Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323154385
label
Labor 1989 [OA 8486] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154385
contentType
document
title
Labor 1989 [OA 8486] [1]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13844-012
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Alphabetical Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323154385
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
341e3142a5606897
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Alpha File, 1987-1991
OA/ID Number:
13844
Folder ID Number:
13844-012
Folder Title:
Labor, 1989 [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
23
3
1
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P10
SPECIAL
DELIVERY
[PRECEEDING 9 PAGES]
ANN: CHRISTINA
/// Research
PROBLEMS?
Mark Fage
foture 523-8271
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P01
Campbell Soup has an outstanding child care program, right across
the street from corporate headquarters, that began in 1983 after
two employees suggested the idea. It's open to all employees,
and accepts children aged three months to kindergarten.
Costs are evenly divided between employer and employee, and the
parents satisfaction. who work for Campbell Soup have expressed a great deal of
Programs like this reduce employee turnover and rates of
absenteeism. They lift employee morale, and loyalty to a firm.
And they make the recruitment of new personnel easier. And we're
not just talking about women Earlier this month, Du Pont
surveyed 4,000 of its people - and found that more than half of
the men surveyed were using child care.
Taking the broader view, these policies have real implications
for the quality of talent available 60 businesses in this country
--- and the quality of the goods and services they provide.
both private enterprise, and public policy-makers, is education.
But perhaps the most important and far-reaching challenge facing
The second priority of the three I've outlined -- investing in
our future. future workers -- will be absolutely critical in the near
Simply put, we're going to have to close the skills gap, and get
serious about public education - by making parents, schools, and
business accountable. The fact is that the current pool of
applicants for entry-level jobs lack the most basic skills -- and
about it.
all of us, including business, are going to have to do something
This will require more than throwing more money at the school
systems. Money alone won't do it. In the last couple of decades
we've seen federal spending on public education increase by a
percent. thousand percent --- and spending from all sources increase by 600
At the same time, we've watched the quality of public education
slip. Everyone's got their favorite horror story. One of mine
where the power went out.
takes place in Washington, in a fast food restaurant downtown,
with pictures of burgers, shakes, and fries for the cashiers to
There were four young people at the registers --- those registers
press. No skills required. Just some eye-hand coordination.
And when the power failed in that business, so did the kids.
Well, at the far end of the counter, an elderly lady pulled out a
pad them. and a pencil -- and started adding up people's orders for
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P O 2
High-tech -- minus low-tech -- equals no-tech.
David Kearns of Xerox complains that American companies are
"doing the school's product recall work for them. He, like many
executives, resents that. Meanwhile, those who work in the
nation's schools blame parents, churches, families, and community
agencies, saying "we're doing work they ought to have done."
There is an alternative. And that's for us to stop blaming the
students -- stop blaming the schools -- stop blaming other
institutions -- and start getting involved.
3-M Company in Minneapolis did. They started a program
that brings women in technical occupations into the schools, to
encourage girls to prepare for scientific and technical careers.
The New Jersey Public Service Electric and Gas Company matches
black high school students with successful black managers, who
provide inspiration, career guidance, and advice.
Maybe you've heard success stories like these --- maybe you've got
a few of your own. But essentially, American business has a
choice to make: train, or miss the train.
Government can help, here. I believe that the Bush
administration should and will push for more accountability from
public schools; ensure that funds are spent wisely; work with
governors on state curricula, student achievement, and teacher
motivation and incentives; and devote funds to programs from Head
Start, to magnet schools, to a college savings bond program.
But beyond funding, beyond pedagogy, beyond content and back-to-
basics curricula, we're talking about a fundamental cultural
shift -- a change that we're all going to have to work to bring
about -- re-asserting the value of learning in America.
For this country's young people, this means constantly reminding
them not simply to "stay in school,' but also letting them know
why they should stay in school: that those who drop out commit
economic suicide.
You and I understand the connection between education, and
success -- but young minds often don't, if the choice is between
studying calculus, and selling crack.
Former Labor Secretary James Mitchell once said, "We need young
men and women who are zealous in maintaining a high ethical
standard in their community, professional, business, labor,
political, and civic organizations.
"In short, he said, "We need men and women who are willing to
accept a challenge -- who are willing to become engaged in the
business of the community, the state, and the nation."
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P03
colleges, your role in this kind of training is particularly
important, if we want to remain competitive. I say "remain,"
because the news isn't all bad.
Over the last SIX years we've made unprecedented social and
economic progress in this country. We're in the sixth year of
the longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history. Nearly
3 million people have risen above the poverty line. More people
are working today than ever before. Real GNP is still rising --
up 22 percent over the past five years.
And all of us have participated in, and benefitted from, this
growth. More than 15 million new jobs have been created during
the current expansion -- 94 percent of them full-time. Black
employment has risen more than 25 percent since 1982; the number
of black teenagers with jobs has increased over 50 percent.
Hispanic employment is up by over a third
The jobs created in the current expansion have, in fact, been
anything but the "McJobs" you may have read about. Since 1982,
the number of minimum wage jobs has declined by 23 percent, while
those paying over $10 an hour have increased by 50 percent. We
are making significant and measurable progress.
But we have work to do. We are a nation known for good ideas,
but we're still not working smart. The technology for the video
cassette recorder, for instance, was developed here -- but the
machines themselves are now manufactured abroad. The idea of
quality circles in management first developed here -- but the
Japanese were the first to apply quality circles to their daily
operations. Robots, too, were first developed in this country,
but then mass-produced abroad.
This country will maintain neither its wages nor its wealth if we
continue to act as a test-bed for the rest of the world. The
competitiveness of our companies, and our national economy,
demand that we translate good ideas into competitive products.
Rates of exchange are no excuse. Not long ago there were
complaints that the dollar was too strong. Now it's too weak.
It's not enough to simply balance trade, or adjust currencies; to
maintain our standard of living, trade must be balanced while
supporting a high wage level at home -- and that will only happen
if we develop a highly productive, highly-skilled workforce.
Otherwise, as one economist recently put it, we might as well
"let the price of the dollar adjust to the point where one dollar
equals one yen, and sell the entire economics building at the
University of Chicago, brick by brick, to the Japanese to use as
a disco." Our products would be cheap at that point -- but so
would our national income.
There is another alternative, of course. And that is to develop
a workforce of highly productive, creative, educated workers --
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P04
taking advantage of emerging technologies to produce a wide range
off. of goods and services. That scenario is not necessarily that far
Already, almost half of American workers have already experienced
major technological changes in their jobs -- and are enthusiastic
about those changes. More than half have told the Bureau of
Labor Statistics that technology has increased their job
independence, and three-fourths believe that technology has made
their jobs more interesting. We in Washington are busy talking
about homework regulation when we should be talking about people
working at home by computer.
I'm going to spend a few minutes sketching out what the immediate
future holds for us, in terms of human capital. Then I'll talk
about what we can do, together, to make the most effective use of
this changing workforce.
In the next ten years, the supply of labor will grow more slowly
than at any time since World War II. The profile of the
workforce will shift -- dramatically.
The average worker will be older. Women will account for two-
thirds of workforce growth in the next decade. Native, white
males, if not exactly an endangered species, will no longer be
typical workers. They'll comprise 15 percent of the new entrants
to the labor force, compared to almost 50 percent today.
New entrants will primarily be women, blacks, hispanics, and
immigrants. Those are groups traditionally disadvantaged because
of discrimination, lack of education, or language barriers. Our
most pressing responsibility is to see that these people are
prepared for the work that will be available to them.
The jobs created in the near future will be more complex
demanding better reading, writing, and reasoning skills.
Our demographic destiny will lead to a severe shortage of
qualified workers to fill the jobs being created by technology
and in services -- unless we do a better job of developing the
talent to fill those jobs.
We are headed for a significant -- and expanding -- and expensive
-- skills gap. This gap must be narrowed. If we move quickly,
together, over the next ten years we will be able to offer a job
to everyone who wants one.
Precisely because these demographic changes are basic and
enduring, what we do today will matter powerfully tomorrow. We
must never be forced to import talent from overseas.
We talk about minimum wage, when we should be talking about
maximum bonuses. We talk about maximum hours, when we should be
talking about minimum skills. We talk about import quotas, when
we should be talking about quality exports.
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P05
We cannot afford, given the challenges of the immediate future,
not to make the most productive use of our talent. We cannot
allow American workers to become an underdeveloped resource, if
we hope to improve the quality of life here, and remain
competitive abroad.
What we need to build on is the quality of the American workforce
by that I mean their self-esteem, their skills, their
education, their adaptability. Only then can we assure the
quality of American goods and services -- and a better standard
of living for all Americans.
By insisting that we need to improve the quality of American
labor, I'm not blaming the workers. This challenge must be met
by unions, school leadership, all levels of government, and by
private enterprise.
We need more intense and creative cooperation on quality in the
workforce. And you are in an ideal position to catalyze it.
Over half of the jobs created in the coming ten years will
require education beyond high school.
None of your schools will have to face declining enrollments, if
you're willing to work out exactly what local business and
industry need. It may sound strange for an educational
institution, but you must, in fact, be market-driven.
How? You can coordinate your curricula to respond to changing
requirements on the part of employers -- being careful to balance
immediate needs with more long-term, flexible skills. You can
ensure that your schools provide practical, realistic career
counseling.
You can forge closer partnerships with local businesses, to
better focus students on the world they're preparing to meet.
You can create better links between your schools and communities
through a liaison officer, who can provide local forecasting and
planning of education needs, to match skills to demand.
This month's Governing magazine has some hard numbers on what
that kind of work does for local economic development. In 1987
the Illinois Community College Board spent $3.73 million of its
own funds on specialized training for its 39 community college
districts. This was supplemented by fees from businesses, JTPA
money, and other state funds.
The result was the creation or retention of nearly 22,000 jobs
and assistance to more than 5,500 companies last year. The
colleges also helped 3,200 firms prepare bids on government
contracts, which eventually netted more than $66 million in
contracts. Not bad for a $3 and 3/4 million investment.
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P06
An opportunity, in fact, to attain what I consider the true
meaning of "full employment": beyond a percentage of people at
work, an assurance that people have work worth doing.
Good pay isn't all there is to a good job, of course. And
neither are good wages all there is to good pay. Our workers'
prosperity today in fact, is unprecedented. Wages have been
rising faster than inflation during this administration - but
benefits have been rising even faster than that.
Wages and salaries have grown about 36 percent. The value
of benefits like medical insurance and pension payments,
education, and time off, have risen 48 percent. Taken together,
total compensation has Aisen about 40 percent -- about a third
faster than inflation.
So that's the road we ve travelled. And make no mistake
about it -- Americans are better off today that they were eight
years ago. I see no reason why -- with the right policies in
place -- they can't become even metter off in the years ahead.
We are standing at a very firm point in our economic
evolution. I am optimistic about our future. But the road ahead
-- the road to full employment in the truest sense - will be
one of great challenges. Not just for the comfortable in
America, but most especially for those who have not yet made it
in our expanding economy.
The road to full employment -- at a GNP growth rate of three
percent a year -- with ever-greater levels of productivity and
material well-being for our people -- is a worthy goal. So today
I'm going to suggest three steps toward truly Full employment.
In the first place, we need to get serious about public
education. Imagine a company with nearly three million employees
whose job is to produce human widgets. It processes over 45
million widgets a year. While it takes twelve years to produce
the final product, 700,000 widgets drop off of the assembly line
before they are done. Another 700,000 each year don't meet the
customer specifications, and never make it into the market place.
Imagine that over the years this company has produced
increasingly rigid, hollow widgets -- when every market survey
called for flexible widgets. Finally, imagine that this
company's widgets ranked among the lowest on all international
comparisons of durability, shelf-life, warranty and functional
suitability.
It does not take a Harvard MBA to figure out how long this
company will stay in business. Unless, of course, the company is
our school system. And the widgets are our 45 million elementary
and secondary school students. And the investors and
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P07
shareholders who pour $170 billion a year into this enterprise
are the American taxpayers.
Despite recent, hopeful trends that the skill level of
workers is increasing, the cold hard truth is that our
educational system is still sorely inadequate. If this doesn't
change soon, the stockholders -- the American people -- may well
have to liquidate the company and start over.
But something can be done about it. New partnerships
between business and schools and labor and schools are springing
up all over the country. The Toledo School District, for
example, in partnership with the American Federation of Teachers,
has been up-grading the professionalism of teachers by requiring
that teachers educate other teachers. Instructors have a
controlling voice in establishing teaching standards and training
and screening new applicants.
And for the past several years, teachers in Seattle have had
an active employee involvement program negotiated with the local
National Education Association to provide innovative curricula
and special teacher projects.
No industry in this country is more dependent on a committed
workforce for its success than education. A sustained and long-
term commitment to a more cooperative and productive relationship
between teachers, principals, local school boards -- together
with local business - can enhance the quality of the American
workforce, improve productivity, and contribute to keeping us on
full course toward full employment.
The second step toward full employment is for business to
invest in the education, training, and retraining of its own
people. The world isn't what it used to be. Free market ideas
are taking hold around the world -- Europe, Africa, the Pacific
Rim. even communist nations seem affected. China is in
transition. Possibly even the Soviet Union.
It wasn't long ago that Americans didn't need to worry about
competition. But with the deregulation of our internal markets
and the rise of foreign producers -- all that has changed. Just
look around. The results are more goods and lower prices.
We are also in the midst of technological revolution: the
explosion of communication and information, of changes in
materials and genetics and computers and artificial intelligence.
We stand to benefit immeasurably from these advances in ways that
make the industrial revolution pale by comparison.
However, this is the age of portable technology and portable
capital. Ideas and money can move around the world in minutes,
if not seconds. No nation any longer has a monopoly on
invention. So we must compete for that too.
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
P08
If we hope to compete along these broader dimensions,
everyone holding a job in this country must be as well-prepared
and as highly-skilled as possible. That means retraining -- on
before. an order of magnitude and intensity that we've never known
Continuing education and retraining opportunities must
become a reality through a joint commitment between labor,
management, educators, families, individuals, and public policy
makers from all levels of government.
The third step toward full employment is to develop more
effective partnerships between managers and workers. The old
antagonistic approach no longer works. We need new methods for a
new age.
For too long, the American workplace has been organized not
around principles of teamwork, but hierarchy. We've seen reams
of management books and articles in the last ten years.
If they've taught us anything, it is that the best-run
companies in America are those which involve their employees in
every aspect of their business -- including strategic
decisionmaking. The worst-run companies are those that treat
parts. their employees like interchangeable -- or worse, expendable -
Fortunately, a number of businesses on the cutting edge,
including several of the large automobile manufacturers, are
forging new kinds of partnerships with their employees. The
enterprise is being viewed as a partnership between management
and workers -- where each is a stakeholder and a trustee.
And what we see -- and will see more of in the future --
are personnel systems which engender motivation and commitment --
by involving workers in management and rewarding them with
innovative profit sharing arrangements.
I have seen that future here in Michigan -- and it works.
Giving employees a share in their business will guarantee that
business will get a share of the world markets of tomorrow.
The road ahead can bring us full employment. The
increasingly tight labor market we're already feeling can be
a source of unprecedented opportunity. The message of the 1990s
is potentially the most positive this nation has ever known:
- that everyone who wants a good job can and will be
educated and prepared to have a good job;
02. 08. 89 12:39PM *LABOR SECRETARY DOLE
PO9
- that workers can and must be continually re-trained as
the demands of work change; and
-- that managers and workers can and will build momentum
through interests held in common, rather than through
controversy.
These three steps can take us a long way down the road to
meaningful, full employment for all Americans.
Two final thoughts:
To anyone who suggests that America is somehow headed for
decline, I have one answer: expansions and economic growth don't
die of old age, but from bad policies.
And to anyone who believes that our future is uncertain
and intangible, I have one suggestion: look at the children who
started first grade this month. They are our future. They will
be the graduating class of the year 2000. If we do well by them,
there is nothing they can't accomplish.
Thank you. God Bless you.
The high school graduating
class of Hee year 2000 is already
grade. Tell. me? ARE there hids
hapway through the first
need to /sod pooductor lors in
being taught The shills they will
the 21ST century?
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
441 G Street, N.W.
DEPERTMENT
Washington, D.C. 20212
CHITED STATES OF AMERICAN
In accordance with your request, enclosed are tables
presenting our latest comparative labor force statistics for
the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and six
European nations. Unless otherwise noted, the data are
adjusted to U.S. concepts. The tables update and revise
previously published data. Major revisions are included for
Germany and the Netherlands.
Data for Germany for 1987 onward reflect the
incorporation of employment statistics based on their 1987
Population Census, which indicated the level of employment
was about one million higher than previously estimated. The
impact of this change was to lower the adjusted unemployment
rate by 0.4 percentage point. When historical data
benchmarked to the 1987 Population Census become available
from the German Federal Statistical Office, the Bureau will
revise its comparative measures for earlier years. Until
that time, there will be a break in series at 1987 for
Germany.
For the Netherlands, the historical comparative labor
force statistics have been revised back to 1973. The Dutch
labor force survey was revamped in 1987. The new survey
revealed a large increase in the number of persons employed,
particularly those working less than 20 hours a week. These
persons, many of whom are students and housewives, had not
been enumerated in earlier surveys or quarterly statistics
of employed persons. The new survey also reported a sharp
increase in the unemployed looking for part-time work and
fewer unemployed seeking full-time work. The Bureau has
benchmarked the historical data to the new survey estimates
of employment and unemployment. The impact of this revision
was to raise employment by 10 percent and unemployment by 7
percent and to lower the adjusted unemployment rate by 0.2
percentage point for 1973 to 1985.
Sincerely,
Edwin R. Dear
EDWIN R. DEAN
Acting Associate Commissioner for
Productivity and Technology
Enclosure
COMPARATIVE LABOR FORCE STATISTICS
FOR TEN COUNTRIES,
1959-1988
Prepared by:
U.S. Department of Labor
Bureau of Labor Statistics
October 1989
CONTENTS
Page
Contents
1
General Notes
2
Tables
1. Civilian Working Age Population, 1959-1988
3
2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988
4
3. Quarterly Unemployment Rates, Seasonally Adjusted, 1984-1989
16
4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988
18
5. Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988
25
6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988
30
7. Percent Distribution of Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988
35
8. Civilian Unemployment Rates by Sex, 1960-1988
39
9. Civilian Unemployment Rates by Age, 1984-1988
41
10. BLS, OECD, and EUROSTAT Comparative Unemployment Rates, 1984-1988
42
1
GENERAL NOTES
This document presents selected international labor force statistics for 10 countries --
the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, and 6 European countries. Data for all 10
countries are shown on most tables. (Tables 3 and 9 exclude the Netherlands, and Table 10
relates to only 5 countries.) Unless otherwise noted, the data are adjusted to U.S.
concepts. This compendium is updated twice each year, usually in May and September.
BREAKS IN SERIES: There are breaks in the data series for Germany (1983, 1987), Italy
(1986), the Netherlands (1983), and Sweden (1987). For both Germany and the Netherlands,
the 1983 breaks reflect the replacement of labor force survey results tabulated by the na-
tional statistical offices with those tabulated by the European Community Statistical
Office, EUROSTAT. The Dutch figures for 1983 onward also reflect the replacement of man-
year employment data with data from the Dutch Survey of Employed Persons. The impact of
the changes was to lower the adjusted unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage point for Germany
and about 2 percentage points for the Netherlands. The 1987 break for Germany reflects
the incorporation of employment statistics based on their 1987 Population Census which in-
dicated that the level of employment was about one million higher than previously estimat-
ed. The impact of this change was to lower the adjusted unemployment rate by 0.4 percent-
age point. When historical data benchmarked to the 1987 Census become available, BLS will
revise its comparative measures for Germany. For Italy, the break in series reflects a
change in the survey questionnaire resulting in a significant increase in the number of
people reported as seeking work in the past 30 days. The impact was to increase the Ital-
ian unemployment rates approximating U.S. concepts by 1.2 percentage points. Sweden
introduced a new questionnaire. Questions regarding current availability were added and
the period of active workseeking was reduced from 60 days to 4 weeks. These changes re-
sulted in lowering Sweden's unemployment rate by 0.5 percentage point.
For Australia, data have been revised to incorporate results from the 1986 Census of
Population from 1984 onward.
OTHER COMPARATIVE SERIES: Three organizations compile internationally "comparable" series
of unemployment rates for groups of developed countries. The BLS series, shown in this
supplement, provides unemployment rates adjusted to U.S. concepts, insofar as possible.
The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) publishes
"Standardized Unemployment Rates" (SURS) for 15 member countries (see OECD, Quarterly
Labor Force Statistics, Appendix Section). The SURS are adjusted to International Labour
Office (ILO) concepts which are more general than U.S. concepts. The third organization,
the Statistical Office of the European Communities (EUROSTAT), publishes comparable
unemployment rates for European Community countries based on their own specific
interpretation of ILO concepts. These concepts are close to U.S. concepts, but there are
some differences. Table 10 compares the unemployment rates published by these three
organizations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SEE: (1) Joyanna Moy, "An Analysis of Unemployment and Other Labor
Market Indicators in 10 Countries," Monthly Labor Review, April 1988, pp. 39-50; and
(2) Constance Sorrentino, "The Uses of the European Community Labor Force Surveys for
International Unemployment Comparisons, paper prepared for the Statistical Office of the
European Communities, October 1987. (Copies available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
upon request. Call 202-523-9301.)
2
Table 1. Civilian Working Age Population, 1959-1988
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Working Age Population (1) (thousands)
1959
115,329
11,278
NA
64,030
30,982
43,103
36,754
NA
5,458
38,614
1960
117,245
11,494
NA
64,990
31,144
43,468
37,130
NA
5,514
38,952
1961
118,771
11,708
NA
65,820
31,467
43,647
37,358
NA
5,577
39,287
1962
120,153
11,940
NA
67,330
32,305
43,972
37,815
NA
5,643
39,804
1963
122,416
12,179
NA
69,170
33,196
44,232
38,083
NA
5,703
40,036
1964
124,485
12,453
7,668
71,000
33,707
44,525
38,515
NA
5,769
40,281
1965
126,513
12,755
7,830
72,650
34,261
44,909
38,724
NA
5,840
40,481
1966
128,058
13,083
8,023
74,090
34,615
45,174
39,276
NA
5,909
40,631
1967
129,874
13,444
8,208
75,340
34,947
45,111
39,456
NA
5,955
40,779
1968
132,028
13,805
8,403
76,550
35,372
45,163
39,833
NA
5,991
40,874
1969
134,335
14,162
8,612
77,580
35,753
45,570
39,781
NA
6,039
41,006
1970
137,085
14,528
8,819
78,610
36,166
46,094
40,279
NA
6,106
41,101
1971
140,216
14,872
9,036
79,560
36,598
46,687
40,385
NA
6,158
41,320
1972
144,126
15,186
9,238
80,470
36,987
47,100
40,780
NA
6,179
41,452
1973
147,096
15,526
9,425
82,150
37,366
47,594
41,186
9,750
6,199
40,799
1974
150,120
15,924
9,614
83,170
37,745
47,904
41,745
9,885
6,224
40,951
1975
153,153
16,323
9,763
84,190
38,079
48,018
42,131
9,803
6,257
41,119
1976
156,150
16,701
9,957
85,160
38,366
48,128
42,312
9,960
6,287
41,312
1977
159,033
17,051
10,136
86,070
38,743
48,418
42,529
10,103
6,321
41,557
1978
161,910
17,377
10,406
87,020
39,073
48,788
43,000
10,256
6,360
41,821
1979
164,863
17,702
10,575
88,000
39,431
49,255
43,436
10,415
6,396
42,115
1980
167,745
18,053
10,778
89,080
39,852
49,849
43,860
10,588
6,441
42,443
1981
170,130
18,368
10,994
89,930
40,181
50,344
44,184
10,744
6,479
42,733
1982
172,271
18,608
11,204
90,920
40,577
50,714
44,847
10,871
6,514
42,938
1983
174,215
18,805
11,401
92,080
40,882
50,928
45,457
10,996
6,553
43,191
1984
176,383
18,996
11,605
93,230
41,176
51,113
45,853
11,131
6,586
43,491
1985
178,206
19,190
11,852
94,410
41,501
51,262
46,174
11,271
6,606
43,735
1986
180,587
19,397
12,084
95,630
41,764
51,468
46,252
11,403
6,634
43,982
1987
182,753
19,642
12,315
96,960
42,159
51,598
46,327
11,531
6,661
44,200
1988
184,613
19,890
12,594
98,250
42,406
51,721
46,786
11,631
6,684
44,433
NA = Not available.
(1) Data relate to the civilian noninstitutionalized working age population, except that the institution-
alized working age population is included in Japan and Germany. Working age is defined as 16-year-olds
and over in the United States, France, and Sweden; 15-year-olds and over in Australia, Canada, Germany,
and Japan; and 14-year-olds and over in Italy.
The lower age limit was raised from 15 to 16 in 1973
in the United Kingdom and from 14 to 15 in 1975 for the Netherlands.
3
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
Total Labor Force (thousands)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
70,157
6,406
NA
43,530
19,510
26,080
21,450
NA
(2)3,655
24,450
1960
71,489
6,581
NA
44,330
19,590
26,280
21,190
NA
(2)3,715
24,650
1961
72,359
6,696
NA
44,820
19,590
26,500
21,230
NA
3,741
24,850
1962
72,675
6,796
NA
45,260
19,650
26,610
21,080
NA
3,764
25,160
1963
73,839
6,928
NA
45,640
19,870
26,710
20,640
NA
3,771
25,370
1964
75,109
7,113
4,611
46,260
20,100
26,730
20,630
NA
3,768
25,490
1965
76,401
7,319
4,745
47,000
20,240
26,830
20,290
NA
3,792
25,660
1966
77,892
7,599
4,930
48,080
20,450
26,770
20,010
NA
3,842
25,740
1967
79,565
7,853
5,099
49,040
20,660
26,220
20,190
NA
3,820
25,710
1968
80,990
8,051
5,221
49,920
20,770
26,170
20,210
NA
3,867
25,580
1969
82,972
8,291
5,368
50,380
21,050
26,440
20,050
NA
3,895
25,540
1970
84,889
8,487
5,562
50,970
21,380
26,740
20,100
NA
3,953
25,480
1971
86,355
8,727
5,707
51,350
21,570
26,920
20,080
NA
4,000
25,320
1972
88,847
8,981
5,833
51,550
21,720
26,870
19,840
NA
4,008
25,560
1973
91,203
9,358
5,974
52,820
22,000
27,050
19,980
5,310
4,012
25,800
1974
93,670
9,720
6,121
52,680
22,240
26,930
20,250
5,390
4,077
25,820
1975
95,453
10,054
6,238
52,770
22,340
26,650
20,430
5,430
4,161
26,070
1976
97,826
10,277
6,313
53,340
22,590
26,430
20,660
5,490
4,184
26,240
1977
100,665
10,574
6,428
54,060
22,900
26,400
20,910
5,570
4,204
26,380
1978
103,882
10,970
6,513
54,850
23,060
26,530
20,940
5,630
4,240
26,580
1979
106,559
11,305
6,589
55,450
23,240
26,780
21,240
5,740
4,300
26,660
1980
108,544
11,646
6,765
55,980
23,370
27,050
21,530
5,970
4,348
26,840
1981
110,315
11,973
6,882
56,560
23,530
27,180
21,700
6,190
4,364
26,920
1982
111,872
12,001
6,983
57,220
23,740
27,230
21,790
6,250
4,389
26,880P
1983
113,226
12,185
7,068
58,350
23,710
(3)27,190
21,940
(3)6,270
4,409
26,910P
1984
115,241
12,391
7,206
58,720
23,860
27,280
22,070
6,360
4,426
27,340P
1985
117,167
12,609
7,371
59,060
23,920
27,500
22,200
6,380
4,460
27,530P
1986
119,540
12,823
7,658
59,650
24,000
27,620
(3)22,710
6,470
4,484
27,700P
1987
121,602
13,090
7,828
60,290
24,090
(3)28,890P
22,760
6,590P
(3)4,519
28,020P
1988
123,378
13,353
8,044
61,100
24,140
29,080P
23,100P
6,660P
4,565
28,270P
Continued on the following page.
