April 2020 BLS Jobs Situation – Worst Report Ever

Written by Steven Hansen

The headline seasonally adjusted BLS job growth showed the worst ever job loss ever with the U-6 unemployment rate at 22.8% (headline unemployment was 14.7 %).

• The year-over-year rate of growth for employment significantly declined this month (red line on the graph below). The year-over-year growth rate is below the rate of growth one year ago. In fact, this wipes out almost all job gains this century.

• Economic intuitive sectors of employment significantly declined.
• This month’s report internals (comparing household to establishment data sets) did correlate with the household survey showing seasonally adjusted employment declined 22,369 ,000 vs the headline establishment number declining 20,500,000. The point here is that part of the headlines are from the household survey (such as the unemployment rate) and part is from the establishment survey (job growth). From a survey control point of view – the common element is job growth – and if they do not match, your confidence in either survey is diminished. [note that the household survey includes ALL job growth, not just non-farm).
• The household survey removed 6,432,000 people to the labor force which explains why the unemployment rate was not worse.
• The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)’s monthly Jobs Report is at the end of this post.

A summary of the employment situation:

• BLS reported: -20,500K (non-farm) and -19,520K (non-farm private). The headline unemployment rate worsened from 4.4 % to 14.7 %.
• ADP reported: -20,236,000 (non-farm private)
• In Econintersect‘s April 2020 economic forecast released in late March 2020, we estimated non-farm private payroll growth at 70,000 (based on economic potential) and 190,000 (fudged based on current overrun / under-run of economic potential). [note that our April forecast was unable to pick up the effects of the coronavirus pandemic]
• The market expected (from Econoday):

The BLS reports seasonally adjusted data – manipulated with multiple seasonal adjustment factors, and Econintersect believes the unadjusted data gives a clearer picture of the job situation.

The following chart compares the job gains/losses this month with the same month historically – this is the worst month since the Great Recession.

Year-to-date unadjusted employment growth is 20,962,000 people below the pace of last year – and the worst year-to-date growth ever.

The last month’s headline employment gains were revised down. Generally speaking, the INITIAL employment gain estimate is overstated when the economy is slowing and understated when the economy is accelerating.

Concentrating on the labor force growth Vs. employment growth – it should be noted that the trend shows that the slack between labor force growth and employment growth was narrowing slowly before the coronavirus hit.

Most of the analysis below uses unadjusted data and presents an alternative view of the headline data.

Unemployment

The BLS reported U-3 (headline) unemployment was 14.7 % with the U-6 “all-in” unemployment rate (including those working part-time who want a full-time job worsened from 8.7 % to 22.8 %. These numbers are volatile as they are created from the household survey.

BLS U-3 Headline Unemployment (red line, left axis), U-6 All In Unemployment (blue line, left axis), and Median Duration of Unemployment (green line, right axis)

Econintersect has an interpretation of employment supply slack using the BLS employment-population ratio, demonstrated by the graph below. The employment-population ratio worsened from 60.0 to 51.3

Employment-Population Ratio

The jobs picture – when the employment/population as a whole – has been on an uptrend since mid-2011. This ratio is determined by the household survey.

• Econintersect uses employment-population ratios to monitor the jobless situation. The headline unemployment number requires the BLS to guess at the size of the workforce, then guess again who is employed or not employed. In employment-population ratios, the population is a given and the guess is who is employed.
• This ratio has been in a general uptrend since the beginning of 2014. The employment-population ratio tells you the percent of the population with a job. Each 0.1 % increment represents approximately 300,000 jobs. [Note: these are seasonally adjusted numbers – and we are relying on the BLS to get this seasonal adjustment factor correct]. An unchanged ratio would be telling you that job growth was around 150,000 – as this is approximately the new entries to the labor market caused by population growth.
• The growth in employment since the Great Recession has been in full-time jobs.

Employment Metrics

The growth trend in the establishment survey’s non-farm payroll year-over-year growth rate was trending up in 2018. The year-over-year growth rate is declined in 2019 but 2020 was now hit by the coronavirus pandemic.

Unadjusted Non-Farm Payrolls Year-over-Year Growth

Another way to view employment is to watch the total hours worked where trends vary based on periods selected.

Percent Change Year-over-Year Non-Farm Private Weekly Hours Worked

The bullets below use seasonally adjusted data from the establishment survey except where indicated:

• Average hours worked (table B-2) worsened from 34.1 to 34.2. A rising number normally indicates an expanding economy [except in this case]
• Government employment declined (980K) with the Federal Government up 1K, state governments down 180K, and local governments down 801K.
• The big contributor to employment declined this month was leisure and hospitality (-7,653K), health care/social services (-2,086K), and retail trade (-2,107K)
• Manufacturing employment was down 1,330K and construction was down 975K.
• The unemployment rate (from the household survey) for people between 20 and 24 (Table A-10) worsened from 8.7 % to 25.7 %. This number is produced by a survey and is very volatile.
• Average hourly earnings (Table B-3) was up $1.34 to $30.01

Private Employment: Average Hourly Earnings

Economic Metrics

Economic markers used to benchmark economic growth (all from the establishment survey).

The truck employment was down 88.3K

Truck Transport Employment – Year-over-Year Change

Temporary help was down 841.9K.

Temporary Help Employment – Year-over-Year Change

Econintersect believes the transport sector is a forward indicator. Others look at temporary help as a forward indicator.

Food for Thought

Who are the victims in this employment situation? It is not people over 55.

