, t>1993 (1)

where dlnG is the change rate of real GDP per capita at time t. Figure 2 shows the cumulative curves for the time series in (1). There is a structural break near 1994 which is expressed by significant shifts in slope and intercept. The employment/population ratio varies between from ~56%% in 1970 and 50.4% in 1992. The agreement is very good. Figure 3 present results of a linear regression with R2=0.91 for the period between 1971 and 2010.

Figure 2. The cumulative curves for the observed and predicted change in the employment/population ratio, de.

Figure 3. Linear regression of the measured and predicted curves in Figure 2.

Employment in Canada

There is a trade-off between the change in unemployment and employment. Figure 1 compares the change in the rate of employment (the employment/population ratio), de, and the rate of unemployment, du, in Canada. As expected, the change in the rate of unemployment is more volatile. We have retrieved all data on unemployment and employment from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Figure 1. The (negative) change in the rate of employment compared to the change in the rate of unemployment in Canada.  

In one our previous posts we have estimated Okun’s law for Canada. It is instructive to estimate a model similar to Okun’s law for the employment/population ratio, e. For Canada, the best-fit model has been obtained by the least-squares (applied to the cumulative sums):  

de_t = 0.40dlnG_t – 0.70, t<1984

de_t = 0.56dlnG_t – 0.76, t>1983    (1)  

where dlnG_t is the change rate of real GDP per capita at time t. Figure 2 shows the cumulative curves for the time series in (1). There is a structural break near 1984 which is expressed by a significant shift in slope and a minor change in intercept.  The employment/population ratio varies between from ~54.5% in 1971 and ~64.1% (!) in 2008. The agreement is very good. Figure 3 present results of a linear regression with R²=0.84 for the period between 1971 and 2010.

Figure 2. The cumulative curves for the observed and predicted change in the employment/population ratio, de. 

Figure 3. Linear regression of the measured and predicted curves in Figure 2.