4
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(4)
(1)
Civilian Labor Force (thousands)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
68,369
6,286
NA
43,320
18,480
25,850
21,020
NA
(2)3,609
23,880
1960
69,628
6,462
NA
44,120
18,520
25,990
20,820
NA
(2)3,669
24,130
1961
70,459
6,575
NA
44,610
18,530
26,160
20,830
NA
3,695
24,380
1962
70,614
6,670
NA
45,040
18,720
26,210
20,680
NA
3,718
24,720
1963
71,833
6,805
NA
45,430
19,100
26,290
20,240
NA
3,725
24,940
1964
73,091
6,994
4,559
46,040
19,430
26,270
20,220
NA
3,720
25,070
1965
74,455
7,207
4,689
46,780
19,650
26,360
19,900
NA
3,744
25,240
1966
75,770
7,493
4,862
47,850
19,850
26,290
19,620
NA
3,795
25,320
1967
77,347
7,747
5,022
48,810
20,070
25,730
19,800
NA
3,773
25,290
1968
78,737
7,951
5,140
49,690
20,190
25,690
19,780
NA
3,822
25,180
1969
80,734
8,194
5,284
50,140
20,470
25,960
19,620
NA
3,851
25,160
1970
82,771
8,395
5,478
50,730
20,800
26,240
19,720
NA
3,909
25,110
1971
84,382
8,639
5,624
51,120
21,000
26,420
19,660
NA
3,955
24,950
1972
87,034
8,897
5,752
51,320
21,150
26,340
19,450
NA
3,963
25,190
1973
89,429
9,276
5,901
52,590
21,430
26,540
19,590
5,200
3,971
25,440
1974
91,949
9,639
6,053
52,440
21,660
26,400
19,900
5,280
4,036
25,470
1975
93,775
9,974
6,169
52,530
21,750
26,130
20,090
5,330
4,123
25,730
1976
96,158
10,203
6,244
53,100
22,000
25,900
20,290
5,390
4,148
25,900
1977
99,009
10,500
6,358
53,820
22,310
25,870
20,510
5,470
4,168
26,050
1978
102,251
10,895
6,443
54,610
22,460
26,000
20,570
5,530
4,203
26,260
1979
104,962
11,231
6,519
55,210
22,660
26,250
20,850
5,630
4,262
26,350
1980
106,940
11,573
6,693
55,740
22,800
26,520
21,120
5,860
4,312
26,520
1981
108,670
11,899
6,810
56,320
22,950
26,650
21,320
6,080
4,327
26,590
1982
110,204
11,926
6,910
56,980
23,160
26,700
21,410
6,140
4,350
26,720P
1983
111,550
12,109
6,997
58,110
23,140
(3)26,650
21,590
(3)6,170
4,369
26,750P
1984
113,544
12,316
7,135
58,480
23,300
26,760
21,670
6,260
4,385
27,170P
1985
115,461
12,532
7,300
58,820
23,360
26,970
21,800
6,280
4,418
27,370P
1986
117,834
12,746
7,588
59,410
23,440
27,090
(3)22,290
6,370
4,443
27,540P
1987
119,865
13,011
7,758
60,050
23,540
(3)28,360P
22,350
6,490P
(3)4,480
27,860P
1988
121,669
13,275
7,974
60,860
23,580
28,550P
22,660P
6,560P
4,530
28,110P
Continued on the following page.
5
Table 2.
Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(4)
(1)
Labor Force (thousands)
As published (5)
1959
70,157
6,242
NA
44,330
18,883
26,337
21,879
4,144
(2)3,603
23,745
1960
71,489
6,411
NA
45,110
18,887
26,518
21,545
4,192
(2)3,662
24,072
1961
72,359
6,521
NA
45,620
18,870
26,772
21,535
4,235
3,688
24,351
1962
72,675
6,615
NA
46,140
19,024
26,845
21,306
4,319
3,712
24,628
1963
73,839
6,748
NA
46,520
19,377
26,930
20,852
4,381
3,720
24,767
1964
75,109
6,933
4,559
47,100
19,664
26,922
20,870
4,467
3,718
24,953
1965
76,401
7,141
4,689
47,870
19,857
27,034
20,612
4,512
3,742
25,139
1966
77,892
7,493
4,862
48,910
20,014
26,962
20,367
4,555
3,792
25,237
1967
79,565
7,747
5,022
49,830
20,198
26,409
20,507
4,580
3,775
25,105
1968
80,990
7,951
5,140
50,610
20,286
26,291
20,555
4,620
3,822
25,022
1969
82,972
8,194
5,284
50,980
20,525
26,535
20,369
4,670
3,855
25,028
1970
84,889
8,395
5,478
51,530
20,857
26,817
20,436
4,725
3,913
25,001
1971
86,355
8,639
5,624
51,860
21,024
27,002
20,404
4,762
3,961
24,747
1972
88,847
8,897
5,752
51,990
21,182
26,990
20,293
4,781
3,970
24,991
1973
91,203
9,276
5,901
53,260
21,456
27,195
20,490
4,780
3,977
25,272
1974
93,670
9,639
6,053
53,100
21,690
27,147
20,714
4,807
4,043
25,360
1975
95,453
9,974
6,169
53,230
21,764
26,884
20,946
4,900
4,129
25,536
1976
97,826
10,203
6,244
53,780
22,013
26,651
21,285
4,932
4,155
25,687
1977
100,665
10,500
6,358
54,520
22,322
26,577
21,607
4,972
4,174
25,796
1978
103,882
10,895
6,443
55,320
22,463
26,692
21,730
5,030
4,209
25,993
1979
106,559
11,231
6,519
55,960
22,666
26,923
22,075
5,101
4,268
26,235
1980
108,544
11,573
6,693
56,500
22,800
27,217
22,372
5,299
4,318
26,283
1981
110,315
11,899
6,810
57,070
22,953
27,416
22,665
5,485
4,332
26,235
1982
111,872
11,926
6,910
57,740
23,163
27,542
(3)22,416
5,654
4,356
26,098
1983
113,226
12,109
6,997
58,890
23,142
27,589
22,697
5,639
4,375
26,222
1984
115,241
12,316
7,135
59,270
23,304
27,629
22,933
5,669
4,391
26,760
1985
117,167
12,532
7,300
59,630
23,357
27,844
23,117
5,710
4,424
27,239
1986
119,540
12,746
7,588
60,200
23,444
28,032
23,467
5,740
4,386
27,446
1987
121,602
13,011
7,758
60,840
23,542
(3)29,361
23,669
NA
(3)4,421
27,576
1988
123,378
13,275
7,974
61,660
23,587
29,534
23,988
NA
4,471
28,501
Continued on the following page.
6
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
Total Employment (thousands)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
66,418
6,056
NA
42,550
19,220
25,570
20,450
NA
(2)3,595
23,790
1960
67,639
6,161
NA
43,580
19,320
26,000
20,430
NA
(2)3,652
24,120
1961
67,646
6,257
NA
44,160
19,360
26,340
20,560
NA
3,686
24,370
1962
68,763
6,428
NA
44,670
19,380
26,460
20,500
NA
3,709
24,490
1963
69,768
6,577
NA
45,050
19,570
26,590
20,160
NA
3,709
24,550
1964
71,323
6,807
4,548
45,720
19,860
26,630
20,090
NA
3,710
24,870
1965
73,034
7,056
4,684
46,430
19,930
26,770
19,600
NA
3,748
25,120
1966
75,017
7,348
4,853
47,430
20,130
26,700
19,280
NA
3,783
25,180
1967
76,590
7,557
5,005
48,410
20,240
25,880
19,520
NA
3,740
24,890
1968
78,173
7,693
5,127
49,330
20,220
25,880
19,510
NA
3,782
24,770
1969
80,140
7,929
5,272
49,810
20,570
26,270
19,370
NA
3,822
24,770
1970
80,796
8,011
5,472
50,380
20,850
26,600
19,460
NA
3,894
24,700
1971
81,340
8,192
5,600
50,710
20,990
26,760
19,440
NA
3,899
24,340
1972
83,966
8,428
5,682
50,820
21,110
26,680
19,100
NA
3,901
24,490
1973
86,838
8,843
5,838
52,140
21,410
26,860
19,260
5,150
3,914
24,970
1974
88,515
9,206
5,959
51,950
21,610
26,510
19,630
5,200
3,997
25,030
1975
87,524
9,364
5,935
51,770
21,440
25,760
19,740
5,160
4,094
24,900
1976
90,420
9,551
6,015
52,260
21,590
25,540
19,870
5,200
4,118
24,700
1977
93,673
9,725
6,070
52,960
21,770
25,500
20,070
5,300
4,129
24,730
1978
97,679
10,062
6,108
53,610
21,860
25,660
20,090
5,350
4,146
24,930
1979
100,421
10,469
6,181
54,280
21,880
26,000
20,320
5,450
4,212
25,250
1980
100,907
10,781
6,356
54,840
21,900
26,280
20,610
5,620
4,262
24,990
1981
102,042
11,075
6,488
55,300
21,780
26,090
20,660
5,650
4,256
24,130
1982
101,194
10,693
6,488
55,860
21,820
25,670
20,630
5,620
4,252
23,880P
1983
102,510
10,751
6,371
56,790
21,740
(3)25,290
20,670
(3)5,510
4,258
23,770P
1984
106,702
11,007
6,565
57,110
21,540
25,310
20,790
5,590
4,290
24,150P
1985
108,856
11,298
6,768
57,500
21,480
25,490
20,890
5,740
4,335
24,470P
1986
111,303
11,608
7,044
57,980
21,510
25,760
(3)21,030
5,830
4,367
24,620P
1987
114,177
11,940
7,199
58,560
21,560
(3)27,080P
21,010
5,940P
(3)4,435
25,170P
1988
116,677
12,322
7,468
59,550
21,700
27,260P
21,310P
6,000P
4,493
25,940P
Continued on the following page.
7
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(4)
(1)
Civilian Employment (thousands)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
64,630
5,936
NA
42,340
18,190
25,340
20,020
NA
(2)3,549
23,220
1960
65,778
6,042
NA
43,370
18,250
25,710
20,060
NA
(2)3,606
23,600
1961
65,746
6,136
NA
43,950
18,300
26,000
20,160
NA
3,640
23,900
1962
66,702
6,302
NA
44,450
18,450
26,060
20,100
NA
3,663
24,050
1963
67,762
6,454
NA
44,840
18,800
26,170
19,760
NA
3,663
24,120
1964
69,305
6,688
4,496
45,500
19,190
26,170
19,680
NA
3,662
24,450
1965
71,088
6,944
4,628
46,210
19,340
26,290
19,210
NA
3,700
24,700
1966
72,895
7,242
4,785
47,200
19,530
26,220
18,890
NA
3,736
24,760
1967
74,372
7,451
4,928
48,180
19,650
25,390
19,130
NA
3,693
24,470
1968
75,920
7,593
5,046
49,100
19,640
25,400
19,080
NA
3,737
24,370
1969
77,902
7,832
5,188
49,570
19,990
25,790
18,940
NA
3,778
24,390
1970
78,678
7,919
5,388
50,140
20,270
26,100
19,080
NA
3,850
24,330
1971
79,367
8,104
5,517
50,480
20,420
26,260
19,020
NA
3,854
23,970
1972
82,153
8,344
5,601
50,590
20,540
26,150
18,710
NA
3,856
24,120
1973
85,064
8,761
5,765
51,910
20,840
26,350
18,870
5,040
3,873
24,610
1974
86,794
9,125
5,891
51,710
21,030
25,980
19,280
5,090
3,956
24,680
1975
85,846
9,284
5,866
51,530
20,850
25,240
19,400
5,060
4,056
24,560
1976
88,752
9,477
5,946
52,020
21,000
25,010
19,500
5,100
4,082
24,360
1977
92,017
9,651
6,000
52,720
21,180
24,970
19,670
5,200
4,093
24,400
1978
96,048
9,987
6,038
53,370
21,260
25,130
19,720
5,250
4,109
24,610
1979
98,824
10,395
6,111
54,040
21,300
25,470
19,930
5,340
4,174
24,940
1980
99,303
10,708
6,284
54,600
21,330
25,750
20,200
5,510
4,226
24,670
1981
100,397
11,001
6,416
55,060
21,200
25,560
20,280
5,540
4,219
23,800
1982
99,526
10,618
6,415
55,620
21,240
25,140
20,250
5,510
4,213
23,720P
1983
100,834
10,675
6,300
56,550
21,170
(3)24,750
20,320
(3)5,410
4,218
23,610P
1984
105,005
10,932
6,494
56,870
20,980
24,790
20,390
5,490
4,249
23,990P
1985
107,150
11,221
6,697
57,260
20,920
24,960
20,490
5,640
4,293
24,310P
1986
109,597
11,531
6,974
57,740
20,950
25,230
(3)20,610
5,730
4,326
24,460P
1987
112,440
11,861
7,129
58,320
21,010
(3)26,550P
20,590
5,840P
(3)4,396
25,010P
1988
114,968
12,244
7,398
59,310
21,140
26,730P
20,870P
5,900P
4,458
25,780P
Continued on the following page.
8
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(4)
(1)
Employment (thousands)
As published (5)
1959
66,418
5,870
NA
43,350
18,584
25,797
20,349
4,092
(2)3,543
23,315
1960
67,639
5,965
NA
44,360
18,611
26,247
20,330
4,162
(2)3,599
23,711
1961
67,646
6,055
NA
44,980
18,629
26,591
20,427
4,213
3,633
24,011
1962
68,763
6,225
NA
45,560
18,748
26,690
20,337
4,297
3,657
24,156
1963
69,768
6,375
NA
45,950
19,066
26,744
20,045
4,356
3,659
24,226
1964
71,323
6,609
4,496
46,550
19,413
26,753
19,966
4,445
3,660
24,570
1965
73,034
6,862
4,628
47,300
19,541
26,887
19,502
4,487
3,698
24,800
1966
75,017
7,242
4,785
48,270
19,688
26,801
19,175
4,519
3,733
24,869
1967
76,590
7,451
4,928
49,200
19,762
25,950
19,401
4,505
3,695
24,548
1968
78,173
7,593
5,046
50,020
19,732
25,968
19,383
4,552
3,737
24,447
1969
80,140
7,832
5,188
50,400
20,041
26,356
19,209
4,621
3,782
24,453
1970
80,796
7,919
5,388
50,940
20,327
26,668
19,325
4,679
3,854
24,389
1971
81,340
8,104
5,517
51,210
20,439
26,817
19,295
4,700
3,860
24,038
1972
83,966
8,344
5,601
51,260
20,571
26,744
18,996
4,673
3,862
24,204
1973
86,838
8,761
5,765
52,590
20,863
26,922
19,185
4,670
3,879
24,717
1974
88,515
9,125
5,891
52,370
21,058
26,565
19,601
4,672
3,962
24,801
1975
87,524
9,284
5,866
52,230
20,863
25,810
19,716
4,640
4,062
24,665
1976
90,420
9,477
5,946
52,710
21,016
25,591
19,859
4,654
4,088
24,494
1977
93,673
9,651
6,000
53,420
21,188
25,547
20,062
4,701
4,099
24,525
1978
97,679
9,987
6,038
54,080
21,262
25,699
20,159
4,757
4,115
24,740
1979
100,421
10,395
6,111
54,790
21,305
26,047
20,377
4,821
4,180
25,062
1980
100,907
10,708
6,284
55,360
21,333
26,328
20,674
4,973
4,232
24,796
1981
102,042
11,001
6,416
55,810
21,203
26,144
20,752
5,005
4,225
23,928
1982
101,194
10,618
6,415
56,380
21,240
25,709
(3)20,493
4,999
4,219
23,472
1983
102,510
10,675
6,300
57,330
21,168
25,331
20,557
4,965
4,224
23,356
1984
106,702
10,932
6,494
57,660
20,981
25,363
20,629
4,980
4,255
23,761
1985
108,856
11,221
6,697
58,070
20,915
25,540
20,735
5,076
4,299
24,145
1986
111,303
11,531
6,974
58,530
20,955
25,804
20,856
5,135
4,269
24,266
1987
114,177
11,861
7,129
59,110
21,010
(3)27,132
20,836
NA
(3)4,337
24,706
1988
116,677
12,244
7,398
60,110
21,144
27,301
21,103
NA
4,399
26,207
Continued on the following page.
9
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(4)
(1)
Unemployment (thousands)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
3,740
350
NA
980
290
510
1,000
NA
(2)60
660
1960
3,852
420
NA
750
270
280
760
NA
(2)63
530
1961
4,714
439
NA
660
230
160
670
NA
55
480
1962
3,911
368
NA
590
270
150
580
NA
55
670
1963
4,070
351
NA
590
300
120
480
NA
62
830
1964
3,786
306
63
540
240
100
540
NA
58
620
1965
3,366
263
61
570
310
70
690
NA
44
540
1966
2,875
251
76
650
320
70
730
NA
59
570
1967
2,975
296
94
630
420
340
670
NA
80
830
1968
2,817
358
94
590
550
290
700
NA
85
810
1969
2,832
362
96
570
480
170
680
NA
73
770
1970
4,093
476
91
590
530
140
640
NA
59
770
1971
5,016
535
107
640
580
160
640
NA
101
980
1972
4,882
553
150
730
610
190
740
NA
107
1,070
1973
4,365
515
136
680
590
190
720
160
98
820
1974
5,156
514
162
730
630
420
620
190
80
790
1975
7,929
690
302
1,000
900
890
690
270
67
1,180
1976
7,406
726
298
1,080
1,000
890
790
290
66
1,540
1977
6,991
849
358
1,100
1,130
900
840
270
75
1,660
1978
6,202
908
405
1,240
1,200
870
850
280
94
1,650
1979
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,360
780
920
290
88
1,420
1980
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,470
770
920
350
86
1,850
1981
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,750
1,090
1,040
540
108
2,790
1982
10,678
1,308
495
1,360
1,920
1,560
1,160
630
137
3,000P
1983
10,717
1,434
697
1,560
1,970
(3)1,900
1,270
(3)760
151
3,140P
1984
8,539
1,384
641
1,610
2,320
1,970
1,280
770
136
3,180P
1985
8,312
1,311
603
1,560
2,440
2,010
1,310
640
125
3,060P
1986
8,237
1,215
613
1,670
2,490
1,860
(3)1,680
640
117
3,080P
1987
7,425
1,150
629
1,730
2,530
1,810P
1,760
650P
(3)84
2,850P
1988
6,701
1,031
576
1,550
2,440
1,820P
1,790P
660P
72
2,330P
Continued on the following page.
10
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(4)
(1)
Unemployment (thousands)
As published (6)
1959
3,740
372
NA
980
299
540
1,530
49
(2)60
430
1960
3,852
446
NA
750
276
271
1,215
29
(2)63
361
1961
4,714
466
NA
660
241
181
1,108
21
55
340
1962
3,911
390
NA
590
276
154
969
21
55
472
1963
4,070
374
NA
590
311
186
807
24
62
541
1964
3,786
324
63
540
251
169
904
21
58
383
1965
3,366
280
61
570
316
147
1,110
25
44
339
1966
2,875
251
76
650
326
161
1,192
36
59
368
1967
2,975
296
94
630
436
459
1,106
75
80
557
1968
2,817
358
94
590
554
323
1,172
68
85
575
1969
2,832
362
96
570
484
179
1,160
49
73
575
1970
4,093
476
91
590
530
149
1,111
45
59
612
1971
5,016
535
107
640
585
185
1,109
62
101
709
1972
4,882
553
150
730
611
246
1,297
108
107
787
1973
4,365
515
136
680
593
273
1,305
110
98
555
1974
5,156
514
162
730
632
582
1,113
135
80
559
1975
7,929
690
302
1,000
901
1,074
1,230
(3)260
67
871
1976
7,406
726
298
1,080
997
1,060
1,426
278
66
1,193
1977
6,991
849
358
1,100
1,134
1,030
1,545
271
75
1,271
1978
6,202
908
405
1,240
1,201
993
1,571
273
94
1,253
1979
6,137
836
408
1,170
1,361
876
1,698
281
88
1,173
1980
7,637
865
409
1,140
1,467
889
1,698
325
86
1,487
1981
8,273
898
394
1,260
1,750
1,272
1,913
480
108
2,307
1982
10,678
1,308
495
1,360
1,923
1,833
(3)1,923
655
137
2,626
1983
10,717
1,434
697
1,560
1,974
2,258
2,140
801
151
2,866
1984
8,539
1,384
641
1,610
2,323
2,265
2,304
822
136
2,999
1985
8,312
1,311
603
1,560
2,443
2,304
2,381
767
125
3,114
1986
8,237
1,215
613
1,670
2,489
2,228
2,611
711
117
3,180
1987
7,425
1,150
629
1,730
2,532
2,229
2,832
686
(3)84
2,880
1988
6,701
1,031
576
1,550
2,443
2,242
2,885
682
72
2,370
Continued on the following page.
11
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
Unemployment Rate (percent)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
5.3
5.5
NA
2.3
1.5
2.0
4.7
NA
(2)1.6
2.7
1960
5.4
6.4
NA
1.7
1.4
1.1
3.6
NA
(2)1.7
2.2
1961
6.5
6.6
NA
1.5
1.2
.6
3.2
NA
1.5
1.9
1962
5.4
5.4
NA
1.3
1.4
.6
2.8
NA
1.5
2.7
1963
5.5
5.1
NA
1.3
1.5
.4
2.3
NA
1.6
3.3
1964
5.0
4.3
1.4
1.2
1.2
.4
2.6
NA
1.5
2.4
1965
4.4
3.6
1.3
1.2
1.5
.3
3.4
NA
1.2
2.1
1966
3.7
3.3
1.6
1.4
1.6
.3
3.6
NA
1.5
2.2
1967
3.7
3.8
1.8
1.3
2.0
1.3
3.3
NA
2.1
3.2
1968
3.5
4.4
1.8
1.2
2.6
1.1
3.5
NA
2.2
3.2
1969
3.4
4.4
1.8
1.1
2.3
.6
3.4
NA
1.9
3.0
1970
4.8
5.6
1.6
1.2
2.5
.5
3.2
NA
1.5
3.0
1971
5.8
6.1
1.9
1.2
2.7
.6
3.2
NA
2.5
3.9
1972
5.5
6.2
2.6
1.4
2.8
.7
3.7
NA
2.7
4.2
1973
4.8
5.5
2.3
1.3
2.7
.7
3.6
3.0
2.4
3.2
1974
5.5
5.3
2.6
1.4
2.8
1.6
3.1
3.5
2.0
3.1
1975
8.3
6.9
4.8
1.9
4.0
3.3
3.4
5.0
1.6
4.5
1976
7.6
7.1
4.7
2.0
4.4
3.4
3.8
5.3
1.6
5.9
1977
6.9
8.0
5.6
2.0
4.9
3.4
4.0
4.8
1.8
6.3
1978
6.0
8.3
6.2
2.3
5.2
3.3
4.1
5.0
2.2
6.2
1979
5.8
7.4
6.2
2.1
5.9
2.9
4.3
5.1
2.0
5.3
1980
7.0
7.4
6.0
2.0
6.3
2.8
4.3
5.9
2.0
6.9
1981
7.5
7.5
5.7
2.2
7.4
4.0
4.8
8.7
2.5
10.4
1982
9.5
10.9
7.1
2.4
8.1
5.7
5.3
10.1
3.1
11.2P
1983
9.5
11.8
9.9
2.7
8.3
(3)7.0
5.8
(3)12.1
3.4
11.7P
1984
7.4
11.2
8.9
2.7
9.7
7.2
5.8
12.1
3.1
11.6P
1985
7.1
10.4
8.2
2.6
10.2
7.3
5.9
10.0
2.8
11.1P
1986
6.9
9.5
8.0
2.8
10.4
6.7
(3)7.4
9.9
2.6
11.2P
1987
6.1
8.8
8.0
2.9
10.5
(3)6.3P
7.7
9.9P
(3)1.9
10.2P
1988
5.4
7.7
7.2
2.5
10.1
6.3P
7.8P
9.9P
1.6
8.2P
Continued on the following page.
12
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(4)
(1)
Civilian Unemployment Rate (percent)
Approximating U.S. concepts
1959
5.5
5.6
(7)2.1
2.3
1.6
2.0
4.8
NA
(2)1.7
2.8
1960
5.5
6.5
(7)1.6
1.7
1.5
1.1
3.7
NA
(2)1.7
2.2
1961
6.7
6.7
(7)3.0
1.5
1.2
.6
3.2
NA
1.5
2.0
1962
5.5
5.5
(7)2.9
1.3
1.4
.6
2.8
NA
1.5
2.7
1963
5.7
5.2
(7)2.3
1.3
1.6
.5
2.4
NA
1.7
3.3
1964
5.2
4.4
1.4
1.2
1.2
.4
2.7
NA
1.6
2.5
1965
4.5
3.6
1.3
1.2
1.6
.3
3.5
NA
1.2
2.1
1966
3.8
3.4
1.6
1.4
1.6
.3
3.7
NA
1.6
2.3
1967
3.8
3.8
1.9
1.3
2.1
1.3
3.4
NA
2.1
3.3
1968
3.6
4.5
1.8
1.2
2.7
1.1
3.5
NA
2.2
3.2
1969
3.5
4.4
1.8
1.1
2.3
.6
3.5
NA
1.9
3.1
1970
4.9
5.7
1.6
1.2
2.5
.5
3.2
NA
1.5
3.1
1971
5.9
6.2
1.9
1.3
2.8
.6
3.3
NA
2.6
3.9
1972
5.6
6.2
2.6
1.4
2.9
.7
3.8
NA
2.7
4.2
1973
4.9
5.5
2.3
1.3
2.8
.7
3.7
3.1
2.5
3.2
1974
5.6
5.3
2.7
1.4
2.9
1.6
3.1
3.6
2.0
3.1
1975
8.5
6.9
4.9
1.9
4.1
3.4
3.4
5.1
1.6
4.6
1976
7.7
7.1
4.8
2.0
4.5
3.4
3.9
5.4
1.6
5.9
1977
7.1
8.1
5.6
2.0
5.1
3.5
4.1
4.9
1.8
6.4
1978
6.1
8.3
6.3
2.3
5.3
3.3
4.1
5.1
2.2
6.3
1979
5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.0
4.4
5.2
2.1
5.4
1980
7.1
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
2.9
4.4
6.0
2.0
7.0
1981
7.6
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.6
4.1
4.9
8.9
2.5
10.5
1982
9.7
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
5.8
5.4
10.3
3.1
11.2P
1983
9.6
11.8
10.0
2.7
8.5
(3)7.1
5.9
(3)12.3
3.5
11.7P
1984
7.5
11.2
9.0
2.8
10.0
7.4
5.9
12.3
3.1
11.7P
1985
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.5
6.0
10.2
2.8
11.2P
1986
7.0
9.5
8.1
2.8
10.6
6.9
(3)7.5
10.0
2.6
11.2P
1987
6.2
8.8
8.1
2.9
10.8
(3)6.4P
7.9
10.0P
(3)1.9
10.2P
1988
5.5
7.8
7.2
2.5
10.4
6.4P
7.9P
10.1P
1.6
8.3P
Continued on the following page.