Index of Employment Levels – 55 and up (blue line), 45 to 54 (red line), 35 to 44 (green line), 25 to 34 (purple line), 20 to 24 (light blue line), and 16 to 19 (orange line)

Women are doing better than men.

Index of Employment Levels – Men (blue line) vs Women (red line)

Mom and Pop employment remains historically low.

The less education one has the less chance of finding a job.

Index of Employment Levels – University graduate (blue line), Some college or AA degree (orange line), high school graduates (green line), and high school dropouts (red line)

Here is an indexed view of employment levels.

Index of Employment Levels (from the BLS Establishment Survey) – Hispanic (blue line), African American (red line), and White (green line)

However, keep in mind that population growth is different for each group. Here is a look at employment to population ratios which clearly shows NO group has recovered from the Great Recession:

Employment / Population Ratios (from the BLS Household Survey) – Hispanic (blue line), African American (red line), and White (green line)

National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)’s monthly Jobs Report Statement:

For the second month in a row, job creation plans among small businesses fell as the economy deals with the effects of COVID-19, according to NFIB’s monthly jobs report. An increasing number of firms reported reducing employment as the six-week total of initial unemployment claims has now reached 30.3 million.

“Small businesses have been doing everything they can to sustain their business during this economic uncertainty,” said NFIB’s Chief Economist Bill Dunkelberg. “As states begin to reopen, workers who have been unemployed will be called back to work at many of these small businesses. Until workers are back and the virus is contained, we will get a better picture of how many jobs and firms were lost during this time.”

A seasonally-adjusted net 1 percent plan to create new jobs, down 8 points from March following a 12 point drop from February. Small business owners all but suspended hiring plans in the near term.

Down seven points from March, 47% reported hiring or trying to hire, with 87% of those owners reported few or no qualified applicants for the positions they were trying to fill. Fifty-four percent of construction firms reported few or no qualified applicants and 30% cited the shortage of qualified workers as their top business problem.

Overall, finding qualified workers is no longer the top issue for majority of small business owners as 15% reported this as their No. 1 business problem, a nine-point decline from March and 12 points from August’s record high.

A seasonally adjusted 24% of all owners reported job openings they could not fill in the current period, down 11 points from March. A third of all job openings are in construction, 17% in non-professional services, and 12% in manufacturing and retail.

Fewer employers are raising compensation than in previous months. A seasonally adjusted net 16% reported raising compensation (down 15 points) and a net 7% plan to do so in the coming months (down 9 points). Eight percent of owners cited labor costs as their top problem.

Twenty-one percent of owners have job openings for skilled workers (down 9 points) and 8% have openings for unskilled labor (down 5 points). Twenty-two percent of owners said they have few qualified applicants for their open positions and 19% reported none.

Click here to view the entire NFIB Jobs Report. For more information about NFIB, please visit NFIB.com. 

Caveat on the use of BLS Jobs Data

The monthly headline data ends up being significantly revised for months after the initial release – and is subject also to annual revisions. The question remains how seriously can you take the data when first released.

Econintersect Contributor Jeff Miller has the following description of BLS methodology:

1. An initial report of a survey of establishments. Even if the survey sample was perfect (and we all know that it is not) and the response rate was 100% (which it is not) the sampling error alone for a 90% confidence interval is +/- 100K jobs.
2. The report is revised to reflect additional responses over the next two months.
3. There is an adjustment to account for job creation — much-maligned and misunderstood by nearly everyone.
4. The final data are benchmarked against the state employment data every year. This usually shows that the overall process was very good, but it led to major downward adjustments at the time of the recession. More recently, the BLS estimates have been too low.

ADP (blue line) versus BLS (red line) – Monthly Jobs Growth Comparison

However, there is some discussion that neither the ADP nor BLS numbers are correct – as both are derived by a sampling methodology. The answer could be that there is no correct answer in real-time – and that it is best to look at the trends. As has been noted, all eventually end up correlating.

The BLS uses seasonally adjusted data for its headline numbers. The seasonally adjusted employment data is produced by an algorithm. The following graph which shows unadjusted job growth – seasonal adjustments spread employment growth over the entire year. Employment does not really grow in the second half of the year and always falls significantly in January.

Non-Seasonally Adjusted Employment – Private Sector

There is the proverbial question on what is minimal job growth each month required to allow for new entrants to the market. Depending on mindset, this answer varies. According to Investopdia, the number is between 100,000 and 150,000. The Wall Street Journal is citing 125K. Mark Zandi said 150K. Econintersect is going with Mark Zandi’s number:

• In Econintersect‘s June 2014 economic forecast released in late May, we estimated non-farm payroll growth at 160,000 (unadjusted based on economic potential) and 229,000 (fudged based on current overrun of economic potential).
• If Econintersect uses employment-population ratios, the correct number would be the number where this ratio improved. Using the graph below, the ratio began to improve starting a little after mid-year. This corresponds to the period where the 12-month rolling average of job gains hit 150,000.

Employment to Population Ratio

Note: The ratio could be fine-tuned by adjusting to the ratio of employment to working-age population rather than the total population. However, this would not change the big picture that an increase of somewhere around 150,000 (+/-) is needed for the growing population numbers. We have an estimated 140k – 160k. The number might possibly be within the range 125k – 175k. Econintersect cannot find a reason to support the estimates below 125k.

The question of how changing demographics impact the employment numbers is at the margins of analysis. Econintersect will publish more on this fine-tuning going forward, both in-house research and the work of others

include(“/home/aleta/public_html/files/ad_openx.htm”); ?>

Permanent link to most recent post on this topic