13
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan.
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(4)
(1)
Unemployment Rate (percent)
As published (8)
1959
5.3
6.0
(7)2.1
2.2
1.6
2.6
7.0
1.5
(2)1.7
2.2
1960
5.4
7.0
(7)1.6
1.7
1.5
1.3
5.6
.9
(2)1.7
1.6
1961
6.5
7.2
(7)3.0
1.4
1.3
.8
5.1
.6
1.5
1.5
1962
5.4
5.9
(7)2.9
1.3
1.5
.7
4.5
.6
1.5
2.0
1963
5.5
5.5
(7)2.3
1.3
1.6
.8
3.9
.7
1.7
2.4
1964
5.0
4.7
1.4
1.1
1.3
.8
4.3
.6
1.6
1.8
1965
4.4
3.9
1.3
1.2
1.6
.7
5.4
.7
1.2
1.5
1966
3.7
3.4
1.6
1.3
1.6
.7
5.9
1.0
1.6
1.5
1967
3.7
3.8
1.9
1.3
2.2
2.1
5.4
2.0
2.1
2.3
1968
3.5
4.5
1.8
1.2
2.7
1.5
5.7
1.8
2.2
2.5
1969
3.4
4.4
1.8
1.1
2.4
.9
5.7
1.3
1.9
2.5
1970
4.8
5.7
1.6
1.1
2.4
.7
5.4
1.1
1.5
2.6
1971
5.8
6.2
1.9
1.2
2.8
.8
5.4
1.6
2.5
3.3
1972
5.5
6.2
2.6
1.4
2.9
1.1
6.4
2.8
2.7
3.7
1973
4.8
5.5
2.3
1.3
2.8
1.2
6.4
2.8
2.5
2.6
1974
5.5
5.3
2.7
1.4
2.9
2.6
5.4
3.5
2.0
2.6
1975
8.3
6.9
4.9
1.9
4.1
4.7
5.9
5.0
1.6
4.0
1976
7.6
7.1
4.8
2.0
4.5
4.6
6.7
5.3
1.6
5.5
1977
6.9
8.1
5.6
2.0
5.1
4.5
7.2
5.1
1.8
5.8
1978
6.0
8.3
6.3
2.2
5.3
4.3
7.2
5.1
2.2
5.7
1979
5.8
7.4
6.3
2.1
6.0
3.8
7.7
5.1
2.1
5.3
1980
7.0
7.5
6.1
2.0
6.4
3.8
7.6
5.9
2.0
6.8
1981
7.5
7.5
5.8
2.2
7.6
5.5
8.4
9.1
2.5
10.4
1982
9.5
11.0
7.2
2.4
8.3
7.5
8.6
12.6
3.1
10.9
1983
9.5
11.8
10.0
2.6
8.5
9.1
9.4
17.0
3.5
11.7
1984
7.4
11.2
9.0
2.7
10.0
9.1
10.0
17.3
3.1
11.7
1985
7.1
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.5
9.3
10.3
15.9
2.8
11.8
1986
6.9
9.5
8.1
2.8
10.6
9.0
(3)11.1
14.7
2.7
11.8
1987
6.1
8.8
8.1
2.8
10.8
8.9
12.0
13.9
(3)1.9
10.4
1988
5.4
7.8
7.2
2.5
10.4
8.8
13.7
13.7
1.6
8.3
Continued on the following page.
14
Table 2. Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment, 1959-1988--Continued
Footnotes:
NA = Not available.
P = Preliminary.
(1) Published and adjusted data are identical.
(2) The Swedish labor force survey was initiated in 1961. The published data for 1959-1960 are
estimates made by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
(3) Break in series. Based on the former series, the adjusted unemployment rate would be
1.2 percentage points lower for Italy and 2 percentage points higher for the Netherlands.
For Germany, the adjusted unemployment rate based on the former series would be approxi-
mately 0.3 percentage point higher in 1983 and 0.4 percentage point higher in 1987.
For Sweden, the 1986 unemployment rate based on the new series would be approximately
0.5 percentage point lower.
(4) Published and adjusted data are identical from 1966 onward. There is a break in the as
published series for Canada as of 1966, resulting from sampling changes and a raising
of the lower age limit from 14 to 15. The effect was to lower the as published unemploy-
ment rate by about 0.4 percentage point. The adjusted series for Canada prior to 1966
are based on BLS estimates and do not show a break in series.
(5) Including military personnel for the United States, Japan, Germany, Italy, and Sweden.
(6) For the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Italy, and Sweden, unemployment as recorded
by sample labor force surveys; for France, annual estimates of unemployment; and for Germany,
the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, the registered unemployed.
(7) The Australian labor force survey was initiated in 1964. Unemployment rates for 1959-1963
are estimates made by an Australian researcher.
(8) For Canada, Australia, and France, unemployment as a percent of the civilian labor force; for
the United States, Japan, Italy, and Sweden, unemployment as a percent of the civilian labor
force plus career military personnel; for Germany and the Netherlands, registered unemployed
as a percent of employed wage and salary workers plus the unemployed; for the United Kingdom,
registered unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force plus military personnel.
Published rates shown for Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom cannot be computed
from data contained in this table.
Note: Data for the United States relate to the population 16 years of age and over. Published
data for Canada, France, Germany, and Italy relate to the population 14 years of age and over; for
Sweden, to the population aged 16 to 74; and for Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United
Kingdom, to the population 15 years of age and over. Beginning in 1966, published data for Canada
relate to the population 15 years of age and over; beginning in 1971, published data for France
relate to the population 15 years of age and over; beginning in 1973, published data for the
United Kingdom relate to the population 16 years of age and over; and beginning in 1986, published
data for Sweden, relate to the population aged 16 to 64. The adjusted statistics have been
adapted, insofar as possible, to the age at which compulsory schooling ends in each country.
Therefore, adjusted statistics for France relate to the population 16 years of age and over; for
Germany, to the population 15 years of age and over; and for the Netherlands, to the population 14
years of age and over for 1973-1974, and to the population 15 years of age and over from 1975
onward. The age limits of adjusted statistics for Canada (except for 1959-1965), Australia,
Japan, Italy, and the United Kingdom coincide with the age limits of the published statistics.
Statistics for Sweden remain at the lower age limit of 16, but have been adjusted to include
persons older than the upper age limit.
15
Table 3. Quarterly Unemployment Rates, Seasonally Adjusted, 1984-1989
United
United
Period
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(1)
(1,2)
(1)
Total Labor Force Basis
1984
7.4
11.2
8.9
2.7
9.7
7.2
5.8
3.1
11.6
I
7.7
11.2
9.3
2.7
9.3
7.2
5.9
3.2
11.8
II
7.4
11.3
9.0
2.7
9.7
7.2
5.8
3.1
11.6
III
7.3
11.1
8.7
2.8
9.9
7.3
6.0
3.0
11.6
IV
7.2
11.0
8.6
2.7
10.2
7.3
5.6
3.0
11.5
1985
7.1
10.4
8.2
2.6
10.2
7.3
5.9
2.8
11.1
I
7.2
10.9
8.5
2.6
10.2
7.3
5.8
3.0
11.3
II
7.2
10.5
8.4
2.6
10.2
7.3
5.7
2.9
11.2
III
7.1
10.1
8.0
2.6
10.2
7.3
5.8
2.7
11.1
IV
7.0
10.0
7.8
2.8
10.1
7.3
6.0
2.7
11.0
1986
6.9
9.5
8.0
2.8
10.4
6.7
(3)7.4
2.6
11.1
I
6.9
9.6
7.8
2.7
10.1
6.9
7.2
2.7
11.1
II
7.1
9.5
7.7
2.8
10.4
6.8
7.2
2.6
11.2
III
6.9
9.5
8.2
2.9
10.5
6.6
7.3
2.6
11.2
IV
6.8
9.3
8.3
2.8
10.5
6.6
7.7
2.5
11.1
1987
6.1
8.8
8.0
2.9
10.5
(3)6.3
7.7
(3)1.9
10.2
I
6.5
9.4
8.2
3.0
10.6
6.2
7.4
2.0
10.9
II
6.2
9.0
8.0
3.0
10.6
6.3
7.6
1.9
10.5
III
5.9
8.6
7.9
2.8
10.5
6.3
7.8
1.9
10.0
IV
5.8
8.1
7.9
2.7
10.3
6.3
7.9
1.7
9.4
1988
5.4
7.7
7.2
2.5
10.1
6.3
7.8
1.6
8.2
I
5.6
7.8
7.5
2.7
10.2
6.3
7.8
1.7
9.0
II
5.4
7.6
7.5
2.5
10.1
6.3
7.7
1.6
8.5
III
5.4
7.8
6.9
2.6
10.2
6.3
7.8
1.6
8.0
IV
5.3
7.7
6.8
2.4
10.0
6.1
7.7
1.4
7.5
1989
I
5.1
7.5
6.6
2.4
9.9
5.8
7.6
1.4
7.0
II
5.2
7.6
6.1
2.3
9.9
5.7
7.8
1.3
6.5
III
5.2
7.3
5.6
1.3
6.2
Continued on the following page.
16
Table 3. Quarterly Unemployment Rates, Seasonally Adjusted, 1984-1989--Continued
United
United
Period
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(1)
(1,2)
(1)
Civilian Labor Force Basis
1984
7.5
11.2
9.0
2.8
10.0
7.4
5.9
3.1
11.7
I
7.9
11.3
9.4
2.8
9.5
7.3
6.0
3.2
11.8
II
7.5
11.4
9.1
2.8
9.9
7.4
5.9
3.1
11.7
III
7.4
11.2
8.8
2.8
10.1
7.4
6.1
3.1
11.6
IV
7.3
11.1
8.6
2.7
10.4
7.4
5.6
3.0
11.6
1985
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.4
7.5
6.0
2.8
11.2
I
7.3
11.0
8.6
2.6
10.5
7.5
5.9
3.0
11.4
II
7.3
10.6
8.4
2.6
10.4
7.5
5.8
2.9
11.2
III
7.2
10.2
8.1
2.6
10.5
7:4
5.9
2.8
11.1
IV
7.1
10.1
7.9
2.8
10.4
7.4
6.1
2.7
11.1
1986
7.0
9.5
8.1
2.8
10.6
6.9
(3)7.5
2.6
11.2
I
7.0
9.6
7.9
2.7
10.4
7.1
7.4
2.7
11.1
II
7.2
9.6
7.8
2.8
10.6
6.9
7.4
2.6
11.2
III
7.0
9.5
8.3
2.9
10.7
6.8
7.5
2.6
11.3
IV
6.8
9.4
8.4
2.8
10.8
6.7
7.9
2.6
11.1
1987
6.2
8.8
8.1
2.9
10.8
(3)6.4
7.9
(3)1.9
10.2
I
6.6
9.5
8.3
3.0
10.9
6.3
7.6
2.0
11.0
II
6.3
9.0
8.1
3.0
10.9
6.4
7.8
1.9
10.6
III
6.0
8.6
8.0
2.8
10.8
6.4
8.0
1.9
10.0
IV
5.9
8.1
8.0
2.7
10.5
6.4
8.1
1.7
9.4
1988
5.5
7.8
7.2
2.5
10.4
6.4
7.9
1.6
8.3
I
5.7
7.8
7.6
2.7
10.4
6.4
7.9
1.7
9.0
II
5.5
7.7
7.5
2.5
10.4
6.4
7.9
1.6
8.6
III
5.5
7.8
7.0
2.6
10.4
6.4
8.0
1.6
8.0
IV
5.3
7.7
6.8
2.4
10.2
6.3
7.9
1.4
7.5
1989
I
5.2
7.6
6.6
2.4
10.1
5.9
7.7
1.4
7.0
II
5.3
7.6
6.1
2.3
10.1
5.8
8.0
1.3
6.6
III
5.2
7.4
5.7
1.3
6.2
(1)
Preliminary for the United Kingdom from 1984 onward, for Germany from 1987 onward,
for Italy from 1988 onward, and for France from 1989 onward.
(2)
Quarterly data are for January, April, July, and October.
(3)
Break in series. For Italy, the first half 1986 rate based on the former series
was 6.2 percent on a total labor force basis and 6.4 percent on a civilian basis.
For Germany, the 1987 rate based on the former series was 6.7 percent on a total
labor force basis and 6.8 percent on a civilian basis. For Sweden, the 1986 rate
based on the new series was 2.2 percent on both bases.
Note: Quarterly figures for France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom are calcu-
lated by applying annual adjustment factors to quarterly published data, and therefore
should be viewed as only approximate Indicators of unemployment under U.S. concepts.
17
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Total Labor Force Basis
Both Sexes
1960
60.0
56.7
NA
68.0
60.8
60.1
56.5
NA
66.8
62.6
1961
60.0
56.6
NA
67.9
60.2
60.2
56.2
NA
66.5
62.7
1962
59.5
56.3
NA
67.0
59.1
60.0
55.2
NA
66.2
62.7
1963
59.3
56.3
NA
65.8
58.5
59.8
53.6
NA
65.6
62.9
1964
59.4
56.6
59.7
65.0
58.5
59.4
53.0
NA
64.8
62.8
1965
59.5
56.9
60.2
64.5
58.1
59.1
51.9
NA
64.4
62.9
1966
59.8
57.6
60.9
64.7
58.1
58.6
50.4
NA
64.5
62.9
1967
60.2
58.0
61.6
64.9
58.1
57.5
50.7
NA
63.6
62.6
1968
60.3
57.9
61.5
65.0
57.8
57.3
50.2
NA
64.1
62.1
1969
60.8
58.1
61.7
64.7
57.9
57.4
49.9
NA
64.0
61.8
1970
61.0
58.1
62.5
64.6
58.2
57.4
49.4
NA
64.3
61.6
1971
60.7
58.3
62.6
64.4
58.0
57.0
49.2
NA
64.5
60.9
1972
60.9
58.8
62.6
63.9
57.8
56.4
48.2
NA
64.4
61.2
1973
61.3
60.0
62.9
64.1
58.0
56.2
48.1
53.9
64.3
62.8
1974
61.7
60.7
63.2
63.2
58.0
55.6
48.1
53.9
65.1
62.6
1975
61.6
61.3
63.4
62.5
57.8
54.9
48.1
54.8
66.1
63.0
1976
62.0
61.3
63.0
62.5
58.0
54.3
48.4
54.6
66.2
63.1
1977
62.6
61.7
63.0
62.6
58.2
53.9
48:7
54.6
66.1
63.1
1978
63.5
62.9
62.2
62.9
58.1
53.8
48.3
54.4
66.3
63.2
1979
64.0
63.6
61.9
62.8
58.1
53.8
48.5
54.6
66.8
62.9
1980
64.1
64.3
62.3
62.7
57.8
53.7
48.6
55.8
67.1
62.9
1981
64.2
64.9
62.2
62.7
57.7
53.4
48.7
57.0
67.0
62.6
1982
64.3
64.2
61.9
62.8
57.7
53.1
48.2
56.9
67.0
62.2P
1983
64.4
64.5
61.6
63.2
57.2
(1) 52.8
47.9
(1) 56.5
66.9
61.9P
1984
64.7
65.0
61.7
62.8
57.2
52.8
47.7
56.6
66.8
62.5P
1985
65.1
65.4
61.8
62.4
56.9
53.1
47.7
56.1
67.1
62.6P
1986
65.6
65.8
63.0
62.2
56.7
53.1
(1 48.3
56.2
67.2
62.6P
1987
65.9
66.4
63.2
62.0
56.4
55.4P
48.3P
56.6P
(1)67.4P
63.0P
1988
66.2
66.9
63.5
62.0
56.2P
55.7P
48.9P
56.8P
67.9P
63.2P
Continued on the following page.
18
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Total Labor Force Basis
Male
1960
83.9-
83.1
NA
84.4
NA
82.9
82.7
NA
NA
87.8
1961
83.4
82.2
NA
84.4
NA
83.0
82.2
NA
87.3
87.4
1962
82.6
81.5
NA
83.7
82.1
82.5
81.0
NA
85.6
86.9
1963
82.0
81.0
NA
82.6
80.8
82.2
79.7
NA
84.0
87.2
1964
81.6
80.5
85.5
81.6
80.7
81.8
79.2
NA
83.3
86.5
1965
81.3
80.2
85.3
81.2
79.9
81.4
78.0
NA
82.4
86.1
1966
81.1
80.1
85.4
81.2
79.8
80.9
76.5
NA
81.9
85.6
1967
81.1
79.6
85.2
81.1
79.5
79.8
76.6
NA
80.7
85.2
1968
80.8
78.9
84.8
81.8
78.6
79.5
75.7
NA
80.4
84.3
1969
80.5
78.6
84.5
81.6
78.4
79.4
75.0
NA
79.4
83.6
1970
80.3
78.1
84.4
81.6
78.2
79.2
74.2
NA
78.8
82.8
1971
79.7
77.6
84.1
82.0
77.3
78.3
74.0
NA
78.3
81.5
1972
79.5
77.8
83.9
82.0
76.5
76.7
72.6
NA
77.6
81.3
1973
79.3
78.4
83.4
82.0
76.2
75.9
71.8
79.6
77.2
82.7
1974
79.2
78.9
82.9
81.7
76.0
74.7
71.5
79.6
77.2
81.1
1975
78.4
78.6
82.5
81.3
75.1
73.7
71.1
80.1
77.3
81.2
1976
78.0
77.8
81.7
81.1
74.8
72.8
70.9
79.6
76.8
81.2
1977
78.1
77.9
81.2
80.5
74.5
72.2
70.1
78.9
75.9
80.6
1978
78.3
78.3
80.0
80.2
73.9
72.0
69.3
78.0
75.3
80.1
1979
78.2
78.6
79.7
80.0
73.3
71.8
68.9
77.4
75.4
79.4
1980
77.8
78.6
79.4
79.7
72.5
71.2
68.5
77.7
75.2
79.2
1981
77.4
78.6
79.1
79.7
72.1
70.4
68.4
77.8
74.1
78.9
1982
77.0
77.2
78.6
79.4
71.5
69.6
67.4
76.6
73.8
77.9P
1983
76.8
76.9
77.9
79.3
70.5
(1)69.1
66.7
(1)76.0
73.2
77.0P
1984
76.8
76.7
77.5
78.6
69.9
68.6
66.2
75.3
72.7
76.8P
1985
76.7
76.8
76.8
78.0
69.1
68.8
65.9
74.4
72.9
76.6P
1986
76.7
76.8
76.8
77.7
68.6
68.4
)65.9
72.7
72.8
76.1P
1987
76.6
76.7
76.4
77.2
67.8
NA
65.5P
72.0P
(1)72.5P
76.1P
1988
76.6
76.7
76.3
77.0
NA
NA
66.2P
NA
72.9P
76.1P
Continued on the following page.
19
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Total Labor Force Basis
Female
1960
37.8
30.1
NA
52.7
NA
41.2
32.3
NA
NA
39.9
1961
38.1
31.0
NA
52.4
NA
41.0
32.5
NA
46.1
40.2
1962
38.0
31.3
NA
51.3
38.3
40.7
31.6
NA
47.1
40.5
1963
38.3
31.9
NA
50.0
38.2
40.7
29.7
NA
47.6
40.8
1964
38.7
32.9
33.8
49.3
38.3
40.3
28.8
NA
46.8
41.2
1965
39.3
33.8
34.9
48.8
38.2
40.0
27.8
NA
46.6
41.8
1966
40.3
35.4
36.4
49.2
38.2
39.4
26.5
NA
47.3
42.2
1967
41.2
36.5
37.9
49.6
38.6
38.4
26.6
NA
46.8
42.0
1968
41.6
37.1
38.4
49.2
38.8
38.5
26.5
NA
48.0
41.9
1969
42.7
38.0
39.0
48.8
39.2
38.5
26.6
NA
48.8
42.1
1970
43.4
38.4
40.4
48.7
39.8
38.5
26.4
NA
50.0
42.2
1971
43.4
39.4
41.0
47.7
40.2
38.5
26.3
NA
50.9
42.1
1972
43.9
40.2
41.2
46.8
40.6
38.6
25.6
NA
51.5
42.9
1973
44.8
41.9
42.4
47.3
41.1
38.9
26.1
28.5
51.7
44.7
1974
45.7
43.0
43.5
45.7
41.4
38.8
26.5
28.7
53.3
45.7
1975
46.4
44.4
44.5
44.8
41.7
38.4
26.8
29.5
55.2
46.3
1976
47.4
45.2
44.3
44.9
42.4
38.1
27.6
29.9
55.8
46.6
1977
48.5
46.1
44.9
45.7
43.2
37.8
28.9
30.6
56.7
47.0
1978
50.0
47.9
44.5
46.4
43.5
37.8
28.8
31.1
57.5
47.7
1979
51.0
49.0
44.3
46.6
44.0
37.9
29.5
32.1
58.5
47.8
1980
51.6
50.4
45.5
46.6
44.3
38.1
30.1
34.3
59.3
47.9
1981
52.2
51.8
45.5
46.7
44.5
37.6
30.4
36.7
60.1
47.7
1982
52.7
51.8
45.5
47.0
44.9
38.4
30.3
37.7
60.5
47.8P
1983
53.0
52.6
45.6
48.0
45.0
(1) 38.4
30.5
(1) 37.4
60.8
48.1P
1984
53.7
53.7
46.1
47.8
45.5
38.8
30.5
38.2
61.1
49.3P
1985
54.5
54.6
47.1
47.6
45.6
39.1
30.7
38.2
61.5
49.7P
1986
55.4
55.4
49.3
47.6
45.8
39.4
(1) 31.9
40.0
61.7
50.2P
1987
56.1
56.4
50.1
47.6
45.9
NA
32.3P
41.8P
(1)62.6P
51.0P
1988
56.6
57.4
50.7
47.9
NA
NA
32.9P
NA
63.2P
51.3P
Continued on the following page.
20
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Labor Force Basis
Both Sexes
1960
59.4
56.2
NA
67.9
59.5
59.8
56.1
NA
66.5
61.9
1961
59.3
56.2
NA
67.8
58.7
59.9
55.8
NA
66.2
62.1
1962
58.8
55.9
NA
66.9
57.9
59.6
54.7
NA
65.9
62.1
1963
58.7
55.9
NA
65.7
57.5
59.4
53.1
NA
65.3
62.3
1964
58.7
56.2
59.4
64.8
57.6
59.0
52.5
NA
64.5
62.2
1965
58.9
56.5
59.9
64.4
57.4
58.7
51.4
NA
64.1
62.4
1966
59.2
57.3
60.6
64.6
57.3
58.2
50.0
NA
64.2
62.3
1967
59.6
57.6
61.2
64.8
57.4
57.0
50.2
NA
63.4
62.0
1968
59.6
57.6
61.2
64.9
57.1
56.9
49.7
NA
63.8
61.6
1969
60.1
57.9
61.4
64.6
57.3
57.0
49.3
NA
63.8
61.4
1970
60.4
57.8
62.1
64.5
57.5
56.9
49.0
NA
64.0
61.1
1971
60.2
58.1
62.2
64.2
57.4
56.6
48.7
NA
64.2
60.4
1972
60.4
58.6
62.3
63.8
57.2
55.9
47.7
NA
64.1
60.8
1973
60.8
59.7
62.6
64.0
57.3
55.8
47.6
53.3
64.1
62.4
1974
61.2
60.5
63.0
63.0
57.4
55.1
47.7
53.4
64.8
62.2
1975
61.2
61.1
63.2
62.4
57.1
54.4
47.7
54.4
65.9
62.6
1976
61.6
61.1
62.7
62.4
57.3
53.8
48.0
54.1
66.0
62.7
1977
62.3
61.6
62.7
62.5
57.6
53.4
48.2
54.1
65.9
62.7
1978
63.2
62.7
61.9
62.8
57.5
53.3
47.8
53.9
66.1
62.8
1979
63.7
63.4
61.6
62.7
57.5
53.3
48.0
54.1
66.6
62.6
1980
63.8
64.1
62.1
62.6
57.2
53.2
48.2
55.3
66.9
62.5
1981
63.9
64.8
61.9
62.6
57.1
52.9
48.3
56.6
66.8
62.2
1982
64.0
64.1
61.7
62.7
57.1
52.6
47.7
56.5
66.8
62.2P
1983
64.0
64.4
61.4
63.1
56.6
(1) 52.3
47.5
(1) 56.1
66.7
61.9P
1984
64.4
64.8
61.5
62.7
56.6
52.4
47.3
56.2
66.6
62.5P
1985
64.8
65.3
61.6
62.3
56.3
52.6
47.2
55.7
66.9
62.6P
1986
65.3
65.7
62.8
62.1
56.1
52.6
(1) 047.8
55.9
67.0
62.6P
1987
65.6
66.2
63.0
61.9
55.8
(1 55.0P
47.9P
56.3P
(1)67.3P
63.0P
1988
65.9
66.7
63.3
61.9
55.6P
55.2P
48.4P
56.4P
67.8P
63.3P
Continued on the following page.
21
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Labor Force Basis
Male
1960
83.3
82.8
NA
84.2
NA
82.7
82.4
NA
NA
86.8
1961
82.9
81.8
NA
84.3
NA
82.7
81.8
NA
87.1
86.6
1962
82.0
81.1
NA
83.6
81.0
82.2
80.6
NA
85.4
86.2
1963
81.4
80.6
NA
82.5
79.8
81.9
79.2
NA
83.7
86.4
1964
81.0
80.1
85.3
81.5
79.9
81.4
78.7
NA
83.0
85.8
1965
80.7
79.9
85.1
81.1
79.2
80.9
77.5
NA
82.2
85.4
1966
80.4
79.8
85.2
81.1
79.1
80.5
76.0
NA
81.6
84.9
1967
80.4
79.3
84.9
81.0
78.8
79.3
76.1
NA
80.4
84.5
1968
80.1
78.6
84.5
81.7
77.8
79.0
75.2
NA
80.1
83.6
1969
79.8
78.3
84.2
81.5
77.7
78.9
74.4
NA
79.1
82.9
1970
79.7
77.8
84.1
81.5
77.4
78.7
73.7
NA
78.5
82.1
1971
79.1
77.3
83.8
81.9
76.5
77.8
73.4
NA
78.0
80.8
1972
79.0
77.5
83.6
81.9
75.7
76.1
72.0
NA
77.3
80.7
1973
78.8
78.2
83.2
81.9
75.5
75.3
71.2
79.2
76.8
82.1
1974
78.7
78.7
82.7
81.6
75.3
74.1
71.0
79.1
76.7
80.5
1975
77.9
78.4
82.2
81.2
74.3
73.1
70.6
79.8
77.0
80.7
1976
77.5
77.6
81.5
81.0
74.0
72.1
70.4
79.2
76.5
80.6
1977
77.7
77.7
81.0
80.4
73.7
71.6
69.5
78.5
75.6
80.1
1978
77.9
78.1
79.8
80.1
73.1
71.3
68.7
77.6
75.1
79.6
1979
77.8
78.5
79.4
79.9
72.5
71.1
68.3
76.8
75.1
78.9
1980
77.4
78.4
79.1
79.6
71.7
70.6
67.9
77.2
74.9
78.7
1981
77.0
78.4
78.8
79.6
71.3
69.7
67.8
77.3
73.8
78.3
1982
76.6
77.0
78.4
79.3
70.7
68.9
66.9
76.1
73.5
78.1P
1983
76.4
76.7
77.6
79.2
69.6
(1)68.3
66.2
(1) 75.6
72.9
77.2P
1984
76.4
76.6
77.3
78.5
69.0
68.0
65.6
74.9
72.4
77.0P
1985
76.3
76.6
76.5
77.9
68.3
68.1
65.3
73.9
72.5
76.7P
1986
76.3
76.6
76.6
77.6
67.7
67.7
(1 )65.2
72.2
72.5
76.2P
1987
76.2
76.6
76.1
77.1
66.9
NA
64.8P
71.6P
(1)72.2P
76.2P
1988
76.2
76.6
76.1
76.9
NA
NA
65.5P
NA
72.6P
76.3P
Continued on the following page.
22
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Labor Force Basis
Female
1960
37.7
30.1
NA
52.7
NA
41.2
32.3
NA
NA
39.8
1961
38.1
31.0
NA
52.4
NA
41.0
32.5
NA
46.1
40.1
1962
37.9
31.3
NA
51.3
38.2
40.7
31.6
NA
47.1
40.5
1963
38.3
31.9
NA
50.0
38.2
40.7
29.7
NA
47.6
40.7
1964
38.7
32.9
33.8
49.3
38.2
40.3
28.8
NA
46.8
41.2
1965
39.3
33.8
34.8
48.8
38.2
40.0
27.8
NA
46.6
41.7
1966
40.3
35.4
36.3
49.2
38.2
39.4
26.5
NA
47.3
42.1
1967
41.1
36.5
37.8
49.6
38.5
38.4
26.6
NA
46.8
41.9
1968
41.6
37.1
38.3
49.2
38.8
38.5
26.5
NA
48.0
41.9
1969
42.7
38.0
39.0
48.8
39.2
38.5
26.6
NA
48.8
42.0
1970
43.3
38.3
40.4
48.7
39.8
38.5
26.4
NA
50.0
42.2
1971
43.4
39.4
41.0
47.7
40.2
38.5
26.3
NA
50.9
42.0
1972
43.9
40.2
41.2
46.8
40.6
38.6
25.6
NA
51.5
42.8
1973
44.7
41.9
42.4
47.3
41.0
38.9
26.1
28.5
51.7
44.6
1974
45.7
43.0
43.5
45.7
41.4
38.8
26.5
28.7
53.3
45.7
1975
46.3
44.4
44.5
44.8
41.7
38.4
26.8
29.5
55.2
46.2
1976
47.3
45.2
44.3
44.9
42.4
38.1
27.6
29.9
55.8
46.5
1977
48.4
46.0
44.8
45.7
43.2
37.8
28.9
30.6
56.7
47.0
1978
50.0
47.9
44.5
46.4
43.5
37.8
28.8
31.1
57.5
47.6
1979
50.9
49.0
44.3
46.6
44.0
37.9
29.5
32.1
58.5
47.8
1980
51.5
50.4
45.5
46.6
44.3
38.1
30.1
34.3
59.3
47.8
1981
52.1
51.7
45.5
46.7
44.5
37.6
30.4
36.7
60.1
47.6
1982
52.6
51.7
45.4
47.0
44.9
38.4
30.3
37.7
60.5
47.8P
1983
52.9
52.6
45.5
48.0
44.9
(1) 38.4
30.5
(1) 37.4
60.8
48.1P
1984
53.6
53.6
46.1
47.8
45.4
38.8
30.5
38.2
61.1
49.3P
1985
54.5
54.6
47.0
47.6
45.5
39.1
30.7
38.2
61.5
49.7P
1986
55.3
55.3
49.2
47.6
45.7
39.4
(1) 31.9
40.0
61.7
50.2P
1987
56.0
56.4
50.0
47.6
45.9
NA
32.3P
41.8P
(1)62.6P
51.0P
1988
56.6
57.4
50.7
47.6
NA
NA
32.9P
NA
63.2P
51.3P
Continued on the following page.
23
Table 4. Labor Force Participation Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
NA = Not available.
P = Preliminary.
(1) Break in series.
Note: Data relate to the total or civilian labor force approximating U.S. concepts as a per-
cent of the total or civilian noninstitutionalized working age population. Working age is
defined as 16-year-olds and over in the United States, France, and Sweden; 15-year-olds and
over in Australia, Canada, Germany, and Japan; and 14-year-olds and over in Italy. For the
United Kingdom, the lower age limit was raised from 15 to 16 in 1973. For the Netherlands,
the lower age limit was raised from 14 to 15 in 1975. The institutionalized working age
population is included in Japan and Germany.
24
Table 5. - Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Total Employment Basis
Both sexes
1959
56.7
53.1
NA
66.2
60.0
59.0
55.0
NA
65.3
60.9
1960
56.8
53.0
NA
66.8
60.0
59.4
54.5
NA
65.7
61.3
1961
56.1
52.9
NA
66.9
59.5
59.9
54.5
NA
65.6
61.5
1962
56.3
53.3
NA
66.1
58.3
59.6
53.6
NA
65.2
61.0
1963
56.1
53.5
NA
64.9
57.6
59.5
52.4
NA
64.5
60.8
1964
56.4
54.1
58.9
64.2
57.8
59.2
51.6
NA
63.8
61.2
1965
56.8
54.8
59.4
63.7
57.2
59.0
50.1
NA
63.7
61.6
1966
57.6
55.7
60.0
63.8
57.2
58.5
48.6
NA
63.5
61.5
1967
58.0
55.8
60.4
64.1
57.0
56.8
49.0
NA
62.3
60.6
1968
58.2
55.3
60.4
64.2
56.2
56.7
48.5
NA
62.7
60.2
1969
58.7
55.6
60.6
64.0
56.6
57.0
48.2
NA
62.8
60.0
1970
58.0
54.8
61.5
63.9
56.7
57.1
47.9
NA
63.3
59.7
1971
57.2
54.8
61.4
63.6
56.5
56.7
47.6
NA
62.9
58.5
1972
57.5
55.2
61.0
63.0
56.2
56.0
46.4
NA
62.7
58.7
1973
58.3
56.7
61.5
63.3
56.4
55.8
46.3
52.2
62.7
60.8
1974
58.3
57.5
61.5
62.3
56.4
54.7
46.6
52.0
63.8
60.7
1975
56.5
57.1
60.4
61.3
55.4
53.1
46.5
52.1
65.0
60.2
1976
57.3
56.9
60.0
61.2
55.4
52.5
46.6
51.7
65.1
59.4
1977
58.3
56.8
59.5
61.4
55.4
52.1
46.7
51.9
65.0
59.1
1978
59.7
57.7
58.3
61.4
55.1
52.0
46.3
51.7
64.8
59.2
1979
60.3
58.9
58.1
61.5
54.7
52.2
46.4
51.8
65.5
59.6
1980
59.6
59.5
58.6
61.4
54.2
52.2
46.6
52.5
65.8
58.5
1981
59.4
60.1
58.6
61.3
53.4
51.3
46.4
52.1
65.3
56.1
1982
58.2
57.2
57.5
61.3
53.0
50.1
45.6
51.2
64.9
55.3P
1983
58.3
56.9
55.5
61.5
52.4
(1) 49.1
45.1
49.6
64.6
54.7P
1984
59.9
57.7
56.2
61.1
51.6
49.0
44.9
49.8
64.7
55.2P
1985
60.5
58.6
56.8
60.8
51.1
49.2
44.8
50.5
65.2
55.6P
1986
61.1
59.6
58.0
60.5
50.8
49.5
44.7
50.7
65.4
55.6P
1987
61.9
60.5
58.1
60.2
50.5
(1) 51.9P
44.6P
51.1P
1)66.2P
56.6P
1988
62.6
61.7
59.0
60.5
50.5P
52.2P
45.1P
51.1P
66.9P
58.0P
Continued on the following page.
25
Table 5. Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Employment Basis
Both sexes
1959
56.0
52.6
NA
66.1
58.7
58.8
54.5
NA
65.0
60.1
1960
56.1
52.6
NA
66.7
58.6
59.1
54.0
NA
65.4
60.6
1961
55.4
52.4
NA
66.8
58.2
59.6
54.0
NA
65.3
60.8
1962
55.5
52.8
NA
66.0
57.1
59.3
53.2
NA
64.9
60.4
1963
55.4
53.0
NA
64.8
56.6
59.2
51.9
NA
64.2
60.2
1964
55.7
53.7
58.6
64.1
56.9
58.8
51.1
NA
63.5
60.7
1965
56.2
54.4
59.1
63.6
56.4
58.6
49.6
NA
63.4
61.0
1966
56.9
55.4
59.6
63.7
56.4
58.0
48.1
NA
63.2
60.9
1967
57.3
55.4
60.0
64.0
56.2
56.3
48.5
NA
62.0
60.0
1968
57.5
55.0
60.0
64.1
55.5
56.2
47.9
NA
62.4
59.6
1969
58.0
55.3
60.2
63.9
55.9
56.6
47.6
NA
62.6
59.5
1970
57.4
54.5
61.1
63.8
56.0
56.6
47.4
NA
63.1
59.2
1971
56.6
54.5
61.0
63.4
55.8
56.2
47.1
NA
62.6
58.0
1972
57.0
54.9
60.6
62.9
55.5
55.5
45.9
NA
62.4
58.2
1973
57.8
56.4
61.2
63.2
55.8
55.4
45.8
51.7
62.5
60.3
1974
57.8
57.3
61.3
62.2
55.7
54.2
46.2
51.5
63.6
60.3
1975
56.1
56.9
60.1
61.2
54.8
52.6
46.0
51.6
64.8
59.7
1976
56.8
56.7
59.7
61.1
54.7
52.0
46.1
51.2
64.9
59.0
1977
57.9
56.6
59.2
61.2
54.7
51.6
46.3
51.5
64.8
58.7
1978
59.3
57.5
58.0
61.3
54.4
51.5
45.9
51.2
64.6
58.8
1979
59.9
58.7
57.8
61.4
54.0
51.7
45.9
51.3
65.3
59.2
1980
59.2
59.3
58.3
61.3
53.5
51.7
46.1
52.0
65.6
58.1
1981
59.0
59.9
58.4
61.2
52.8
50.8
45.9
51.6
65.1
55.7
1982
57.8
57.1
57.3
61.2
52.3
49.6
45.2
50.7
64.7
55.2P
1983
57.9
56.8
55.3
61.4
51.8
(1)48.6
44.7
)49.2
64.4
54.7P
1984
59.5
57.5
56.0
61.0
51.0
48.5
44.5
49.3
64.5
55.2P
1985
60.1
58.5
56.5
60.6
50.4
48.7
44.4
50.0
65.0
55.6P
1986
60.7
59.4
57.7
60.4
50.2
49.0
(1) 44.2
50.2
65.2
55.6P
1987
61.5
60.4
57.9
60.1
49.8
(1)51.5P
44.1P
50.6P
(1)66.0P
56.6P
1988
62.3
61.6
58.7
60.4
49.9P
51.7P
44.6P
50.7P
66.7P
58.0P
Continued on the following page.
26
Table 5. Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Employment Basis
Male
1960
78.9
76.9
NA
82.8
NA
82.0
79.5
NA
NA
85.0
1961
77.6
75.8
NA
83.2
NA
82.3
79.4
NA
86.3
84.9
1962
77.7
76.3
NA
82.7
80.1
81.8
78.6
NA
84.2
83.9
1963
77.1
76.2
NA
81.5
79.0
81.6
77.6
NA
82.6
83.5
1964
77.3
76.5
84.5
80.6
79.2
81.1
77.0
NA
81.9
83.7
1965
77.5
76.9
84.4
80.2
78.4
80.7
75.2
NA
81.5
83.5
1966
77.9
77.1
84.2
80.1
78.2
80.3
73.5
NA
80.6
82.9
1967
78.0
76.3
83.8
80.0
77.6
78.2
73.9
NA
78.8
81.5
1968
77.8
75.1
83.5
80.7
76.4
78.1
73.0
NA
78.2
80.6
1969
77.6
74.9
83.2
80.5
76.5
78.5
72.4
NA
77.7
80.0
1970
76.2
73.4
83.2
80.5
76.3
78.3
71.9
NA
77.4
79.2
1971
74.9
72.7
82.7
80.9
75.3
77.4
71.6
NA
76.2
77.3
1972
75.0
73.0
82.0
80.6
74.4
75.6
69.9
NA
75.4
76.8
1973
75.5
74.3
81.8
80.8
74.2
74.9
69.3
77.1
75.1
79.1
1974
74.9
74.9
81.1
80.5
73.9
73.0
69.4
76.9
75.5
77.9
1975
71.7
73.5
79.1
79.5
72.1
70.6
68.8
76.7
76.0
76.7
1976
72.0
72.7
78.3
79.2
71.7
69.9
68.5
75.9
75.6
75.5
1977
72.8
72.0
77.3
78.7
71.1
69.5
67.5
75.5
74.5
74.7
1978
73.8
72.2
75.5
78.2
70.2
69.4
66.8
74.8
73.5
74.6
1979
73.8
73.3
75.3
78.2
69.4
69.5
66.3
74.1
73.7
74.5
1980
72.0
73.0
75.1
77.9
68.5
68.9
66.0
73.9
73.6
72.8
1981
71.3
72.9
75.1
77.8
67.4
67.4
65.6
72.0
72.0
69.3
1982
69.0
68.5
73.4
77.4
66.3
65.4
64.4
69.5
71.3
68.9P
1983
68.8
67.5
70.1
77.1
65.0
(1)64.0
63.5
(1)67.2
70.4
67.7P
1984
70.7
68.0
70.6
76.4
63.5
63.6
62.9
66.6
70.2
67.8P
1985
70.9
68.7
70.4
75.9
62.3
63.7
62.5
67.4
70.5
67.9P
1986
71.0
69.5
70.7
75.4
61.8
63.8
(1)61.8
66.5
70.6
67.4P
1987
71.5
70.1
70.2
74.9
61.2
NA
61.3P
66.3P
(1)70.9P
68.1P
1988
72.0
70.9
70.9
75.0
NA
NA
61.9P
NA
71.5P
69.7P
Continued on the following page.
27
Table 5. Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Employment Basis
Female
1960
35.5
28.6
NA
51.8
NA
40.5
31.0
NA
NA
38.9
1961
35.4
29.4
NA
51.6
NA
40.7
31.1
NA
45.0
39.3
1962
35.6
29.9
NA
50.6
37.4
40.4
30.4
NA
46.3
39.4
1963
35.8
30.5
NA
49.3
37.2
40.4
28.8
NA
46.5
39.4
1964
36.3
31.6
32.9
48.7
37.5
40.1
27.7
NA
45.9
40.1
1965
37.1
32.6
34.0
48.1
37.3
39.9
26.6
NA
45.8
40.8
1966
38.3
34.2
35.4
48.4
37.2
39.3
25.2
NA
46.4
41.2
1967
39.0
35.1
36.6
48.9
37.3
38.0
25.3
NA
45.7
40.7
1968
39.6
35.5
37.1
48.7
37.1
38.0
25.1
NA
47.0
40.8
1969
40.7
36.2
37.7
48.3
37.7
38.2
25.1
NA
47.9
41.1
1970
40.8
36.1
39.3
48.2
38.1
38.2
25.0
NA
49.1
41.2
1971
40.4
36.8
39.7
47.2
38.4
38.1
24.9
NA
49.5
40.7
1972
41.0
37.4
39.6
46.2
38.7
38.3
24.1
NA
50.0
41.4
1973
42.0
39.1
40.9
46.8
39.2
38.6
24.5
27.3
50.-3
43.4
1974
42.6
40.2
41.7
45.1
39.4
38.1
25.1
27.1
52.0
44.3
1975
42.0
40.8
41.4
44.0
39.2
37.0
25.3
27.1
54.0
44.4
1976
43.2
41.4
41.5
44.1
39.5
36.6
25.8
27.3
54.7
44.1
1977
44.5
41.7
41.5
44.9
39.9
36.2
26.9
28.2
55.4
44.3
1978
46.4
43.3
41.0
45.5
40.2
36.1
26.9
28.4
56.1
44.7
1979
47.5
44.7
40.7
45.7
40.2
36.4
27.3
29.2
57.2
45.4
1980
47.7
46.2
41.9
45.7
40.1
36.7
27.9
31.0
58.0
44.8
1981
48.0
47.4
42.1
45.7
39.8
35.7
28.0
31.9
58.5
43.3
1982
47.7
46.1
41.5
45.9
39.9
35.8
27.7
32.6
58.4
42.8P
1983
48.0
46.5
40.8
46.7
39.9
(1) 35.2
27.6
(1)31.9
58.6
42.8P
1984
49.5
47.6
41.7
46.5
39.7
35.3
27.6
32.7
59.1
43.7P
1985
50.4
48.8
42.9
46.3
39.6
35.5
27.8
33.4
59.7
44.4P
1986
51.4
49.9
44.9
46.2
39.7
36.1
(1)28.1
34.7
60.1
44.8P
1987
52.5
51.2
45.7
46.2
39.6
NA
28.5P
35.7P
(1)61.4P
46.0P
1988
53.4
52.6
46.8
46.6
NA
NA
28.9P
NA
62.2P
47.3P
Continued on the following page.
28
Table 5. Employment-Population Ratios by Sex, 1959-1988--Continued
NA = Not available.
P = Preliminary.
(1) Break in series.
NOTE: Data relate to total or civilian employment approximating U.S. concepts as a percent of
the total or civilian noninstitutionalized working age population. Working age is defined as 16-
year-olds and over in the United States, France, and Sweden; 15-year-olds and over in Australia,
Canada, Germany, and Japan; and 14-year-olds and over in Italy. For the United Kingdom, the
lower age limit was raised from 15 to 16 in 1973. For the Netherlands, the lower age limit was
raised from 14 to 15 in 1975. The institutionalized working age population is included in Japan
and Germany.
29
Table 6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988 (in thousands)
United
Aus-
Nether
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian
Employment
1960
65,778
5,965
NA
43,370
18,595
25,954
20,064
4,162
3,513
23,660
1965
71,088
6,862
4,614
46,200
19,540
26,418
19,210
4,487
3,673
24,776
1970
78,678
7,919
5,388
50,140
20,328
26,169
19,083
4,679
3,836
24,381
1971
79,367
8,104
5,518
50,470
20,440
26,317
19,016
4,700
3,842
24,165
1972
82,153
8,344
5,602
50,580
20,571
26,214
18,730
4,673
3,845
24,139
1973
85,064
8,761
5,765
51,900
20,863
26,411
18,914
4,670
3,861
24,716
1974
86,794
9,125
5,891
51,710
21,059
26,038
19,346
4,672
3,944
24,803
1975
85,846
9,284
5,867
51,530
20,864
25,285
19,476
4,640
4,044
24,720
1976
88,752
9,477
5,946
52,020
21,016
25,059
19,605
4,654
4,070
24,509
1977
92,017
9,651
6,000
52,720
21,188
25,014
19,794
4,710
4,081
24,538
1978
96,048
9,987
6,016
53,360
21,263
25,169
19,867
4,757
4,097
24,697
1979
98,824
10,395
6,098
54,040
21,305
25,516
20,097
4,821
4,162
25,079
1980
99,303
10,708
6,276
54,600
21,334
25,797
20,383
4,973
4,214
25,004
1981
100,397
11,001
6,399
55,060
21,203
25,610
20,486
5,005
4,207
24,011
1982
99,526
10,618
6,405
55,620
21,240
25,177
20,431
4,999
4,201
23,584
1983
100,834
10,675
6,289
56,550
21,168
24,793
20,467
4,927
4,206
23,288
1984
105,005
10,932
6,474
56,870
20,981
24,839
20,392
4,980
4,237
23,734
1985
107,150
11,221
6,708
57,260
20,914
25,010
20,492
5,076
4,281
24,116
1986
109,597
11,531
6,949
57,740
20,955
25,267
20,614
5,135
4,314
24,434
1987
112,440
11,861
7,100
58,320
21,010
25,476
20,591
NA
4,384
24,987
1988
114,968
12,245
7,366
59,310
21,144
25,631
20,868
NA
4,455
25,433
Continued on the following page.
30
Table 6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988 (in thousands)--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Agriculture (1)
1960
5,572
795
NA
12,800
4,305
3,623
6,514
409
544
1,118
1965
4,477
694
448
10,500
3,473
2,876
5,031
341
421
952
1970
3,567
604
432
8,490
2,751
2,262
3,839
289
314
784
1971
3,510
607
424
7,840
2,612
2,134
3,817
281
300
764
1972
3,598
575
440
7,310
2,468
2,018
3,550
277
287
735
1973
3,572
573
422
6,810
2,345
1,924
3,438
272
276
736
1974
3,613
579
408
6,540
2,242
1,842
3,373
267
264
699
1975
3,505
564
405
6,380
2,156
1,773
3,244
263
261
687
1976
3,453
561
390
6,210
2,082
1,682
3,217
261
254
685
1977
3,426
553
398
6,110
2,013
1,589
3,119
248
248
684
1978
3,550
574
381
6,100
1,954
1,536
3,053
256
250
680
1979
3,508
590
396
5,860
1,908
1,481
2,985
257
242
666
1980
3,529
583
407
5,510
1,854
1,437
2,896
246
237
654
1981
3,519
600
416
5,330
1,791
1,408
2,731
244
237
639
1982
3,570
561
412
5,250
1,732
1,395
2,525
241
236
632
1983
3,541
590
416
5,060
1,677
1,391
2,517
247
230
622
1984
3,469
588
402
4,860
1,627
1,376
2,390
247
218
615
1985
3,338
575
412
4,820
1,582
1,360
2,262
248
208
616
1986
3,350
570
425
4,700
1,534
1,338
2,212
248
204
603
1987
3,400
566
412
4,640
1,481
1,311
2,138
NA
189
592
1988
3,326
556
431
4,480
1,428
1,283
2,033
NA
188
582
Continued on the following page.
31
Table 6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988 (in thousands)--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Industry (2)
1960
21,995
1,906
NA
12,380
6,976
11,912
6,855
1,644
1,420
10,900
1965
24,311
2,233
1,653
15,010
7,486
12,501
7,174
1,797
1,553
11,117
1970
26,080
2,360
1,886
17,880
7,812
12,465
7,586
1,778
1,456
10,531
1971
25,182
2,383
1,916
18,140
7,869
12,530
7,613
1,757
1,424
10,156
1972
25,828
2,439
1,898
18,290
7,929
12,315
7,472
1,683
1,396
9,940
1973
27,258
2,586
1,945
19,210
8,076
12,348
7,466
1,661
1,401
10,110
1974
27,213
2,688
1,963
19,020
8,131
11,941
7,634
1,632
1,434
10,080
1975
25,302
2,613
1,870
18,370
7,883
11,243
7,663
1,576
1,449
9,632
1976
26,310
2,701
1,866
18,520
7,810
11,042
7,561
1,520
1,416
9,345
1977
27,343
2,675
1,845
18,510
7,773
10,944
7,662
1,509
1,375
9,324
1978
28,810
2,750
1,785
18,550
7,650
10,958
7,626
1,525
1,328
9,312
1979
29,797
2,884
1,785
18,740
7,540
11,055
7,641
1,523
1,326
9,344
1980
29,136
2,931
1,816
19,180
7,475
11,136
7,767
1,518
1,327
9,059
1981
28,995
2,983
1,829
19,300
7,266
10,885
7,722
1,453
1,286
8,242
1982
27,070
2,694
1,775
19,210
7,139
10,478
7,594
1,399
1,237
7,817
1983
27,016
2,608
1,649
19,470
6,941
10,112
7,403
1,315
1,223
7,448
1984
28,617
2,695
1,670
19,630
6,691
10,029
7,036
1,361
1,228
7,389
1985
28,805
2,728
1,714
19,820
6,485
10,028
6,890
1,381
1,244
7,363
1986
29,130
2,789
1,730
19,760
6,364P
10,112
6,816
1,329
1,257
7,180
1987
29,209
2,870
1,759
19,560
6,261P
10,100P
6,709
NA
1,262
7,156P
1988
29,676
3,012
1,820
20,120
6,212P
10,074P
6,783
NA
1,267
7,125P
Continued on the following page.
32
Table 6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988 (in thousands)--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Manufacturing
1960
17,149
1,471
NA
9,430
5,250
8,907
4,813
1,213
1,120
8,517
1965
19,190
1,636
1,207
11,450
5,373
9,483
4,894
1,290
1,206
8,666
1970
20,746
1,768
1,340
13,750
5,593
9,779
5,293
1,261
1,064
8,465
1971
19,606
1,766
1,358
13,820
5,676
9,835
5,329
1,250
1,054
8,202
1972
19,943
1,823
1,344
13,810
5,749
9,652
5,223
1,200
1,046
7,934
1973
21,054
1,927
1,374
14,420
5,882
9,697
5,270
1,181
1,066
7,979
1974
21,025
1,978
1,380
14,250
5,953
9,479
5,438
1,178
1,120
8,030
1975
19,457
1,871
1,275
13,430
5,798
9,010
5,447
1,160
1,138
7,654
1976
20,261
1,921
1,289
13,440
5,745
8,807
5,435
1,108
1,100
7,411
1977
20,889
1,888
1,281
13,350
5,721
8,770
5,473
1,092
1,060
7,461
1978
21,784
1,956
1,220
13,220
5,640
8,751
5,420
1,074
1,023
7,427
1979
22,459
2,071
1,221
13,290
5,556
8,793
5,409
1,067
1,026
7,395
1980
21,942
2,111
1,246
13,630
5,495
8,842
5,485
1,067
1,025
7,081
1981
21,817
2,124
1,252
13,800
5,321
8,598
5,384
1,048
984
6,365
1982
20,286
1,928
1,214
13,740
5,249
8,321
5,277
1,032
946
6,005
1983
19,946
1,879
1,143
14,010
5,136
8,006
5,113
993
941
5,664
1984
20,995
1,954
1,145
14,330
4,997
7,933
4,876
975
953
5,579
1985
20,879
1,960
1,139
14,480
4,854
8,012
4,761
984
968
5,578
1986
20,962
1,989
1,143
14,390
4,742P
8,126
4,715
988
983
5,451
1987
20,935
2,018
1,158
14,200
4,629P
NA
4,635
NA
970
NA
1988
21,320
2,104
1,193
14,500
NA
NA
4,718
NA
974
NA
Continued on the following page.
33
Table 6. Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988
(in thousands)--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Services (3)
1960
38,212
3,264
NA
18,190
7,314
10,419
6,696
2,109
1,550
11,642
1965
42,301
3,934
2,514
20,690
8,581
11,041
7,005
2,349
1,699
12,709
1970
49,031
4,955
3,070
23,770
9,765
11,442
7,656
2,612
2,066
13,066
1971
50,675
5,114
3,178
24,510
9,959
11,653
7,584
2,662
2,118
13,246
1972
52,727
5,330
3,265
24,980
10,173
11,881
7,709
2,713
2,162
13,466
1973
54,234
5,602
3,399
25,880
10,442
12,139
8,009
2,737
2,185
13,870
1974
55,968
5,858
3,520
26,140
10,684
12,255
8,339
2,773
2,246
14,024
1975
57,039
6,108
3,592
26,770
10,825
12,269
8,568
2,801
2,334
14,404
1976
58,989
6,215
3,690
27,290
11,124
12,335
8,828
2,872
2,400
14,474
1977
61,248
6,424
3,757
28,100
11,400
12,481
9,012
2,953
2,458
14,530
1978
63,688
6,661
3,850
28,720
11,659
12,675
9,187
2,974
2,519
14,705
1979
65,519
6,920
3,917
29,440
11,857
12,980
9,471
3,041
2,594
15,068
1980
66,638
7,194
4,053
29,910
12,005
13,224
9,720
3,209
2,650
15,291
1981
67,883
7,418
4,154
30,430
12,146
13,317
10,033
3,308
2,684
15,129
1982
68,886
7,363
4,218
31,160
12,369
13,304
10,311
3,359
2,728
15,135
1983
70,277
7,478
4,224
32,020
12,549
13,290
10,547
3,364
2,753
15,219
1984
72,919
7,650
4,402
32,380
12,662
13,434
10,966
3,371
2,792
15,730
1985
75,006
7,918
4,581
32,620
12,847
13,622
11,340
3,448
2,828
16,138
1986
77,117
8,173
4,794
33,280
13,057P
13,826
11,587
3,558
2,853
16,651
1987
79,832
8,424
4,930
34,120
13,269P
14,065P
11,744
NA
2,933
17,239P
1988
81,966
8,678
5,115
34,710
13,505P
14,274P
12,051
NA
3,000
17,726P
NA = Not available.
P
=
Preliminary.
(1) Agriculture, forestry, hunting, and fishing.
(2) Manufacturing, mining, and construction.
(3) Transportation, communication, public utilities, trade, finance, public administration, private
household services, and miscellaneous services.
Note: For some countries, data have not been fully adjusted for comparability with U.S. definitions.
Because of rounding, subtotals may not add to totals.
34
Table 7. Percent Distribution of Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Civilian Employment
Each Year
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Agriculture (1)
1960
8.5
13.3
NA
29.5
23.2
14.0
32.5
9.8
15.5
4.7
1965
6.3
10.1
9.7
22.7
17.8
10.9
26.2
7.6
11.5
3.8
1970
4.5
7.6
8.0
16.9
13.5
8.6
20.1
6.2
8.2
3.2
1971
4.4
7.5
7.7
15.5
12.8
8.1
20.1
6.0
7.8
3.2
1972
4.4
6.9
7.8
14.4
12.0
7.7
19.0
5.9
7.5
3.0
1973
4.2
6.5
7.3
13.1
11.2
7.3
18.2
5.8
7.1
3.0
1974
4.2
6.4
6.9
12.6
10.6
7.1
17.4
5.7
6.7
2.8
1975
4.1
6.1
6.9
12.4
10.3
7.0
16.7
5.7
6.5
2.8
1976
3.9
5.9
6.6
11.9
9.9
6.7
16.4
5.6
6.2
2.8
1977
3.7
5.7
6.6
11.6
9.5
6.4
15.8
5.3
6.1
2.8
1978
3.7
5.7
6.3
11.4
9.2
6.1
15.4
5.4
6.1
2.8
1979
3.6
5.7
6.5
10.8
9.0
5.8
14.9
5.3
5.8
2.7
1980
3.6
5.4
6.5
10.1
8.7
5.6
14.2
5.0
5.6
2.6
1981
3.5
5.4
6.5
9.7
8.4
5.5
13.3
4.9
5.6
2.7
1982
3.6
5.3
6.4
9.4
8.2
5.5
12.4
4.8
5.6
2.7
1983
3.5
5.5
6.6
8.9
7.9
5.6
12.3
5.0
5.5
2.7
1984
3.3
5.4
6.2
8.5
7.8
5.5
11.7
5.0
5.2
2.6
1985
3.1
5.1
6.1
8.4
7.6
5.4
11.0
4.9
4.9
2.6
1986
3.1
4.9
6.1
8.1
7.3
5.3
10.7
4.8
4.7
2.5
1987
3.0
4.8
5.8
8.0
7.0
5.2
10.4
NA
4.3
2.4
1988
2.9
4.5
5.9
7.6
6.8
5.0
9.7
NA
4.2
2.3
Continued on the following page.
35
Table 7. Percent Distribution of Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Industry (2)
1960
33.4
32.0
NA
28.5
37.5
45.9
34.2
39.5
40.4
46.1
1965
34.2
32.5
35.8
32.5
38.3
47.3
37.4
40.0
42.3
44.9
1970
33.1
29.8
35.0
35.7
38.4
47.6
39.8
38.0
38.0
43.2
1971
31.7
29.4
34.7
35.9
38.5
47.6
40.0
37.4
37.1
42.0
1972
31.4
29.2
33.9
36.2
38.5
47.0
39.9
36.0
36.3
41.2
1973
32.0
29.5
33.7
37.0
38.7
46.8
39.5
35.6
36.3
40.9
1974
31.4
29.5
33.3
36.8
38.6
45.9
39.5
34.9
36.4
40.6
1975
29.5
28.1
31.9
35.6
37.8
44.4
39.4
34.0
35.8
39.0
1976
29.6
28.5
31.4
35.6
37.2
44.1
38.6
32.7
34.8
38.1
1977
29.7
27.7
30.8
35.1
36.7
43.8
38.7
32.0
33.7
38.0
1978
30.0
27.5
29.7
34.8
36.0
43.5
38.4
32.1
32.4
37.7
1979
30.2
27.7
29.3
34.7
35.4
43.3
38.0
31.6
31.9
37.3
1980
29.3
27.4
28.9
35.1
35.0
43.2
38.1
30.5
31.5
36.2
1981
28.9
27.1
28.6
35.0
34.3
42.5
37.7
29.0
30.6
34.3
1982
27.2
25.4
27.7
34.5
33.6
41.6
37.2
28.0
29.4
33.1
1983
26.8
24.4
26.2
34.4
32.8
40.8
36.2
26.7
29.1
32.0
1984
27.2
24.6
25.8
34.5
31.9
40.4
34.5
27.3
29.0
31.1
1985
26.9
24.3
25.6
34.6
31.0
40.1
33.6
27.2
29.1
30.5
1986
26.6
24.2
24.9
34.2
30.4P
40.0
33.1
25.9
29.1
29.4
1987
26.0
24.2
24.8
33.5
29.8P
39.6P
32.6
NA
28.8
28.6P
1988
25.8
24.6
24.7
33.9
29.4P
39.3P
32.5
NA
28.4
28.0P
Continued on the following page.
36
Table 7. Percent Distribution of Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Manufacturing
1960
26.1
24.7
NA
21.7
28.2
34.3
24.0
29.1
31.9
36.0
1965
27.0
23.8
26.2
24.8
27.5
35.9
25.5
28.8
32.8
35.0
1970
26.4
22.3
24.9
27.4
27.5
37.4
27.7
27.0
27.7
34.7
1971
24.7
21.8
24.6
27.4
27.8
37.4
28.0
26.6
27.4
33.9
1972
24.3
21.8
24.0
27.3
27.9
36.8
27.9
25.7
27.2
32.9
1973
24.8
22.0
23.8
27.8
28.2
36.7
27.9
25.3
27.6
32.3
1974
24.2
21.7
23.4
27.6
28.3
36.4
28.1
25.2
28.4
32.4
1975
22.7
20.2
21.7
26.1
27.8
35.6
28.0
25.0
28.1
31.0
1976
22.8
20.3
21.7
25.8
27.3
35.2
27.7
23.8
27.0
30.2
1977
22.7
19.6
21.4
25.3
27.0
35.1
27.6
23.2
26.0
30.4
1978
22.7
19.6
20.3
24.8
26.5
34.8
27.3
22.6
25.0
30.1
1979
22.7
19.9
20.0
24.6
26.1
34.5
26.9
22.1
24.6
29.5
1980
22.1
19.7
19.9
25.0
25.8
34.3
26.9
21.5
24.3
28.3
1981
21.7
19.3
19.6
25.1
25.1
33.6
26.3
20.9
23.4
26.5
1982
20.4
18.2
18.9
24.7
24.7
33.1
25.8
20.6
22.5
25.5
1983
19.8
17.6
18.2
24.8
24.3
32.3
25.0
20.2
22.4
24.3
1984
20.0
17.9
17.7
25.2
23.8
31.9
23.9
19.6
22.5
23.5
1985
19.5
17.5
17.0
25.3
23.1
32.0
23.2
19.4
22.6
23.1
1986
19.1
17.2
16.5
24.9
22.6P
32.2
22.9
19.2
22.8
22.3
1987
18.6
17.0
16.3
24.3
22.0P
NA
22.5
NA
22.1
NA
1988
18.5
17.2
16.2
24.4
NA
NA
22.6
NA
21.9
NA
Continued on the following page.
37
Table 7. Percent Distribution of Civilian Employment by Economic Sector, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Aus-
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
Services (3)
1960
58.1
54.7
NA
41.9
39.3
40.1
33.4
50.7
44.1
49.2
1965
59.5
57.3
54.5
44.8
43.9
41.8
36.5
52.4
46.3
51.3
1970
62.3
62.6
57.0
47.4
48.0
43.7
40.1
55.8
53.9
53.6
1971
63.8
63.1
57.6
48.6
48.7
44.3
39.9
56.6
55.1
54.8
1972
64.2
63.9
58.3
49.4
49.5
45.3
41.2
58.1
56.2
55.8
1973
63.8
63.9
59.0
49.9
50.0
46.0
42.3
58.6
56.6
56.1
1974
64.5
64.2
59.8
50.6
50.7
47.1
43.1
59.4
56.9
56.5
1975
66.4
65.8
61.2
52.0
51.9
48.5
44.0
60.4
57.7
58.3
1976
66.5
65.6
62.0
52.5
52.9
49.2
45.0
61.7
59.0
59.1
1977
66.6
66.6
62.6
53.3
53.8
49.9
45.5
62.7
60.2
59.2
1978
66.3
66.7
64.0
53.8
54.8
50.4
46.2
62.5
61.5
59.5
1979
66.3
66.6
64.2
54.5
55.7
50.9
47.1
63.1
62.3
60.1
1980
67.1
67.2
64.6
54.8
56.3
51.3
47.7
64.5
62.9
61.2
1981
67.6
67.4
64.9
55.3
57.3
52.0
49.0
66.1
63.8
63.0
1982
69.2
69.3
65.9
56.0
58.2
52.8
50.5
67.2
64.9
64.2
1983
69.7
70.0
67.2
56.6
59.3
53.6
51.5
68.3
65.4
65.4
1984
69.4
70.0
68.0
56.9
60.4
54.1
53.8
67.7
65.9
66.3
1985
70.0
70.6
68.3
57.0
61.4
54.5
55.3
67.9
66.1
66.9
1986
70.4
70.9
69.0
57.6
62.3P
54.7
56.2
69.3
66.1
68.2
1987
71.0
71.0
69.4
58.5
63.2P
55.2P
57.0
NA
66.9
69.0P
1988
71.3
70.9
69.4
58.5
63.9P
55.7P
57.8
NA
67.3
69.7P
NA = Not available.
P = Preliminary.
(1) Agriculture, forestry, hunting, and fishing.
(2)
Manufacturing, mining, and construction.
(3)
Transportation, communication, public utilities, trade, finance, public administration, private.
household services, and miscellaneous services.
Note: For some countries data have not been fully adjusted for comparability with U.S. definitions.
Because of rounding, subtotals may not add to totals.
38
Table 8. Civilian Unemployment Rates by Sex, 1960-1988
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
Male
1960
5.4
7.1
NA
NA
NA
.8
3.4
NA
NA
2.1
1961
6.4
7.3
NA
NA
NA
.5
2.9
NA
1.0
1.9
1962
5.2
6.0
NA
NA
1.0
.4
2.4
NA
1.4
2.7
1963
5.2
5.5
NA
NA
1.1
.4
2.1
NA
1.4
3.4
1964
4.6
4.5
.9
NA
.9
.3
2.2
NA
1.4
2.4
1965
4.0
3.7
.9
NA
1.0
.2
3.0
NA
0.8
2.1
1966
3.2
3.3
1.1
NA
1.1
.3
3.2
NA
1.3
2.3
1967
3.1
3.9
1.3
NA
1.5
1.4
2.9
NA
2.0
3.5
1968
2.9
4.6
1.2
NA
1.9
1.0
2.9
NA
2.3
3.6
1969
2.8
4.3
1.2
NA
1.5
.6
2.7
NA
1.8
3.5
1970
4.4
5.6
1.1
1.2
1.5
.5
2.5
NA
1.4
3.5
1971
5.3
6.0
1.3
1.2
1.7
.5
2.5
NA
2.4
4.3
1972
5.0
5.8
2.0
1.5
1.8
.7
2.9
NA
2.5
4.8
1973
4.2
4.9
1.6
1.3
1.6
.6
2.7
2.6
2.2
3.6
1974
4.9
4.8
1.9
1.4
1.8
1.5
2.3
2.9
1.7
3.2
1975
7.9
6.2
3.8
1.8
2.9
3.3
2.5
3.9
1.4
5.0
1976
7.1
6.3
3.9
2.2
3.1
3.1
2.7
4.1
1.3
6.4
1977
6.3
7.3
4.6
2.0
3.6
2.9
2.8
3.8
1.5
6.7
1978
5.3
7.5
5.4
2.2
3.9
2.7
2.8
3.6
2.1
6.3
1979
5.1
6.6
5.2
1.9
4.3
2.3
3.0
3.6
1.9
5.6
1980
6.9
6.9
5.1
1.7
4.4
2.3
2.9
4.2
1.7
7.4
1981
7.4
7.0
4.8
2.0
5.5
3.4
3.3
6.9
2.4
11.5
1982
9.9
11.0
6.4
2.1
6.2
5.2
3.8
8.6
3.0
11.8P
1983
9.9
12.0
9.7
2.5
6.6
(2)6.4
4.1
(2)11.1
3.4
12.3P
1984
7.4
11.2
8.7
2.5
8.0
6.4
4.2
11.0
3.0
12.0P
1985
7.0
10.3
7.9
2.4
8.7
6.4
4.3
8.8
2.8
11.5P
1986
6.9
9.3
7.7
2.4
8.8
5.7
(2)5.2
7.9
2.6
11.6P
1987
6.2
8.5
7.8
2.5
8.6
NA
5.5
7.4P
(2)1.9
10.7P
1988
5.5
7.4
6.8
2.5
8.1
NA
5.5P
NA
1.6
8.6P
Continued on the following page.
39
Table 8. Civilian Unemployment Rates by Sex, 1960-1988--Continued
United
Nether-
United
Year
States
Canada
Australia
Japan
France
Germany
Italy
lands
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
Female
1960
5.9
4.9
NA
NA
NA
1.5
4.1
NA
NA
2.3
1961
7.2
5.0
NA
NA
NA
.8
4.1
NA
2.4
2.0
1962
6.2
4.4
NA
NA
2.3
.8
3.8
NA
1.7
2.7
1963
6.5
4.4
NA
NA
2.5
.6
3.2
NA
2.2
3.3
1964
6.2
4.1
2.6
NA
1.9
.5
3.8
NA
1.8
2.5
1965
5.5
3.5
2.4
NA
2.4
.3
4.4
NA
1.7
2.1
1966
4.8
3.4
2.7
NA
2.6
.3
4.9
NA
2.0
2.1
1967
5.2
3.7
3.2
NA
3.4
1.1
4.7
NA
2.3
2.9
1968
4.8
4.4
3.2
NA
4.3
1.3
5.2
NA
2.1
2.5
1969
4.7
4.7
3.2
NA
3.8
.7
5.4
NA
1.9
2.3
1970
5.9
5.8
2.8
2.2
4.2
.6
5.2
NA
1.7
2.3
1971
6.9
6.6
3.1
3.0
4.6
.8
5.2
NA
2.8
3.3
1972
6.6
7.0
3.9
3.4
4.7
.8
5.9
NA
3.0
3.3
1973
6.0
6.7
3.6
2.6
4.6
.9
6.2
4.3
2.8
2.6
1974
6.7
6.4
4.1
3.2
4.7
1.8
5.2
5.6
2.4
3.0
1975
9.3
8.1
7.0
3.9
6.1
3.6
5.8
8.2
2.0
4.0
1976
8.6
8.4
6.4
3.9
6.9
4.0
6.5
8.6
2.0
5.3
1977
8.2
9.4
7.5
4.3
7.5
4.5
6.8
7.6
2.2
5.8
1978
7.2
9.6
7.9
4.3
7.6
4.4
6.8
8.6
2.4
6.2
1979
6.8
8.8
8.2
4.1
8.5
4.1
7.3
8.8
2.3
5.0
1980
7.4
8.4
7.9
3.3
9.5
3.8
7.4
9.7
2.3
6.3
1981
7.9
8.3
7.4
3.5
10.6
5.1
8.1
12.9
2.7
9.0
1982
9.4
10.9
8.5
3.5
11.2
6.9
8.6
13.4
3.4
10.4P
1983
9.2
11.6
10.4
3.7
11.2
(2)8.3
9.4
(2)14.8
3.5
10.9P
1984
7.6
11.3
9.5
3.3
12.6
8.9
9.4
14.3
3.2
11.3P
1985
7.4
10.7
8.8
3.1
13.0
9.1
9.4
12.7
2.9
10.7P
1986
7.1
9.8
8.7
3.3
13.1
8.5
(2)11.8
13.3
2.7
10.7P
1987
6.2
9.3
8.6
3.7
13.6
NA
12.2
14.6P
(2)1.9
9.7P
1988
5.6
8.3
7.9
3.2
13.3
NA
12.3P
NA
1.6
7.9P
NA = Not available.
P =
Preliminary.
(1)
For 1977-80 and 1984-88, rates are based on the special surveys taken in March 1977-80 and
February 1984-88. Rates for 1970-76 are based on adjustment factors from the March 1977
survey and for 1981-83, on March 1980 and February 1984 adjustment factors.
(2)
Break in series.
40
Table 9. Civilian Unemployment Rates by Age, 1984-1988-
Age
United
Aus-
Ger-
United
Group
States
Canada
tralia
Japan
France
many
Italy
Sweden
Kingdom
(1)
(1)
(1)
1984
All working ages
7.5
11.2
9.0
2.8
9.6
6.7
5.9
3.1
11.8
Under 25 years
14.0
17.8
16.8
5.0
26.2
10.5
21.9
6.1
19.7
Teenagers (2)
18.9
20.0
22.3
7.0
37.8
11.6
29.8
5.0
22.3
20-24 years
11.5
16.6
12.9
4.4
23.6
9.8
17.9
6.7
17.9
25 years and over
5.8
9.3
6.2
2.4
6.7
5.8
2.8
2.6
9.5
1985
All working ages
7.2
10.5
8.3
2.6
10.3
6.9
6.0
2.8
11.2
Under 25 years
13.6
16.4
15.2
4.8
27.6
10.0
22.1
5.8
17.7
Teenagers (2)
18.6
18.7
20.3
7.5
36.6
10.6
30.4
4.6
19.8
20-24 years
11.1
15.1
11.5
4.2
25.6
9.6
18.3
6.4
16.4
25 years and over
5.6
8.7
5.9
2.3
7.5
6.2
2.9
2.3
9.3
1986
All working ages
7.0
9.5
8.1
2.8
10.3
6.7
(3)7.5
2.6
11.2
Under 25 years
13.3
15.1
15.0
5.2
25.3
8.0
(3)25.5
5.7
18.0
Teenagers (2)
18.3
16.8
20.1
7.5
31.3
7.0
(3)33.0
4.4
20.1
20-24 years
10.7
14.1
11.2
4.6
24.0
8.5
(3)22.1
6.3
16.7
25 years and over
5.4
8.0
5.7
2.5
7.9
6.3
(3)3.9
2.1
9.2
1987
All working ages
6.2
8.8
8.1
2.9
10.8
6.9
NA
(3)1.9
10.7
Under 25 years
12.2
13.7
14.9
5.3
24.7
7.6
NA
(3)4.1
15.8
Teenagers (2)
16.9
15.1
20.0
8.1
28.4
6.9
NA
(3)3.9
18.0
20-24 years
9.7
12.8
11.1
4.5
24.0
8.0
NA
(3)4.5
14.3
25 years and over
4.8
7.5
5.9
2.5
8.6
6.7
NA
(3)1.4
9.2
1988
All working ages
5.5
7.8
7.2
2.5
10.3
NA
NA
1.6
8.8P
Under 25 years
11.0
12.0
13.4
4.9
23.6
NA
NA
3.3
12.8P
Teenagers (2)
15.3
13.2
17.4
7.5
24.2
NA
NA
3.3
13.8P
20-24 years
8.7
11.2
10.4
4.2
23.5
NA
NA
3.6
12.1P
25 years and over
4.2
6.7
5.3
2.2
8.4
NA
NA
1.3
7.6P
NA = Not available.
P =
Preliminary.
(1)
French data are for March; German data are for June; and U.K. data are for April-June.
(2)
16-to 19-year-olds in the United States, France, Sweden, and the United Kingdom; 15-to 19-
year-olds in Canada, Australia, and Japan; and 14-to 19-year olds in Germany and Italy.
(3)
Break in series.
41
Table 10. BLS, OECD, and EUROSTAT Comparative Unemployment Rates, Selected Countries, 1984-1988
OECD
BLS Series
SURS
EUROSTAT
Civilian Basis Total Basis
Total Basis
Civilian Basis
(1)
1984
France
10.0
9.7
9.7
9.9
Germany
7.4
7.2
7.1
7.1
Italy
5.9
5.8
9.3
9.5
Netherlands
12.3
12.1
11.8
12.5
United Kingdom
11.7
11.6
11.7
11.4
1985
France
10.4
10.2
10.2
10.3
Germany
7.5
7.3
7.2
7.3
Italy
6.0
5.9
9.6
9.4
Netherlands
10.2
10.0
10.6
10.4
United Kingdom
11.2
11.1
11.2
11.5
1986
France
10.6
10.4
10.4
10.4
Germany
6.9
6.7
6.4
6.5
Italy
(2)7.5
(2)7.4
10.5
10.6
Netherlands
10.0
9.9
9.9
10.3
United Kingdom
11.2
11.2
11.2
11.5
1987
France
10.8
10.5
10.5
10.5
Germany
(2)6.4
(2)6.3
6.2
6.4
Italy
7.9
7.7
11.2
10.1
Netherlands
10.0
9.9
9.6
10.2
United Kingdom
10.2
10.2
10.2
10.6
1988
France
10.4
10.1
10.1
10.2
Germany
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.4
Italy
7.9
7.8
11.3
10.6
Netherlands
10.1
9.9
9.5
10.3
United Kingdom
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.7
NA = Not available.
(1) Excludes conscripts but includes career military.
(2) Break in series.
42
WHITE HOUSE LIBRARY
AND
RESEARCH CENTER
Room 308
x7000
TO: Bob Simon
ROOM 111 ½ DATE 10/6/89
To Keep
To Borrow Due Date
Per Your Request
FYI
Message:
From: Martha Brown
PAGE
FOR RELEASE: 9:30 A.M., E.D.T.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1989
Advance copies of this statement are made available to the
press with the explicit understanding that, prior to 8:30
a.m. Eastern time: (1) Wire services will not move over
their wires COPY based on information in this statement, (2)
electronic media will not Feed such information to member
stations, and (3) representatives of news organizations will
not contact anyone outside the Bureau of Labor Statistics to
ask questions or solicit comments about information in this
statement.
Statement of
Dr. Janet L. Norwood
Commissioner
Bureau of Labor Statistics
before the
Joint Economic Committee
UNITED STATES CONGRESS
October 6, 1989
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
It is a pleasure to be back this month to provide the
Committee with a few comments to supplement this morning's
Employment Situation release.
Employment showed little srowth in September, and the
unemployment rate remained within the nerrow nanse in which
it has been since the beginning of spring. The overall
jobless rate (including the resident armed forces), at 5.2
percent, and the civilian worker rate, at 5.3, mere both
about the same as the 5.1 and 5.2 percent fisures of the
previous month.
A slowdown in job snowth can be seen in both of our
surveys. The number of Jobs reported in the business survey
rose by 210,000 in September (after seasonel adjustment),
but about 75,000 of that increase represented a return to
company payrolls of workers who had been on strike in
August. The household survey's estimate of total civilian
PAGE
-2-
employment was essentially unchanged in September and, in
fact, has not shown any real srowth since June.
The most disturbing feature of September's business
survey data WBS the larse decline in manufacturing
employment - 105,000. One-third of this decline took place
in automobile factories, where inventory controls have led
to wide fluctuations in employment levels over recent.
months. Real growth in overall factory employment ended
last March: since then, we have lost 135,000 factory jobs.
Several individual manufacturing industries have had small
job losses for several months, and these were joined by
others in September, as 16 of the 20 major manufacturing
industries experienced declines after seasonal adjustment.
Further evidence of weakness comes from the manufacturing
diffusion index, which shows that twice as meny of the 141
industries experienced job losses as had job sains. In
spite of these developments, it should be noted that the
factory workweek remains near its all-time hish.
September employment in the construction industry WB5
unchansed from Ausust. Since the beginning of the Year, the
number of construction Jobs has increased by only about
50,000. Employment dipped slishtly in the mining industry,
but remained about 15,000 above the January level,
The real strensth in the September numbers was in the
services industry, where about 105,000 Jobs were added from
Ausust to September. Employment in business and health
services increased by 45,000 each. This was a very strons
job sain for business services, the bissest in a Year and a
half. The return to work of strikers, mostly in the
telephone industry, accounted for nearly all of the 90,000
increase in transportation and public utilities, Most of
the 95,000 increase in government employment represented an
expansion in local education at the besinning of the school
Year,
Little movement has occurred in most of the household
survey measures in recent months, and the trend continued in
September. The civilian jobless rate has been at 5.2 or 5.3
percent in every month since April, and the quarterly rates
have actually been in that narrow ranse for a full year now.
The proportion of the population that is at work, although
somewhat lower than in recent months, is still near its
record hish. In September, the unemployment rate for adult
women fell a bit to 4.5 percent, but the Jobless rate for
adult men rose four-tenths of a percentase point to 4.3
PAGE
percent. And the volatile rate for black teenagers jumped
to 37.3 percent.
Data on discouraged workers, coverins the third quarter
of the year, were published this morning. There were
315,000 discourased workers in the third quarter of 1989;
-3-
the series has been trending downward slowly, with the
decline totaling 115,000 over the year.
In summary, the labor market data released today show
widespread employment weakness in manufacturing, but
continued strength in the services industry. The
unemployment rate remains close to 5 percent, the lowest
ranse it has been at in 15 years.
Mr colleasues and I will now be slad to answer any
questions YOU may have,
PAGE
Unemployment rates of all civilian workers by alternative seasonal adjustment methods
X-11 ARIMA method
IX-11 method :
+
Month
IUnad-
I
:Concurrent:
:
12-month
:
(official
IRange
and
|justed|Official Mas first :Concurrent Stable Total (Residual Textrapola-1 method (cols,
Year
rate Iprocedure computed) ({revised)
tion
Ibefore 1980)! 2-9)
+
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
1988
September
5.2
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.4
5,4
5.4
5.4
5.4
October
5.0
5.3
5.3
5.3
; 5.3
;
5.3
5.4
5.3
5.3
.1
November
: 5.2
5.4
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.4
5.4
.1
December
5.0
;
5,3
5.3
5.3
: 5.3
;
5.3
5,4
5.3
5,4
.1
1989
January
--
6.0
5.4
5.4
;
5.4
5.5
5.4
--
5.3
5,4
5.5
1.2
February
: 5.6
5,1
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.0
5.1
5.2
.2
March
5.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
;
4.8
5.0
5.0
.2
April
5.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
:
5.3
5.3
5.3
May
; 5.0
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.1
--
5.3
5.2
5.1
.2
June
: 5.5
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.4
;
5.4
5.3
5.3
.2
July
I 5.3
5.2
5.2
5,3
5,2
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
.1
August
; 5.1
5.2
5.2
5.2
; 5.1
--
5.2
5.3
5,2
5,2
.2
September
; 5.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.2
5.3
5,3
.1
+
SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
October 1989
1
0
0
1
1
PAGE
Technical information: (202) 523-1371
USDL 89-480
523-1944
523-1959
TRANSMISSION OF MATERIAL IN THIS
Media Contact:
523-1913
RELEASE IS EMBARGOED UNTIL
8:30 A.M. (EDT), FRIDAY,
OCTOBER 6, 1989
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: SEPTEMBER 1989
Payroll employment showed little growth and unemployment was about
unchanged in September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor reported today. The overall jobless rate was 5.2
percent and the civilian worker rate was 5.3 percent: they had been 5.1 and
5.2 percent, respectively, in August.
Nonagricultural payroll employment, as measured by the survey of
business establishments, rose by 210,000 in September to 109.1 million, but
about 75,000 of the increase represented a return to work of persons who
had been on strike. Total civilian employment, as measured by the survey
of households, was about unchanged over the month.
Unemployment (Household Survey Data)
The number of persons unemployed, 6.6 million, and the civilian worker
unemployment rate, 5,3 percent, were essentially unchanged in September.
Both measures have shown little movement since the spring, Jobless rates
were about unchanged over the month for teenesers (15.1 percent), whites
(4.5 percent), Hispanics (8.3 percent), and blacks (11.6 percent), a although
the rate for black teenagers rose to 37.3 percent. While the unemployment
rate for adult men increased 0,4 percentage point to 4.8 percent, the rate
for adult women edsed down to 4.5 percent, (See tables A-2 and A-3.)
Civilian Employment and the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)
Total civilian employment was virtually unchanged in September at a
seasonally adjusted level of 117,5 million. At 62.9 percent, the
employment-population ratio (the proportion of the workins-ase population
that was employed) remained close to the level that has held throughout
1989. (See table A-2.)
The civilian labor force (124.0 million) and the labor force
participation rate (66,4 percent) were also about the same as in the
previous month, after seasonal adjustment. The labor force has increased
by 2.0 million over the past 12 months. (See table A-2.)
Table A. Major indicators of labor market activity, seasonally adjusted
Quarterly
Monthly data
averages
:Aug.-
Category
1989
1989
|Sept.
Ichange
II
III
July
Aus.
Sept.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
Thousands of persons
PAGE
2
Labor force 1/
125,4641 125,690 125,6221 125,7061 125,7421 36
Total employment 1/. 118,964| 119,1891 119,1251 119,2851 119,158: -127
Civilian labor force
123,790 124,005: 123,956 124,018: 124,040 22
Civilian employment. 117,289: 117,504| 117,459) 117,5971 117,456 -141
Unemployment
6,5011
6,5011
6,4971
6,4211
6,5841
163
Not in labor force
62,3881
62,5971
62,5271
62,5801
62,6861
106
Discourased workers.
8691
8151
N.A.I
N.A.:
N.A. N.A.
;
Percent of labor force
Unemployment rates:
All workers 1/
5.21
5.21
5.21
5.11
5.21
0.1
All civilian workers
5.31
5.21
5.21
5.21
5.31
.1
Adult men
4.41
4.51
4.31
4.41
4.81
.4
Adult women
4.81
4.71
5.01
4.71
4.51
-.2
Teenagers
15.11
14.81
14.71
14.51
15.11
.6
White
4.51
4.51
4.61
4.51
4.51
.0
Black
11.21
11.21
10.91
11.11
11.61
.5
Hispanic origin
8.11
3.81
9.01
9.01
8.31
-,7
;
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
Thousands of Jobs
Nonfarm employment
108,339lp108,895| 108,7671p108,855:p109,064) F209
Goods-producing
25,6641 p25,651 25,6691 ₱25,6961 p25,588lp-108
Service-producins
82,6761 P83,2441 83,0981 -83,1591 P83,4761 F317
Hours of work
Average weekly hours:
Total private
34.71
P34.71
34.81
P34.61
P34.61
p0
Manufacturing
41.11
p41.01
41.01
p40.91
P41.01
p0.1
Overtime
3.81
P3.81
3.91
=3.71
P3.81
P.1
1/ Includes the resident Armed Forces.
P=Preliminary.
=not available.
Discouresed Workers (Household Survey Data)
At a seasonally adjusted level of 815,000 in the July-September
period, the number of discouraged workers--Persons who want to work but
have not looked for jobs because they believe they cannot find any-was
about unchanged from the second quarter. Over the past Year, the number of
discourased workers has declined by about 115,000. -(See table A-14.)
Industry Parroll Employment (Establishment Survey Data)
Total nonagricultural payroll employment increased by 210,000 in
September to 109.1 million, seasonally adjusted. This increase would have
been much smaller if not for the return to payrolls of about 75,000 workers
involved in strikes in August. The diffusion index of 349 industries fell
below 50 percent, indicating that more industries lost than gained jobs in
September. (See tables B-1 and B-6.)
In the goods-producins sector, factory employment fell by 105,000.
Whereas the bulk of the decrease occurred in the durable soods sector, it
PAGE
was very widespread, with 16 of the 20 individual manufacturing industries
showing employment reductions. The largest occurred in the auto industry-
35,000. Employment in the electrical equipment industry fell by 10,000
over the month and has declined by 55,000 since last November. In primary
metals, where employment had changed little since late last Year, the
number of workers fell by 10,000 in September. Fabricated metal products
has had small job losses for 7 consecutive months. Employment in apparel
and other textile products fell by 10,000 over the month, returning to last
October's employment level. The minins industry also showed a small job
loss, while construction employment was unchanged for the second
consecutive month.
In the service-producins sector, employment in transportation and
public utilities increased by 90,000 over the month, primarily reflecting
the return to work of telephone workers from strikes. Services industry
employment rose by 105,000, as both business and health services showed
strons job gains of 45,000, Government employment was also a strons
sainer, with an increase of 95,000 over the month; most of this occurred in
local education. Finance, insurance, and real estate employment srew by
10,000 in September. Wholesale trade showed a small job sain, while
employment-in retail trade was little changed; job growth in these two
industries has been quite slow for most of this year,
Despite the slower srowth in recent months, total payroll employment
in September was nearly 2.9 million above its Year-ase level. Virtually
all of this sain-2.6 million--took place in the`service-producins sector.
Weekly Hours (Establishment Survey Data)
The average workweek for production or nonsupervisory workers on
private nonagricultural payrolls was unchanged in September at 34.6 hours,
seasonally adjusted. The manufacturing workweek and factory overtime both
edged UP 0.1 hour to 41.0 and 3.8 hours, respectively, offsetting small
decreases in the previous month. (See table B-2.)
The index of assregate weekly hours of private production or
nonsupervisory workers rose 0.2 percent in September to 128.6 (1977=100),
after seasonal adjustment. This follows a decrease of 0.6 percent in the
previous month. The manufacturins index fell 0.7 percent to 95.6. (See
table B-5.)
Hourly and Weekly Earnings (Establishment Survey Data)
Both average hourly and average weekly earnings of private production
or nonsupervisory workers increased 0.5 percent in September, after
seasonal adjustment. Prior to seasonal adjustment, average hour earnings
rose 16 cents to $9.76 and average weekly earnines increased $3.63 to
$338.67, as many rouths-earning comparatively low wases left summer jobs
and returned to school. Over the Year, average hourly earnings increased
by 3.8 percent, while average weekly earnings rose 3.5 percent. (See
tables B-3 and B-4.)
The Employment Situation for October 1989 will be released on Friday,
November 3, at 8:30 A.M. (EST).
PAGE 4
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
20.
PAGE
1
Table A-1. Employment status of the population, including Armed Forces in the United States, by sex
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted1/
Employment status and sex
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
TOTAL
Noninstitutional population2/
186,666
188,286
188,428
186,666
187,854
187,995
188,149
188,286
188,428
Labor force2/
123,546
127,132
125,530
123,688
125,283
125,768
125,622
125,706
125,742
Participation rate3/
66.2
67.5
66.6
66.3
66.7
66.9
66.8
66.8
66.7
Total employed2/
117,178
120,780
119,200
117,074
118,888
119,207
119,125
119,285
119,158
Employment-Population ratio4/
62.8
64.1
63.3
62.7
63.3
63.4
63.3
63.4
63.2
Resident Armed Forces
1,704
1,688
1,702
1,704
1,673
1,666
1,666
1,688
1,702
Civilian employed
115,474
119,092
117,498
115,370
117,215
117,541
117,459
117,597
117,456
Agriculture
3,250
3,633
3,329
3,176
3,112
3,096
3,219
3,307
3,257
Nonagricultural industries
112,225
115,460
114,169
112,194
114,102
114,445
114,240
114,290
114,199
Unemployed
6,368
6,352
6,330
6,614
6,395
6,561
6,497
6,421
6,584
Unemployment rate5/
5.2
5.0
5.0
5.3
5.1
5.2
5.2
5,1
5.2
Not in labor force
63,119
61,155
62,899
62,978
62,571
62,228
62,527
62,580
62,686
Men, 16 Years and over
Noninstitutional population2/
89,577
90,384
90,456
89,577
90,167
90,237
90,315
90,384
90,456
Labor force2/
63,465
70,587
69,123
68,604
69,114
69,507
69,245
69,337
69,272
Participation rate3/
76.4
78.1
76.4
76.6
76.7
77.0
76.7
76.7
76.6
Total employed2/
65,282
67,431
65,875
65,015
65,713
66,110
65,961
65,934
65,601
Employment-Population ratio4/
72.9
74.6
72.8
72.6
72.9
73.3
73.0
72.9
72.5
Resident Armed Forces
1,540
1,519
1,531
1,540
1,511
1,501
1,499
1,519
1,531
Civilian employed
63,742
65,912
64,344
63,475
64,202
64,609
64,462
64,415
64,070
Unemployed
3,183
3,157
3,248
3,539
3,401
3,397
3,284
3,403
3,672
Unemployment rate5/
4.6
4.5
4,7
5.2
4.9
4.9
4.7
4.9
5.3
Women, 16 years and over
Noninstitutional population2/
97,089
97,902
97,972
97,089
97,687
97,758
97,834
97,902
97,972
Labor force2/
55,082
56,544
56,407
55,084
56,169
56,261
56,377
56,370
56,470
Participation rate3/
56.7
57.8
57.6
56.7
57.5
57.6
57.6
57.6
57.6
Total employed2/
51,896
53,349
53,325
52,059
53,175
53,097
53,164
53,352
53,557
Employment-Population ratio4/
53.5
54.5
54.4
53.6
54.4
54.3
54.3
54.5
54.7
Resident Armed Forces
164
169
171
-164
162
165
167
169
171
Civilian employed
51,732
53,180
53,154
51,895
53,013
52,932
52,997
53,183
53,386
Unemployed
3,186
3,195
3,081
3,025
2,994
3,164
3,213
3,018
2,912
Unemployment rate5/
5,8
5.7
5.5
5.5
5.3
5.6
5.7
5.4
5.2
1/ The population and Armed Forces fisures are not adjusted for seasonal variation;
therefore, identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.
2/ Includes members of the Armed Forces stationed in the United States.
3/ Labor force as a percent of the noninstitutional population.
4/ Total employment as a percent of the neninstitutional population.
5/ Unemployment as a percent of the labor force (including the resident Armed Forces).
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and ase
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted1/
Employment status, sex, and age
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional population
184,962
186,598
186,726
184,962
186,181
186,329
186,483
186,598
186.726
Civilian Tabor force
121,842
125,444
123,828
121,984
123,610
124,102
123,956
124,018
124-040
Participation rate
65.9
67.2
66.3
66.0
66.4
66.6
66.5
66.5
66.4
Employed
115,474
119,092
117,498
115,370
117,215
117,541
117,459
117,597
117,456
Employment-Population ratio2/
62.4
63.8
62.9
62.4
63.0
63.1
63.0
63.0
62,9
Unemployed
6,368
6,352
6,330
6,614
6,395
6,561
6,497
6,421
6,584
Unemployment rate
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.4
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population
80,751
81,754
81,790
80,751
81,524
81,592
81,679
81,754
81,790
Civilian labor force
62,942
64,167
63,771
62,884
63,503
63,831
63,656
63,643
63,721
Participation rate
77.9
78.5
78.0
77.9
77.9
78.2
77.9
77.8
77.9
Employed
60,402
61,603
61,113
59,979
60,798
61,093
60,921
60,853
60,683
Employment-Population ratio2/
74.8
75.4
74.7
74.3
74.6
74.9
74.6
74.4
74.2
Agriculture
2,325
2,529
2,419
2,249
2,284
2,256
2,342
2,364
2,339
Nonagricultural industries
58,077
59,074
58,694
57,730
58,514
58,837
58,579
58,489
58,344
Unemployed
2,540
2,564
2,658
2,905
2,705
2,737
2,734
2,790
3,038
Unemployment rate
4.0
4.0
4.2
4.6
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.4
4,8
Women, 20 Years and over
Civilian moninstitutional population
89,735
90,684
90,771
89,735
90,432
90,526
90,607
90,684
90-771
Civilian labor force
51,172
52,000
52,558
50,991
52,171
52,231
52,463
52,373
52,443
Participation rate
57.0
57.3
57.9
56.8
57.7
57.7
57.9
57,8
57.8
Employed
48,556
49,352
50,040
43,535
49,690
49,661
49,850
49,905
50-089
Employment-Population ratio2/
54.1
54.4
55.1
54.1
54.9
54.9
55.0
55.0
55.2
Asriculture
642
682
701
638
628
610
627
644
701
Nonesricultural industries
47,914
48,670
49,339
47,897
49,062
49,051
49,223
49,261
49,388
Unemployed
2,616
2,648
2,518
2,456
2,480
2,570
2,613
2,468
2,353
Unemployment rate
5.1
5.1
4.8
4.8
4,8
4.9
5.0
4.7
4,5
Both sexes, -16 to 19 years
Civilian noninstitutional population
14,477
14,160
14,166
14,477
14,224
14,211
14,196
14,160
14,166
Civilian labor force
7,728
9,276
7,498
8,109
7,936
8,040
7,837
8,003
7,876
Participation rate
53.4
65.5
52.9
56.0
55.8
56.6
55.2
56,5
5.6
Employed
6,516
3,137
6,345
6,856
6,726
6,786
6,687
6,840
6,383
Employment-Ropulation ratio2/
45.0
57.5
44.8
47.4
47.3
47.8
47,1
48.3
47.2
Agriculture
282
422
209
289
200
230
249
300
216
Nonesricultural industries
6,234
7,715
6,136
6,567
6,526
6,556
6,438
6,540
6-467
Unemployed
1,212
1,140
1,153
1,253
1,210
1,254
1,150
1,163
1,193
Unemployment rate
15.7
12.3
15.4
15.5
15.2
15.6
14.7
14.5
15.1
1/ The population fisures are not adjusted for seasonal variation; therefore,
PAGE 2
identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.
2/ Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-3. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, ase, and Hispanic orisin
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted1/
Employment status, race, sex, age, and
Hispanic origin
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
Mar
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
WHITE
Civilian noninstitutional population
158,422
159,470
159,549
158,422
159,200
159,297
159,400
159,470
159,549
Civilian labor force
104,959
107,597
106,195
105,036
106,164
106,455
106,424
106,446
106,325
Participation rate
66.3
67.5
66.6
66.3
66.7
66.8
66.8
66.8
66.6
Employed
100,177
102,938
101,600
100,058
101,465
101,693
101,581
101,670
101,535
Employment-Population ratio2/
63.2
64.6
63.7
63.2
63.7
63.8
63.7
63.8
63.6
Unemployed
4,782
4,659
4,595
4,978
4,699
4,762
4,843
4,777
4,791
Unemployment rate
4.6
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.5
4.5
-
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian labor force
54,872
55,766
55,433
54,839
55,249
55,557
55,437
55,377
55,413
Participation rate
78.4
78.8
78.3
78.3
78.3
78.7
78.4
78.3
78.3
Employed
52,910
53,868
53,416
52,579
53,248
53,500
53,343
53,282
53,097
Emeloyment-Population ratio2/
75.6
76.2
75.5
75.1
75.5
75.8
75.5
75.3
75.0
Unemployed
1,962
1,898
2,017
2,260
2,001
2,057
2,094
2,095
2,316
Unemployment rate
3.6
3.4
3.6
4.1
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.8
4.2
Women, 20 years and over
Civilian labor force
43,397
43,886
44,358
43,191
44,084
44,050
44,302
44,169
44,192
Participation rate
56.7
56.8
57.4
56.4
57.2
57.1
57.4
57.2
57.2
Employed
41,495
41,948
42,570
41,413
42,282
42,236
42,411
42,372
42,527
Employment-Population ratio2/
54.2
54.3
55,1
54.1
54.9
54.8
55.0
54.9
55.0
Unemployed
1,902
1,938
1,788
1,778
1,803
1,814
1,891
1,798
1,665
Unemployment rate
4.4
4.4
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.1
3.8
Both sexes, 16 to 19 Years
Civilian labor force
6,690
7,945
6,405
7,006
6,831
6,848
6,685
6,900
6,720
Participation rate
56.7
69.1
55.9
59.4
59.0
59.2
57.9
60.0
58.6
Employed
5,772
7,122
5,614
6,066
5,936
5,957
5,827
6,016
5,910
Employment-Population ratio2/
48.9
61.9
49.0
51.4
51.3
51.5
50.5
52.3
51.6
Unemployed
918
823
790
940
895
891
858
884
810
Unemployment rate
13.7
10.4
12.3
13.4
13.1
13.0
12.8
12.8
12.1
Men
14.2
10.3
12.9
14,5
14.8
13.4
12.4
12.9
13.3
Women
13.2
10.4
11.7
12.3
11.2
12.6
-13.4
12.7
10.8
BLACK
Civilian noninstitutional population
20,762
21,060
21,085
20,762
20,986
21,012
21,038
21,060
21,085
Civilian labor force
13,178
13,694
13,481
13,201
13,444
13,600
13,555
13,448
13,515
Participation rate
63.5
65.0
63.9
63.6
64.1
64.7
64.4
63.9
64.1
Employed
11,764
12,197
11,956
11,758
11,968
11,982
12,082
11,958
11,940
Employment-Porulation ratio2/
56.7
57.9
56.7
56.6
57.0
57.0
57.4
56.8
56.6
Unemployed
1,414
1,497
1,524
1,443
1,476
1,618
1,473
1,490
1,574
Unemployment rate
10.7
10.9
11.3
10.9
11.0
11.9
10.9
11.1
11.6
Men, 20 Years and over
Civilian labor force
6,126
6,263
6,246
6,117
6,207
6,200
6,205
6,189
6,247
Participation rate
74.3
74.7
74.6
74.2
74.3
74.1
74.1
73.8
74.7
PAGE
2
Employed
5,620
5,686
5,682
5,563
5,622
5,619
5,629
5,530
5,620
Emplorment-population ratio2/
68.1
67.8
67.9
67.5
67.3
67.2
67.2
66.6
67.2
Unemployed
506
578
564
554
586
581
576
609
627
Unemployment rate
8.3
9.2
9.0
9.1
9.4
9.4
9.3
9,8
10.0
Women, 20 years and over
Civilian labor force
6,192
6,338
6,369
6,174
6,340
6,405
6,394
6,359
6,356
Participation rate
59.9
60.3
60.6
59.8
60.6
61.2
61.0
60.5
60.4
Employed
5,558
5,710
5,731
5,575
5,740
5,732
5,759
5,762
5,748
Employment-population ratio2/
53.8
54.4
54.5
54.0
54.9
54.7
54.9
54.9
54.6
Unemployed
633
628
639
599
600
674
635
597
607
Unemployment rate
10.2
9.9
10.0
9.7
9.5
10.5
9.9
9.4
9.6
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian labor force
861
1,092
865
910
897
994
956
900
912
Participation rate
39.5
50.3
39.4
41.7
41.3
45.7
44.0
41.4
41.5
Employed
585
801
544
620
606
631
694
616
572
Employment-Population ratio2/
26.8
36.9
24.7
28.4
27,9
29.0
31.9
28.3
26.0
Unemployed
275
291
322
290
291
363
262
284
340
Unemployment rate
32.0
26.6
37.2
31.9
32.4
36.5
27.4
31.6
37.3
Men
32.5
24.6
34.4
31.9
36.9
33.5
22.1
30.0
34.1
Women
31.5
28.9
39.6
31.9
28.4
40.2
33.1
33.4
40.3
HISPANIC ORIGIN
Civilian noninstitutional population
13,419
13,853
13,894
13,419
13,731
13,772
13,813
13,853
13,894
Civilian labor force
9,086
9,494
9,332
9,061
9,428
9,272
9,433
9,364
9,326
Participation rate
67.7
68.5
67.2
67.5
68.7
67.3
68.3
67.6
67.1
Employed
8,444
3,666
8,610
8,378
8,686
8,524
8,587
3,521
8,550
Employment-Population ratio2/
62.9
62.6
62.0
62.4
63.3
61.9
62.2
61.5
61.5
Unemployed
642
828
722
683
742
748
846
843
776
Unemployment rate
7.1
8.7
7.7
7.5
7,9
8.1
9.0
9,0
8.3
1/ The population figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation; therefore,
identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.
2/ Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population,
NOTE: Detail For the above race and Hispanic-orisin sroups will not SUM to totals
because data for the "other races" group are not presented and Hispanics are included in
both the white and black population groups,
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-4. Selected employment indicators
(In thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Category
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
CHARACTERISTIC
Civilian employed, 16 years and over
115,474
119,092
117,498
115,370
117,215
117,541
117,459
117,597
117,456
Married men, spouse present
40,815
40,880
40,856
40,513
40,902
41,102
41,089
40,636
40,572
Married women, spouse present
29,031
28,665
29,608
28,836
29,739
29,481
29,552
29,220
29,461
Women who maintain families
6,188
6,298
6,379
6,253
6,331
6,403
6,456
6,342
6,437
MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS OF WORKER
Agriculture:
Wase and safary workers
1,626
1,958
1,686
1,612
1,610
1,550
1,695
1,803
1,671
Self-employed workers
1,500
1,494
1,523
1,421
1,358
1,412
1,434
1,420
1,441
Unpaid family workers
123
181
120
137
127
126
126
137
135
Nonagricultural industries:
Wase and salary workers
103,400
106,390
105,287
103,501
105,245
105,519
105,321
105,259
105,355
Government
17,035
16,887
17,513
17,145
17,230
17,261
17,519
17,591
17,619
Private industries
86,365
89,503
87,775
86,356
88,015
88,259
87,803
87,668
87,737
Private households
1,077
1,217
1,011
1,119
1,128
1,140
1,093
1,146
1,054
Other industries
85,288
88,286
86,764
85,237
86,887
87,118
86,710
86,522
86,682
Self-employed workers
8,592
8,797
8,586
8,570
8,516
8,570
8,606
8,625
8,569
Unpaid family workers
232
273
296
230
322
241
239
264
296
PERSONS AT WORK PART TIME1/
All industries:
Part time for economic reasons
4,704
5,125
4,487
5,097
4,837
4,957
4,750
4,785
4,882
Slack work
2,041
2,250
2,097
2,266
2,296
2,318
2,311
2,282
2,330
Could only find part-time work
2,191
2,415
1,991
2,389
2,343
2,289
2,138
2,107
2,171
Voluntary part time
15,375
12,460
15,666
15,270
15,316
15,416
15,652
15,614
15,542
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic reasons
4,458
4,849
4,229
4,862
4,609
4,801
4,505
4,553
4,612
Slack work
1,385
2,084
1,935
2,102
2,102
2,190
2,185
2,129
2,174
Could only find part-time work
2,113
2,309
1,910
2,317
2,301
2,236
2,057
2,024
2,090
Voluntary part time
14,906
11,985
15,215
14,819
14,976
14,977
15,219
15,094
15,109
1/ Excludes persons "with a job but not at work" durins the survey period for such
reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial dispute.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
1
Table A-5. Range of unemployment measures based on varying definitions of unemployment and the labor force, seasonally
adjusted
(Percent)
Quarterly averages
Monthly data
Measure
1988
1989
1989
III
IV
I
II
III
July
Aus.
Sept.
U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer as a percent of the
civilian labor force
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
U-2 Job losers as a percent of the civilian labor force
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
U-3 Unemployed persons 25 years and over as a percent of the
civilian labor force for persons 25 years and over
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.1
U-4 Unemployed full-time Jobseekers as a percent of the
full-time civilian labor force
5.1
5.0
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
5.0
U-5a Total unemployed 85 a percent of the labor force,
including the resident Armed Forces
5.4
5.3
5.1
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.1
5.2
U-5b Total unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force
5.5
5.3
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.3
U-6 Total full-time Jobseekers Plus 1/2 part-time Jobseekers Plus
1/2 total on part time for economic reasons as a percent of
the civilian labor force less 1/2 of the part-time labor force
7.6
7.5
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.3
U-7 Total full-time Jobseekers plus 1/2 part-time Jobseekers
plus 1/2 total on part time for economic reasons plus discourased
workers as a percent of the civilian labor force plus
discouraged workers less 1/2 of the part-time labor force
8.4
8.2
7.9
7.9
7.9
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A. = not available.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-6. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted
Number of
unemployed persons
Unemployment rates1/
(in thousands)
Catesory
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
CHARACTERISTIC
Total, 16 Years and over
6,614
6,421
6,584
5.4
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
Men, 16 years and over
3,589
3,403
3,672
5.4
5.0
5.0
4.8
5.0
5.4
Men, 20 years and over
2,905
2,790
3,038
4.6
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.8
Women, 16 years and over
3,025
3,018
2,912
5.5
5.3
5.6
5.7
5.4
5.2
Women, 20 years and over
2,456
2,468
2,353
4.8
4.8
4.9
5.0
4.7
4.5
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
1,253
1,163
1,193
15.5
15.2
15.6
14.7
14.5
15.1
Married men, SPOUSE present
1,316
1,312
1,424
3.1
2.9
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.4
Married women, spouse present
1,133
1,189
1,154
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.8
Women who maintain families
548
552
529
8.1
8.3
7.9
8.7
8.0
7.6
Full-time workers
5,293
5,183
5,255
5.1
4.8
4.8
4.9
4.9
5.0
Part-time workers
1,328
1,253
1,330
7.4
6.9
7.7
7.2
6,9
7.3
Labor force time lost2/
|
6.3
5.9
6.1
6.0
5.9
5.9
INDUSTRY
Nonagricultural private wase and selary workers
4,969
4,971
5,021
5.4
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.4
5.4
Goods-producine industries
1,871
1,844
1,825
6.4
5.8
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.3
Mining
67
48
61
8.6
4.5
3.7
5,5
6.5
8.5
Construction
608
638
648
9.6
9.3
10.0
10.5
10.3
10.4
Manufacturing
1,196
1,158
1,116
5.4
4.9
5.2
5.0
5.2
5.1
Durable goods
677
623
613
5.2
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.7
Nondurable goods
519
535
503
5.8
5.5
6.1
5.5
5.9
5.5
Service-producing industries
3,098
3,127
3,196
5,0
4.9
4.9
5.0
4.9
5.0
Transportation and public utitities
237
234
298
3.8
4.0
4.4
4.2
3.6
4.7
Wholesale and retail trade
1,438
1,424
1,374
6.2
5.5
6.0
6.2
6.0
5.8
Finance and service industries
1,423
1,470
1,524
4.4
4.7
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.5
Government workers
474
489
505
2.7
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.8
Agricultural wase and salary workers
195
169
140
10.8
10.3
11.0
8.5
8.6
7.7
1/Unemplayment as a percent of the civilian labor force.
2/ Assresate hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic
reasons as a percent of potentially available labor- force hours,
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
1
Table A-7. Duration of unemployment
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Weeks of unemployment
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
DURATION
Less than 5 weeks
3,308
3,022
3,355
3,116
3,041
3,309
3,149
3,071
3,156
5.to 14 weeks
1,632
2,152
1,737
1,896
2,017
1,999
1,927
2,011
2,036
15 weeks and over
1,428
1,178
1,237
1,568
1,313
1,258
1,472
1,305
1,370
15 to 26 weeks
644
612
664
775
702
659
846
737
789
27 weeks and over
784
566
573
793
611
599
626
567
581
Average (mean) duration, in weeks
13.3
11.3
11.3
13.5
11.8
11.1
12.0
11.3
11.4
Median duration, in weeks
4.8
5.0
4.2
5.7
5.3
5.5
5.6
5.0
5.0
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
Total unemployed
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Less than 5 weeks
51.9
47.6
53.0
47.4
47.7
50.4
48.1
48.1
48.1
5 to 14 weeks
25.6
33.9
27.4
28.8
31.7
30.4
29.4
31.5
31.0
15 weeks and over
22.4
18.5
19.5
23.8
20.6
19.2
22.5
20.4
20.9
15 to 26 weeks
10.1
9.6
10.5
11.8
11.0
10.0
12.9
11.5
12.0
27 weeks and over
12.3
8.9
9.1
12.1
9.6
9.1
9.6
8.9
8.8
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-8. Reason for unemployment
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Reasons
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED
Job losers
2,732
2,766
2,586
3,079
2,724
2,765
2,920
2,984
2,915
On leyoff
636
736
631
833
790
806
822
873
828
Other job losers
2,096
2,030
1,955
2,246
1,934
1,958
2,097
2,111
2,087
Job leavers
1,099
1,122
1,162
985
1,114
1,023
1,010
1,040
1,039
Reentrants
1,821
1,814
1,997
1,767
1,852
2,051
1,934
1,768
1,946
New entrants
717
650
585
761
683
742
724
628
629
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
Total unemployed
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Job losers
42.9
43.5
40.9
46.7
42.7
42.0
44.3
46,5
44.6
On Taroff
10.0
11.6
10.0
12.6
12.4
12.3
12.5
13.6
12.7
Other job losers
32.9
32.0
30.9
34.1
30.3
29.8
31.8
32.9
32.0
Job leavers
17.3
17.7
18.4
14.9
17.5
15.5
15.3
16.2
15.9
Reentrants
28.6
28.6
31.5
26.8
29.1
31.2
29.4
27.5
29.8
New entrents
11.3
10.2
9.2
11.5
10.7
11.3
11.0
9.8
9.6
UNEMPLOYED AS A PERCENT OF THE
CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
Job losers
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.4
2.4
2.4
Job leavers
.9
.9
.9
is
.9
:o
is
.8
:-
Reentrents
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.6
New entrants
.6
.5
.5
.6
.6
.6
.6
.5
.5
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-9. Unemployed persons by sex and age, seasonally adjusted
Number of
unemployed persons
Unemployment rates1/
(in thousands)
Sex and age
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
Total, 16 years and over
6,614
6,421
6,584
5.4
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
16 to 24 years
2,457
2,420
2,444
10.9
10.4
11.3
10.7
10.9
11.2
16 to 19 Years
1,253
1,163
1,193
15.5
15.2
15.6
14.7
14.5
15.1
16 to 17 years
650
565
518
19.6
16.2
17.5
17.8
18.1
16.8
18 to 19 Years
615
609
683
12.8
14.5
14.9
12.4
12.5
14.2
20 to 24 Years
1,204
1,257
1,251
8.4
7.7
8.9
8.6
8.8
8.9
25 Years and over
4,179
4,031
4,182
4.2
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.1
25 to 54 years
3,733
3,556
3,698
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.2
4.1
4.3
55 Years and over
436
468
461
2.9
2.9
3.3
3.1
3.1
3.0
Men, 16 years and over
3,589
3,403
3,672
5.4
5.0
5.0
4.8
5.0
5.4
16 to 24 years
1,329
1,328
1,380
11.3
11.0
11.5
10.4
11.4
12.1
16 to 19 years
684
613
634
16.4
17.0
15.8
13.4
14.7
15.8
16 to 17 Years
367
290
311
20.8
18.8
20.0
17.4
17.4
19.8
18 to 19 Years
329
315
334
13.5
15.7
13.6
10.7
12.7
13.5
20 to 24 Years
645
715
746
8.5
7.7
9.2
8.7
9.6
10.1
25 Years and over
2,270
2,106
2,324
4.1
3.7
3.7
3,7
3.7
4.1
25 to 54 years
2,014
1,800
1,992
4.3
3.9
3.7
3.9
3.8
4.2
55 years and over
-255
291
313
2.9
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.3
3.6
-
Women, 16 Years and over
3,025
3,018
2,912
5.5
5.3
5,6
5.7
5.4
16 to 24 years
5.2
1,128
1,092
1,064
10.5
9.8
11.0
11.1
10.2
10.1
16 to 19 Years
569
0300
559
14.5
13.4
15.4
16.0
14.4
14.5
16 to 17 Years
283
275
207
18.2
13.4
14.7
18.3
18.8
13.7
18 to 19 Years
286
294
349
12.0
13.3
16.2
14.4
12,4
14.8
20 to 24 years
559
542
505
8.2
7.7
8.6
8.4
7.9
25 years and over
7.6
1,909
1,925
1,858
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.2
25 to 54 Years
4.1
1,719
1,756
1,705
4.5
4.6
4.5
4.6
4.5
55 rears and over
4.3
181
178
147
2.9
3.0
3.8
3.2
2.7
2.2
1/ Unemployment 25_8 percent of the civilian labor force.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-10. Employment status of black and other workers
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted1/
Employment status
Sept.
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
Mar
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
Civilian noninstitutional population.
26,540
27,128
27,177
26,540
26,981
27,031
27,082
27,128
27,177
Civilian labor force
16,884
17,846
17,632
16,910
17,364
17,607
17,618
17,589
17,680
Participation rate
63.6
65.8
64.9
63.7
64.4
65.1
65.1
64.8
65.1
Employed
15,297
16,154
15,898
15,301
15,707
15,795
15,934
15,910
15.892
Employment-Population ratio2/
57.6
59.5
58.5
57.7
58.2
58.4
58.8
58.6
52.5
Unemployed
1,586
1,692
1,735
1,609
1,657
1,812
1,684
1,680
1,798
Unemployment rate
9.4
9.5
9.8
9.5
9.5
10.3
9.6
9.5
10.1
Not in labor force
9,656
9,282
9,545
9,630
9,617
9,424
9,464
9,539
9,497
1/ The population figures are not adjusted For seasonal veriations therefore,
identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and seasonally adjusted columns.
2/ Civilian employment as it percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-11. Occupational status of the employed and unemployed, not seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Civilian employed
Unemployed
Unemployment rate
Occupation
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
1988
1989
1988
1989
1988
1989
Total, 16 years and over1/
115,474
117,498
6,368
6,330
5.2
5.1
Managerial and professional specialty
29,537
30,493
624
715
2.1
2.3
Executive, administrative, and managerial
14,302
14,882
322
405
2.2
2.6
Professional specialty
15,235
15,611
302
310
1.9
1.9
Technical, sales, and administrative support
35,509
35,728
1,573
1,499
4.2
4.0
Technicians and related support
3,676
3,486
92
91
2.5
2.5
Sales occupations
13,575
13,939
658
617
4.6
4.2
Administrative support, including clerical
18,259
18,302
822
791
4.3
4.1
Service occupations
15,223
15,626
1,056
1,089
6.5
6.5
Private household
851
778
53
37
5.9
4.5
Protective service
1,971
1,983
66
101
3.3
4.9
Service, except private househol and protective
12,400
12,864
936
951
7.0
6.9
Precision production, craft, and repair
13,514
13,838
603
665
4.3
4.6
Mechanics and repairers
4,281
4,507
140
166
3.2
3.6
Construction trades
5,145
5,247
288
328
5.3
5.9
Other precision Production, craft, and repair
4,088
4,084
175
170
4.1
4.0
Operators, fabricators, and laborers
18,106
18,158
1,513
1,482
7.7
7.5
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors
8,156
8,349
715
629
8.1
7.0
Transportation and material movins occupations
5,056
5,129
224
267
4.2
4.9
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers
4,893
4,681
573
586
10.5
11.1
Construction laborers
899
768
145
148
13.9
16.1
Other handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers
3,994
3,912
429
438
9.7
10.1
Farming, forestry, and fishing
3,586
3,656
258
177
6.7
4.6
1/ Persons with no previous work experience and those whose last job was in the Armed
Forces are included in the unemployed total.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-12. Employment status of male Vietnam-era veterans and nonveterans by ase, not seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Civilian labor force
Civilian
noninstitutional
Veteran status
population
Unemployed
and 892
Total
Employed
Number
Percent of
labor force
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
1988
1989
1988
1989
1988
1989
1988
1989
1988
1989
VIETNAM-ERA VETERANS
Total, 30 years and over
7,890
7,928
7,261
7,249
7,008
6,999
253
251
3.5
3.5
30 to 44 years
5,826
5,409
5,540
5,114
5,344
4,926
196
187
3.5
3.7
30 to 34 years
633
440
592
-406
554
382
38
24
6.4
6.0
35 to 39 years
2,070
1,673
1,965
1,561
1,894
1,486
71
75
3.6
4.8
40 to 44 years
3,123
3,296
2,983
3,146
2,896
3,058
87
88
2.9
2.8
45 years and over
2,064
2,519
1,721
2,136
1,664
2,072
57
63
3.3
3.0
NONVETERANS
Total, 30 to 44 years
20,631
21,665
19,645
20,572
18,958
19,877
687
695
3.5
3.4
30 to 34 Years
9,175
9,401
8,779
8,966
8,439
8,669
340
297
3.9
3.3
35 to 39 years
6,928
7,506
6,593
7,121
6,405
6,867
188
255
2.9
3.6
40 to 44 years
4,528
4,758
4,273
4,485
4,114
4,341
159
143
3.7
3.2
NOTE: Male Vietnam-era veterans are men who served in the Armed Forces between August
5, 1964 and May 7, 1975. Nonveterens are men who have never served in the Armed Forces;
published data are limited to those 30 to 44 Years of ase, the STOUP that most closely
corresponds to the bulk of the Vietnam-ere veteran population.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
1
Table A-13. Employment status of the civilian population for eleven large States
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted1/
Seasonally adjusted2/
State and employment status
Sept.
Aug.
Sept.
Sept.
Mar.
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
California
Civilian noninstitutional population
20,903
21,192
21,227
20,903
21,085
21,122
21,147
21,192
21,227
Civilian labor force
13,999
14,455
14,409
14,053
14,331
14,286
14,443
14,358
14,452
Employed
13,298
13,782
13,695
13,330
13,546
13,489
13,674
13,706
13,716
Unemployed
701
674
715
723
785
797
769
652
736
Unemployment rate
5.0
4,7
5.0
5.1
5,5
5.6
5.3
4.5
5.1
Florida
Civilian noninstitutional population
9,755
9,978
9,996
9,755
9,924
9,942
9,965
9,978
9,99E
Civilian labor force
6,135
6,310
6,198
6,133
6,227
6,344
6,286
6,209
6,194
Employed
5,824
5,968
5,843
5,831
5,827
5,960
5,930
5,884
5,845
Unemployed
310
342
355
302
400
384
356
325
348
Unemployment rate
5.1
5.4
5.7
4.9
6.4
6.1
5.7
5.2
5.6
Illinois
Civilian noninstitutional population
8,720
8,708
8,711
8,720
8,698
8,701
8,699
8,708
8,711
Civilian labor- force
5,772
5,985
5,974
5,745
5,899
5,934
5,860
5,889
5,944
Employed
5,462
5,637
5,644
5,395
5,563
5,609
5,533
5,540
5,576
Unemployed
310
347
330
350
336
325
327
349
368
Unemployment rate
5.4
5.8
5.5
6.1
5.7
5.5
5.6
5.9
6.2
Massachusetts
Civilian noninstitutional population
4,598
4,604
4,605
4,598
4,598
4,600
4,601
4,604
4,605
Civilian labor force
3,125
3,243
3,112
3,139
3,196
3,166
3,183
3,191
3.130
Employed
3,031
3,117
2,978
3,043
3,080
3,040
3,041
3,060
2,993
Unemployed
94
126
134
96
116
126
142
131
137
Unemployment rate
3.0
3.9
4.3
3.1
3.6
4.0
4.5
4.1
4.4
Michigan
Civilian noninstitutional population
7,043
7,100
7,101
7,043
7,095
7,097
7,104
7,100
7,101
Civilian labor force
4,611
4,766
4,689
4,611
4,581
4,630
4,646
4,673
4,682
Employed
4,305
4,449
4,339
4,274
4,273
4,291
4,331
4,352
4,305
Unemployed
306
317
349
337
308
339
315
321
377
Unemployment rate
6.6
6,7
7.5
7.3
6.7
7.3
6.8
6.9
8.1
New Jersey
Civilian noninstitutional population
6,044
6,066
6,068
6,044
6,059
6,062
6,064
6,066
6,068
Civilian labor force
3,941
4,035
3,974
3,973
3,952
3,971
3,976
3,990
4,014
Employed
3,807
3,864
3,803
3,823
3,834
3,806
3,814
3,810
3,828
Unemployed
134
171
171
150
118
165
162
180
185
Unemployment rate
3.4
4.2
4.3
3.8
3.0
4.2
4.1
4.5
4.6
PAGE
New York
Civilian noninstitutional population
13,804
13,816
13,817
13,804
13,809
13,812
13,814
13,816
13,817
Civilian labor force
8,513
8,734
8,595
8,554
8,770
8,705
3,674
8,557
8,649
Employed
8,159
8,313
8,147
6,184
3,307
8,266
8,269
8,127
2,132
Unemployed
354
421
443
370
463
439
405
430
467
Unemployment rate
4.2
4.8
5.2
4.3
5.3
5.0
4.7
5.0
5.4
North Carolina
Civilian noninstitutional population
4,934
5,016
5,021
4,934
5,000
5,006
5,014
5,016
5,021
Civilian labor force
3,352
3,434
3,445
3,358
3,467
3,463
3,444
3,432
3,454
Employed
3,248
3,363
3,324
3,237
3,340
3,339
3,327
3,304
3,315
Unemployed
104
121
121
121
127
124
117
128
139
Unemployment rate
3.1
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.6
3.4
3.7
4.0
Ohio
Civilian noninstitutional population
8,263
3,318
8,320
8,263
8,310
8,313
8,320
8,318
8,320
Civilian labor force
5,287
5,517
5,460
5,311
5,434
5,490
5,450
5,469
5,491
Employed
4,985
5,257
5,192
5,004
5,138
5,183
5,157
5,209
5,216
Unemployed
302
261
269
307
296
307
293
260
275
Unemployment rate
5.7
4.7
4.9
5.8
5.4
5.6
5.4
4.8
5.0
Pennsylvania
Civilian noninstitutional population
9,385
9,433
9,435
9,385
9,424
9,427
9,433
9,433
9,435
Civilian labor force
5,881
5,919
5,862
5,827
5,920
5,917
5,823
5,768
5,813
Employed
5,584
5,686
5,625
5,523
5,649
5,678
5,562
5,520
5,572
Unemployed
297
233
237
304
271
239
261
248
8
Unemployment rate
5.1
3.9
4.0
5.2
4.6
4.0
4.5
4.3
4.1
Texas
-
Civilian noninstitutional population
12,007
11,996
11,998
12,007
11,987
11,990
11,989
11,996
11,998
Civilian labor force
8,341
8,452
3,266
8,321
8,250
8,223
3,241
8,352
8,253
Employed
7,749
7,843
7,745
7,732
7,762
7,721
7,645
7,729
7,737
Unemployed
591
610
521
589
488
502
596
623
#:
Unemployment rate
7.1
7.2
6.3
7.1
5.9
6.1
7.2
7.5
6.3
1/ These are the official Bureau of Labor Statistics' estimates used in the administration of Federal fund allocation PROSTERS.
2/ The population fisures are not adjusted for seasonal variation; therefore, identical numbers appear in the unadjusted and
seasonally adjusted columns.
HOUSEHOLD DATA
HOUSEHOLD DATA
PAGE
Table A-14. Persons not in the labor force by reason, sex, and race, quarterly averages
(In thousands)
Not seasonally
Seasonally adjusted
adjusted
Reason, sex, and race
1988
1989
1988
1989
1989
III
III
III
IV
I
II
III
TOTAL
Total not in labor force
61,798
61,447
62,959
62,865
62,482
62,388
62,597
Do not want a job now
56,816
56,153
58,202
57,491
57,310
57,046
57,853
Current activity:
Going to school
3,774
3,855
7,022
6,229
6,365
6,292
7,312
III, disabled
4,447
4,694
4,453
4,730
4,528
4,782
4,659
Keepins house
25,380
24,028
25,331
24,588
24,550
-24,062
23,988
Retired
17,044
18,026
16,825
17,251
17,179
17,407
17,688
Other activity:
6,171
5,550
4,571
4,693
4,688
4,503
4,206
Want a job now
4,982
5,294
5,276
5,418
5,313
5,331
5,509
Reason not lookins: School attendance
808
912
1,387
1,412
1,279
1,274
1,477
III health, disability
791
915
794
750
910
965
889
Home responsibilities
1,237
1,307
1,128
1,145
1,177
1,151
1,169
Think cannot set a job
952
835
941
951
855
869
815
Job-market factors
600
513
599
597
562
519
511
Personal factors
351
322
341
354
293
350
305
Other reasons1/
1,194
1,325
1,026
1,160
1,093
1,072
1,159
Men
Total not in labor force
20,000
20,135
20,926
21,084
20,861
20,839
21,101
Do not want a job now
18,311
18,322
19,100
19,062
19,085
18,929
19,284
Want a job now
1,689
1,813
1,920
1,985
1,946
1,932
2,031
Reason not looking: School attendance
379
440
669
716
632
639
735
Ill health, disability
376
503
379
351
420
471
487
Think cannot set a job
448
351
447
446
410
410
340
Other reasonsi/
487
519
425
473
484
412
470
Women
Total not in labor force
41,798
41,311
42,035
41,781
41,621
41,549
41,498
Do not want a job now
38,505
37,831
39,103
38,428
38,225
38,118
38,569
Want a job now.
3,293
3,481
3,356
3,433
3,367
3,399
3,478
Reason not looking: School attendance
429
472
718
697
646
635
742
III health, disability
415
412
415
399
491
494
403
Home responsibilities
1,237
1,307
1,128
1,145
1,177
1,151
1,169
Think cannot set a job
504
484
494
505
445
460
475
Other reasons
708
306
601
688
609
660
689
White
PAGE
Total not in labor force
52,518
52,175
53,447
53,325
52,980
52,888
53,074
Do not want a job now
48,975
48,513
49,728
49,381
49,280
49,060
49,320
Want a job now
3,545
3,658
3,691
3,854
3,844
3,835
3,774
Reason not looking: School attendance
517
607
903
911
885
906
1,003
III health, disability
552
597
556
511
704
684
583
Home responsibilities
902
898
806
828
793
835
793
Think cannot set a job
583
509
600
676
570
527
514
Other reasons1/
991
1,048
821
928
892
882
881
Black
Total not in labor force
7,284
7,347
7,497
7,471
7,445
7,542
7,555
Do not want a job now
6,134
5,875
6,227
6,182
6,134
6,303
5,971
Want a job now
1,150
1,472
1,241
1,259
1,315
1,325
1,613
Reason not lookins: School attendance
197
264
316
374
335
316
430
Ill health, disability
222
310
217
206
206
261
297
Home responsibilities
265
362
270
272
343
266
365
Think cannot get a job
317
296
290
210
253
323
272
Other reasons1/
149
239
147
197
178
160
250
1/ Includes small number of men not looking for work because of "home
responsibilities.
"
NOTE: Detail may not add to not-in-labor force totals because of the weishtins
procedures.
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
PAGE
Table B-1. Employees on nonagricultural payrolls by industry
(In thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Industry
Sept.
July
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989p/
|1989p/
1988
1989
1989
1989
11989p/
1989p/
Total
106,601
108,767
109,064
Total private
89,416
91,7331
91,9671
91,8741
88,7361
20,623
90,8841
91,0161
91,075
91,189
Goods producing industries
25,757
25,9041
26,1421
26,041
25,3131
25,6721
25,6481
25,6691
25,696
25,588
Minins
7281
7141
7401
7341
7191
7221
7151
7061
7301
725
Oil and sas extraction
406.51
406.41
409.31
405.71
4041
4011
4021
4041
4051
403
Construction
5,4421
5,6221
5,6721
5,5981
5,1631
5,2831
5,2831
5,3141
5,3161
5,316
General building contractors
11,451.61
1,3741
1,3881
1,3841
1,3911
1,4014
1,398
Manufacturins
19,587
19,5681
19,730
19,709
19,431
19,6671
19,6501
19,6491
19,650
19,547
Production workers
13,4131
13:2961
13,458:
13,4611
13,2631
13,4261
13,4001
13,4101
13,406
13,309
Durable Boods
11,524
11,490
11,538)
11,535)
11,4641
11,594
11,5671
11,5491
11,5531
11,471
Production workers
7,7121
7,6181
7,6701
7,6821
7,6531
7,7351
7,7061
7,6971
7,7001
7,624
Lumber and wood products
783.01
786.51
787.41
781,01
7631
7711
7691
7671
7641
760
Furniture and fixtures
531.51
523.61
527.51
529.71
5301
5341
5341
5361
5291
528
Stone, clay, and slass products
611.61
612.51
613.21
607.41
6001
6041
6031
6021
6011
595
Primary metal industries
781.11
776,01
783,61
779.91
7791
7871
7871
7851
7871
777
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
276.71
277.51
276.11
274.41
2771
2761
2761
2771
2761
274
Febricated metal products
1,443,911
430,311
435.21
442,91
1,4361
1,4521
1,4491
1,4461
1,4411
1,434
Machinery, except electrical
12,094.
147.31
2,0981
2,1501
2,1511
2,1541
2,1531
2,149
Electrical and electronic equipment
2,0721
2,0501
2,0411
2,0401
2,0321
2,020
Transportation equipment
12,053.
5.112.041.81
2,0441
2,0761
2,0621
2,0461
2,0701
2,034
Motor vehicles and equipment
865.51
828.51
846,71
847.11
8591
8761
8611
8441
8731
840
Instruments and related products
755,01
781,41
783.61
781.21
7561
7784
7791
7811
7821
782
Miscellaneous manufacturing
391.91
383.41
397.01
397.51
3861
3921
3921
3921
3941
392
I
Nondurable goods
8,0631
8,078
8,1921
8,1741
7,9671
8,0731
8,0831
8,1001
8,0971
8,076
Production workers
5,701;
5,6781
5,7881
5,7791
5,6101
5,6911
5,6941
5,7131
5,7061
5,685
--
Food and kindred products
1,707.8
1,6271
1,6561
1,6631
1,678;
1,6701
1,673
Tobacco manufactures
58.11
49.51
52.21
54.61
551
531
521
531
521
52
Textile mill products
730.01
717.31
730.91
730.31
7261
7281
7291
7301
7291
726
Apparel and other textile products
1,090.811
088.0;
1,0851
1,0951
1,0931
1,0941
1,0941
1,083
Paper and allied products
694.51
702.61
704.11
699.41
6931
6971
6971
7011
7011
697
Printing and publishing
1,566.711
411,604.41
1,5731
1,6031
1,6071
1,609;
1,6111
1,611
Chemicals and allied products
1,0721
1,0941
1,0961
1,0911
1,0951
1,093
Petroleum and coal products
164.21
166.01
166.31
165.01
1621
1621
1631
1631
1631
163
Rubber and misc. plastics products
830.71
831.21
838.61
839.71
8301
8431
3411
8411
8421
&
Leather and Teather products
145.81
134.11
142.21
140.71
1441
1421
1421
1401
1401
139
Service-producins industries
80,844
82,6361
82,4961
83,4121
80,8941
82,6381
82,9591
83,0981
83,1591
83,476
Transportation and public utilities
5,6271
5,7371
5,6241
5,7631
5,5811
5,7001
5,7161
5,7361
5,6251
5-717
Transportation
3,4101
3,5031
3,5211
3,5981
3,3651
3,4841
3,5001
3,5241
3,5391
3-552
Communication and public utilities
2,2171
2,2341
2,1031
2,1651
2,2161
2,216;
2,2161
2,2121
2,0861
2,165
Wholesale trade
6,0901
6,2791
6,2911
6,2811
6,0711
6,2221
6,2301
6,2371
6,2541
6.263
Durable goods
3,5911
3,7221
3,7251
3,7121
3,5901
3,6851
3,6931
3,7001
3,7061
3,712
Nondurable Boods
2,4991
2,557
2,5661
2,5691
2,4811
2,5371
2,5371
2,5371
2,5481
2,551
Retail trade
19,2661 19,6841 19,7571 19,7021 19,188) 19,5281 19,5511 19,5861 19,6201 19,624
General merchandise stores
12,404.
612,435.91
2,4521
2,4911
2,4931
2,4821
2,4831
2,436
Food stores
3,123.2(3,290.2(3,298.813,291.61
3,1221
3,2451
3,2621
3,2741
3,2921
3,292
Automotive dealers and service stations
2,132.912,182.612,182.912,172,91
2,1151
2,1591
2,1551
2,1551
2,1531
2,154
Eatins and drinking places
551.01
6,2961
6,3481
6,3621
6,3701
6,3851
6,397
Finance, insurance, and real estate
6,7061
6,9131
6,9181
6,8531
6,6951
6,7901
6,8081
6,8151
6,8341
6,844
Finance
3,2821
3,3571
3,358L
3,3301
3,2881
3,3201
3,3201
3,3241
3,3351
3,337
Insurance
2,0371
2,1421
2,1411
2,1321
2,0921
2,1231
2,1291
2,1311
2,1351
2,138
Real estate
1,3371
1,4141
1,4191
1,3911
1,3151
1,3471
1,3591
1,360|
1,3641
1,369
Services
25,9701
27,2161
27,2351
27,2341
25,8881
26,7111
26,9311
26,9731
27,0461
27,153
Business services
15,701.
115,898.81
5,6511
5,7761
5,7991
5,7861
5,8001
5,845
Health services
7,2281
7,5701
7,6161
7,6481
7,6941
7,739
1
Government
17,1851
16,8071
16,6711
17,5791
17,471
17,6871
17,7231
17,7511
17,7801
17,875
Federal
2,9681
3,0331
3,0101
2,9781
2,9851
2,9991
2,9951
3,0001
2,9981
2,996
State
4,0161
3,9211
3,9321
4,0961
4,0881
4,1191
4,1361
4,1451
4,161
4,171
Local
10,2011
9,8531
9,7291
10,5051
10,3981
10,5691
10,5921
10,606;
10,621
10,708
P = preliminary.
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
1/
PAGE
Table B-2. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls by industry
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Industry
Sept.
July
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
1988
1989
1989p/
1989p/
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989e/
1989F/
Total private
34.8
35.1
34.9
34.7
34.7
34.6
34.6
34.8
34.6
34.6
Mining
42.2
42.5
42.8
43.0
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Construction
38.4
38.9
38.9
38.6
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Manufacturing.
41.3
40.5
40.8
41.1
41.1
41.0
41.0
41.0
40.9
41.0
Overtime hours
4.2
3.7
3.8
4.1
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.7
3.8
Durable goods
42.0
40.9
41.2
41.6
41.9
41,5
41,5
41.5
41.5
41.5
Overtime hours
4.3
3.7
3.8
4.1
4.1
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.9
Lumber and wood products
40.3
39.5
40.4
40.2
40.1
39.7
39.8
39.6
40.2
40.0
Furniture and fixtures
40.1
38.8
39.8
40.1
39.6
39.4
39.4
39.5
:
39.6
39.6
Stone, clay, and glass products
42.8
42.5
42.8
42.7
42.3
41.9
42.2
42.3
42.5
42.3
Primary metal industries
44.0
42.6
42.5
42.6
43.9
43.2
43.3
43,0
42.9
42.5
Blast Furnaces and basic steel products
44.7
43.2
43.0
42.5
44.5
43.6
43.7
43.2
43.4
42.3
Fabricated metal products
42.1
40.7
41.1
41.5
42.0
41.7
41,5
41.5
41.4
41.4
Machinery, except electrical
42.7
41.9
41.7
42.2
42.7
42.5
42.5
42.4
42.2
42.2
Electrical and electronic equipment
41.0
40.0
40.7
41.1
40.9
40.7
40.7
40.6
40.9
41.1
Transportation equipment
43.0
41.6
41.6
42.7
43.0
42.5
42,5
42.6
42.5
42.7
Motor vehicles and equipment
44.1
41.4
41.4
43.7
44.1
42.8
42.7
42.6
42.8
43.7
Instruments and related products
41.6
40.8
40.7
40.8
41.5
41.1
41,3
41.4
41,0
40.8
Miscellaneous manufacturing
39.3
38.6
39.3
39.6
39.2
39.6
39.4
39.3
39.5
39.5
Nondurable goods
40.5
40.0
40.2
;
40.5
;
40,2
40.2
40.3
40,2
40.2
40.2
Overtime hours
4.1
3.7
3.8
4.1
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.8
3.6
3.7
Food and kindred products
40.8
40.9
41.1
41.2
40.3
40.5
40.7
41.0
40.7
40.7
Tobacco manufactures
41.2
37.9
37.3
39.6
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Textile mill products
41.4
40.6
41.3
41.1
41.0
41.4
41,4
41.2
41.0
40.7
Apparel and other textile products
37.1
36.7
37.1
37.1
37.1
37.1
37.1
37.0
37.0
37.1
Paper and allied products
43.7
42.9
43,1
43.7
43.2
43.3
43.3
43.2
43.4
43.2
Printing and publishing
38.5
37.4
37.8
38.3
38.1
37.7
37.8
37.6
37.7
37.9
Chemicals and allied products
42.3
42.2
42.0
42.7
42.3
42.1
42.5
42.5
42.3
42.7
Petroleum and coal products
44.8
44.3
43.7
44.1
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Rubber and misc. plastics products
41.7
40.8
41.1
41.5
41.7
41,5
41.5
41.4
41.4
41.5
Leather and leather products
37.5
37.8
38.5
38.3
37.5
37.4
37.9
37.7
38.2
--
38.3
Transportation and public utilities
39.5
39.8
39.3
39.4
39,4
39.5
39.4
39.4
38.9
39.3
Wholesale trade
38.1
38.3
38.1
38.1
38.1
37.9
38.0
38.1
33.0
38.1
Retail trade
29.1
29.9
29.6
28.8
29.1
28.9
28.9
29.2
28.8
28.7
Finance, insurance, and real estate
35.8
36.3
35.8
35.7
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
PAGE
Services
32.5
33.1
:
32.9
32.6
32.6
:
32.5
:
32.5
:
32.8
:
32.6
32.7
1/ Data relate to production workers in mining and
2/ These series are not published seasonally
manufacturing; construction workers in construction:
adjusted since the seasonal component is small
and nonsupervisory workers in transportation and
relative to the trend-cycle and/or irresular
public utilities; wholesale and retail trade: finance:
components and consequently cannot be sere-
insurance, and real estate: and services. These groups
rated with sufficent precision.
account for approximately four-fifths of the total
F.= preliminary.
employees on private nonagricultural parrolls.
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
1/
PAGE
Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private
nonagricultural Fayrolls by industry
Average hourly earnings
Average weekly earnings
Industry
Sept.
July
Aus.
Sept.
Sept.
July
Aus.
Sept.
1988
1989
|1989p/
11989P/
1988
1989
1989p/
11989p/
Total private
$9.40
$9.63
$9.60
$9.76
$327.12
$338.01
$335.04
$338.67
Seasonally adjusted
9.37
9.69
9.68
9.73
325,141
337.21
334.931
336.66
Mining
12.82
12.95
13.04
13.19
541.00)
550.381
558.111
567.17
Construction
13.16
13.33
13.33
13.48
505.341
518.541
518,541
520.33
Manufacturins
10.25
10.47
10.44
10.54
423,331
424.041
425,951
433.19
Durable goods
10.78
10.99
10.98
11.09
452.761
449,491
452.381
461.34
Lumber and wood products
8.69
8.92
8.93
8.97
350.21
352.341
360,771
360.59
Furniture and fixtures
8.09
8.26
8.29
8.41
324,411
320.491
329.941
337.24
Stone, clay, and glass products
10.55
10.75
10.76
10.31
451.541
456,881
460,531
461.59
Primary metal industries
12.24
12.40
12.35
12.41
538.561
528,241
524.881
528.67
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
14.07
14.33
:
14.28
14.35
628,931
619.061
614.041
609.38
Fabricated metal products
10.34
10.53
;
10.50
10.63
435.311
428.571
431.551
441.15
Machinery, except electrical
11.09
11.35
11.34
11.46
473,541
475.57
472.881
483.61
Electrical and electronic equipment
10.19
10.41
10.41
10.46
417,791
416.40
423.691
429.91
Transportation equipment
13.44
13.61
13.70
13.83
577,921
566.181
569.921
590.54
Motor vehicles and equipment
14.10
14.07
14.21
:
14.42
621,811
582.501
588.291
630.15
Instruments and related products
9.99
10.31
;
10.28
:
10.33
415.581
420.651
418,401
421.46
Miscellaneous manufacturins
8.01
8.29
8.19
8.35
314,791
319.991
321.871
330.66
Nondurable soods
9,50
9.77
9.71
9.80
384.751
390.801
390,341
396.90
Food and kindred products
9.11
9.35
9.27
9.32
371.691
382.421
381.00
383.98
Tobacco manufactures
14.09
16.34
15.61
I
14.21
580.511
619.291
582.251
562.72
Textile mill products
7.43
7.66
:
7.70
7.76
307.601
311.001
318.011
318.94
Apparel and other textile products
6.21
6.28
6.32
6.40
230.391
230,481
234.471
237.44
Paper and allied products
11.72
12.04
:
11.92
12.01
;
512.161
516.521
513.751
524.84
Printins and publishing
10.70
10.83
10.90
11.04
411.951
405.041
412.021
422.83
Chemicals and allied Products
12.75
13.12
13.09
13.15
539,331
553.661
549.781
561.51
Petroleum and coal products
15.01
15.34
15.25
I
15.45
672.451
679.561
666.431
681.35
Rubber and misc, plastics products
9.22
9.45
9.44
9.51
384.471
385.561
387.981
394.67
Leather and leather products
6.30
6.54
6.54
6.60
236.251
247.21
251.791
252.78
Transportation and Public utilities
12.40
12.58
12.50
12:67
439.301
500.681
491.251
499.20
Wholesale trade
10.04
10.40
10.35
:
10.44
382.521
398.321
394.341
397.76
Retail trade
6.38
6.49
6.49
6.61
185.661
194.05
192.101
190.37
Finance, insurance, and real estate
9.14
9.59
9.49
9.60
327.21
348.12
339,741
342.72
Services
9.00
9.33
9.29
9.48
292.501
308.821
305.641
309.05
PAGE
1/ See footnote 1, table B-2.
F = preliminary.
- 1 -
ESTABLISHMENT DATA#\#ESTABLISHMENT DATA
1/
PAGE
TABLE B-4. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private
nonagricultural paypolls by industry, seasonally adjusted
Percent
change
Industry
Sept.
May
dune
Aus.
Sept.
from:
1988
1989
1989
&
1989p/
1989p/
1Aus. 1989-
Sept. 1989
Total private2/:
Current dollars
$9.371 $9.601 $9.621 $7.691 $9.681 $9.731
0.5
Constant (1977) dollars3/
4.831
4.771
4.771
4.791
4.791
N.A. :
(4)
Construction
13.071
13.321
13.321
$13.421
$13.371
$13.391
.1
Manufacturing
10.251
10.421
10,451
10.481
10:521
10.541
.2
Excluding overtime5/
9.781
9.971
9.991
10.011
10.051
10.071
.2
Transportation and Public utilities:
12.371
12.541
12.541
12.611
12.51/-
12.641
1.0
Wholesale trade
10.031
10.281
10.331
10.441
10.391
10.44:
.5
Retail trade
6.361
6.491
6,521
6.541
6,561
6.581
.3
Finance, insurance, and real estate!
9.181
9.451
9.531
9,681
9.561
9.641
.8
Services
9.001
9.331
9.341
9.461
9.431
9.481
.5
1/ See footnote 1, table B-2.
2/ Includes mining, not shown separately,
because its seasonal component is too small
to be separated out with sufficient
precision.
3/ The Consumer Price Index for Urban
Wase Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) is
used to deflate this series.
4/ Change was 0.0 percent from July 1989
to August 1989, the latest month available.
5/ Derived by assumine that overtime
hours are paid at the rate of time and one-
half.
N.A. = not available.
p/ = preliminary.
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
1/
PAGE
Table B-5. Indexes of assresate weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural
payrolls by industry
(1977=100)
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted
Industry
Sept.
(July
Aus.
Sept.
(Sept.
Mar
IJune
(July
Aug.
Sept.
1988
11989
(1939p/
1989p/
1988
11989
1989
11989
1989p/
11989p/
Total private
126.91131.21 131.1 130.0 128.4 128.6
Goods-producing industries
1104.9 103.6: 105.5 105.6 101.81102.41102.51103.0 103.1 102.5
Minins
82.71
80.71 85.3 85.0 31.11 81.81 81.21 80.31 83.7 83.3
Construction
1149.71156.11 158.1 154.5 138.11138.21139.31142.7 143.0 142.9
Manufacturing
97.21
94.51
96.3
97.1
95.71
96.41
96.41
96.31
96.3
95,6
Durable soods
95.01 91.61 92,8 93,9 94.11 94.31 94.01 93.81 93.9 92.9
Lumber and wood products
(107.11105.4) 107.8 106.3 1103.71103.71103.41102.6 103.6 102.8
Furniture and fixtures
1114.41107.91 112.0 113.4 112.61112.91112.6/113.21 111.9 111.6
Stone, clay, and slass products
93.01 92.31 93.0 91.6 89.61 39.31 89,81 90.01 90.2 88,6
Primary metal industries
69.31 66.21 66.7 66,5 68.91 68.21 68.51 67.91 67.8 66.0
Blast furnaces and basic steel products
54.81 52.71 52.2 51.1 54.21 52.31 52.61 52.01 52.8 : 51.2
Fabricated metal products
92.41 87.61 89.1 90.7 91.51 91.71 90.81 90.71 90.2 89.7
Machinery, except electrical
91.21 91.91 91.4 92.8 91.21 93.71 93.81 94.01 93.3 92.9
Electrical and electronic equipment
1101.41 94.91 97.2 98.1 (100.6) 98.41 97.81 97.61 98.0 97.7
Transportation equipment
1100.51 94.11 95.0 98.3 1100.01100.5) 99.51 98.61 100.1 97.8
Motor vehicles and equipment
92,31 80.81 83,3 87,5 92.31 90.21 88.11 85.71 89.5 36.7
Instruments and related products
113.6/114.71 114.9 115.5 113.7/115.8/116.11116.91 115.8 115.8
Miscellaneous manufacturins
36.81 81.91 87.4 88.1 84.81 86,61 86.21 85.71 87.0 : 36.1
Nondurable goods
100.41 98.91 101.4 : 101.9 98.21 99.51 99.91100.11 99.8 I 99.6
Food and kindred products
108.21108.61 112.8 113.4 100.41103.31104.31106.4 105.1 105.3
Tobacco manufactures
82.91 62.51 66.2 75.2 74.31 69.61 69.01 70.51 66.9 1 68.0
Textile mill products
31.91 78.51 81.6 81.0 80,61 31.51 81.51 81.31 80.6 79.7
Apparel and other textile products
84.61 81.51 85.1 84.6 : 84.21 85.41 85.21 84.91 84.9 84.2
Paper and allied products
103.21102.11 102.9 103.7 101.71102.3/102.31102.71 103.2 102.1
Printing and publishing
137.91136,31 137.8 139.6 137.2/137.81138.3/137.7 138.1 138.7
Chemicals and allied products
99.21101.31 101.4 : 102.3 98.71100.51101.8:101.5 101.2 101.8
Petroleum and coal products
;
86.01 86.31 85.3 ; 85.7 84.11 83.51 84.31 83.21 83.4 83.5
Rubber and misc. plastics products
(117.9(115.2) 117.4 ; 118.8 1117.8/119.61118.91118.8 119.2 118,9
Leather and leather products
56.21 52.21 56.5 55,5 55.41 54.71 55.51 54.71 55.0 54.6
Service-producing industries
(139.21146.5) 145.2 143,5 f138.81141.51142.21143.7 142.4 143.0
Transportation and Public utilities
115.31118,81
114.7
118.1
/114.11117.31117.31117.7
113.4
116.7
Wholesale trade
(124.41128.7) 128.3 128.0 1123.81126, 1126.71127.21 127.2 ; 127.5
PAGE
Retail trade
(126.21132.6) 131.9 : 128.0 125.91127.2/127.4:128.95 127.5 : 126.9
Finance, insurance, and real estate
1140.71147.6 145.9 ; 143.4 140.9(141.91142.71145.0 143.3 : 143.6
Services
1163.31173.9) 173.1 : 171.2 163.21167.51169.01170.8 170.3 I 171.3
1/ See footnote 1, table B-2.
P = preliminary.
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
ESTABLISHMENT DATA
PAGE
Table B-6. Diffusion indexes of employment change, seasonally adjusted
(Percent)
Time span
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aus,
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Private nonaericultural payrolls, 349 industries1/
Over 1-month spant
1987
55.6
59.3
61.0
61.9
58.6
59.7
65.3
60.6
63.0
67.8
64.5
60.7
1988
60.7
63.5
63.0
62.8
61.3
67.2
63.6
58.0
55.4
63.9
68.2
64.6
1989
68.3
60.5
61.0
58.2
55.6
59.7
55.6
p/56.3
P/47.4
Over 3-month span:
1987
60.7
62.0
66.6
65.2
65.8
65.9
67.8
71.1
71.2
72.3
70.9
65.9
1988
64.8
65.6
69.5
70.2
71.1
71.9
71.2
64.2
65.3
70.1
73.4
74.6
1989
71.6
70.1
64.5
61.9
61.6
60,7
Ip/62.5
p/52.1
Over 6-month span:
1987
67.3
65.8
64.8
66.8
67.6
69.5
71.3
73.5
73.2
71.5
71.8
72.2
1988
69.9
70.2
71.5
73.9
73.9
69.1
70.2
74.6
73.5
73.9
74.5
75.8
1989
75.1
69.5
68.2
66.0
p/63,5
P/58.5
Over 12-month spant
1987
66.6
68.2
68.2
71,8
71.9
72.5
72.2
74.1
75.4
72.5
73.8
76.9
1983
76.2
76.1
74.8
74.6
75.8
74.9
78.1
75.5
75.5
74.8
74.9
74.1
1989
73.2
p/72.5
ip/69.1
Manufacturing payrolls, 141 industries1/
Over 1-month spant
1988
58.5
56.0
55.0
59.9
58.5
61.7
59.6
51.1
49,3
62.8
64,9
58.5
1989
62.4
53.5
53.2
49.6
46.8
48.6
49,6
p/47.2
p/34.8
Over ?-month span:
1987
52.1
51.4
59.6
61.3
58.5
62.8
67.0
71.6
68.4
70.6
67.7
64.5
1988
63.1
61.0
62.4
64.9
67,4
67.0
64.5
58.2
62.1
66.7
71.3
70.9
1989
67.4
63.8
55.7
51.8
49.3
48.6
p/49.6
p/35.5
Over 6-month span:
1987
57.4
56.7
55.3
62.4
64.9
67.0
67.4
70.6
71.3
69.5
69.5
68.1
1988
66.3
66.3
67.7
69.5
66.7
64.2
66.0
70.9
68.8
69.9
71.6
74,1
1989
69.5
58.5
55.7
52,8
p/50,4
p/40.4
PAGE
Over 12-month span:
1987
55.3
:
58.5
I
58.5
63.5
:
66.3
:
67.4
:
71.6
72.7
71.6
69.1
:
68.4
72.3
1988
73.8
:
70.2
:
69,1
:
71.6
:
70.2
:
69.9
--
67.0
1989
63.1 p/63.1 P/55.3
1/ Based on seasonally adjusted data for 1-, 3-,
employment increasing Flus one- half of the
and 6-month spans and unadjusted data for the
industries with unchansed employment, where
12-month span. Data are centered within the span.
50 percent indicates an equal balance
P=preliminary.
between industries with increasing and
NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with
decreasing employment.
INVESTING
IN PEOPLE
A Strategy to Address America's Workforce Crisis
Commission on Workforce Quality and Labor Market Efficiency
We gratefully acknowledge the opportunity to share our main title with Investing in
People: The Economics of Population Quality (1981) by Theodore W. Schultz. It is our
pleasure to share a title with this distinguished scholar who has made such a major
contribution to the analysis of investments in human capital.
INVESTING
IN PEOPLE
A Strategy to Address America's Workforce Crisis
A Report to the Secretary of Labor and
the American People
Commission on Workforce Quality
and Labor Market Efficiency
U.S. Department of Labor
Washington, D.C.
Labor Day 1989
CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal
ii
Members of the Commission on Workforce Quality and
Labor Market Efficiency
iv
Executive Summary
vii
Introduction
1
Chapter 1: The Foundation of Workforce Quality
7
Chapter 2: Lifetime Education and Training
15
Chapter 3: Putting Quality to Work
25
Chapter 4: Understanding the Workforce
35
Appendices
Appendix 1: Commission Calendar
41
Appendix 2: Commission Charter
42
Appendix 3:
Background Papers
43
Appendix 4:
Public Hearings
47
Appendix 5:
Outreach Program
57
Appendix 6:
Commission Staff
60
Ordering Information
61
i
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Labor Day 1989
The Honorable Elizabeth Dole
Secretary of Labor
U.S. Department of Labor
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Madam Secretary:
The Commission on Workforce Quality and Labor Market Efficiency
was established on July 11, 1988, with the charge to make specific
recommendations by September 1989, on ways to increase the
excellence of the American workforce. On behalf of the Commission,
it is my pleasure to submit our report, Investing in People: A Strategy
to Address America's Workforce Crisis.
At the beginning of the Commission's work, we had hoped to identify
two or three major initiatives that might produce immediate,
significant improvements in workforce quality. We have since
learned that there are no simple, easy solutions. Rather, we have
identified a need for action on many fronts, action that will require
the close cooperation of business, labor, and government at all levels.
Our concern for workforce quality has led us to recommend
incentives to inspire greater student achievement. We have asked the
business community to help by relating career opportunity to school
performance and by supporting incentive programs for improved
performance by teachers and schools.
We have also made recommendations to establish an environment
that encourages employer investments in workforce quality. To
complement these initiatives, government is urged to provide
education and training programs that address needs unlikely to be
met by the private sector.
To enhance the efficiency with which the workforce is employed, we
have proposed ways to create more flexible working arrangements, to
facilitate the matching of workers with jobs, and to increase
productivity through employee relations innovations.
While our nation's workforce problems may seem daunting, they are
not beyond solution. If we care enough, if we are willing to commit
ourselves to doing that which is necessary, America can experience a
rebirth of productivity, competitiveness, and family well-being. If our
commitment falls short, however, it will surely be impossible to
maintain our standard of living or our position as a leader of nations.
On behalf of the Commissioners, I would like to acknowledge the
splendid contributions of our staff. Led by Dr. David L. Crawford and
Dr. Laurie J. Bassi, this outstanding team made our year's work
effective, efficient, and very enjoyable.
Finally, all the Commissioners thank you for supporting our efforts
while assuring our continued independence as a bipartisan
Commission. We wish you great success in your leadership of the
national discussion of our recommendations.
Respectfully,
Richard J. Sched
Richard F. Schubert
Chairman
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON WORKFORCE
QUALITY AND LABOR MARKET EFFICIENCY
Richard F. Schubert (Chairman)
Constance E. Clayton
Immediate Past President
Superintendent of Schools
American Red Cross
School District of Philadelphia
Washington, DC
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Orley C. Ashenfelter
John L. Clendenin
Professor of Economics
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Princeton University
BellSouth Corporation
Princeton, New Jersey
Atlanta, Georgia
Morton Bahr
William H. Kolberg
President
President and Chief Executive Officer
Communications Workers of
National Alliance of Business
America (AFL-CIO, CLC)
Washington, DC
Washington, DCail
Jose I. Lozano
Gary S. Becker
President and Publisher
Professor of Economics and Sociology
La Opinion
University of Chicago
Los Angeles, California
Chicago, Illinois
Gary E. MacDougal
Chairman of the Board
Pat Choate
Russell Sage Foundation
Vice President
Chicago, Illinois
Office of Policy Analysis
TRW, Inc.
Ethel Olson
Arlington, Virginia
Consultant to the Thrift Industry
Ruidoso, New Mexico
Russell E. Palmer
Dean
The Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
iv
Gloria M. Portela
Linda J. Wachner
Director of the law firm
President and Chief Executive Officer
Pope, Ballard, Shepard and Fowle, Ltd.
Warnaco, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois
New York, New York
Albert H. Quie
Lynn R. Williams
Former Governor
International President
State of Minnesota
United Steelworkers of America (AFL-CIO,
Minnetonka, Minnesota
CLC)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Isabel V. Sawhill
Senior Fellow
William J. Wilson
The Urban Institute
Professor of Sociology and Public Policy
Washington, DC
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois
Albert Shanker
President
American Federation of Teachers (AFL-CIO)
Washington, DC
John Sloan, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
National Federation of Independent Business
Washington, DC
V
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1987, Workforce 2000 warned the nation that a crisis of workforce
quality was at hand, a crisis that would threaten the very
foundations of the American economy. Today, demographic trends,
technological change, and increased international competition
already are creating shortages of skilled workers and an excess of
unskilled workers, problems that are likely to worsen in the years
ahead.
In Investing in People, the Commission on Workforce Quality and
Labor Market Efficiency offers its response to the challenges posed
by Workforce 2000. The Commission calls for:
A public/private partnership under the leadership of the
Secretary of Labor.
Additional human capital investments by states, communities,
individuals, and American business.
A reallocation of federal human resource expenditures.
A sustained increase in federal expenditures on human resource
programs.
These initiatives are essential if America is to resolve its workforce
crisis. Without them, America's workforce will be undereducated,
undertrained, and ill-equipped to compete in the twenty-first century.
1. THE FOUNDATION OF WORKFORCE QUALITY
Vast numbers of American students cannot meet the educational
requirements of today's workplace, much less those of the next
century. The Commission believes that this lack of achievement
stems in large part from the lack of incentives for effort and
achievement in school. Only a handful of the best college-bound
students strive to meet the rigorous entry standards of the most
selective universities, while for all others, a high-school diploma
seems sufficient to secure access to post-secondary education. Most of
those bound directly for the workplace know that the quality of their
school work and the grades they receive will have little effect on
their immediate employment prospects and virtually no effect on
their entry-level wage rate. The Commission recommends:
Presidential leadership in the development of specific national
education goals and timetables.
Continued efforts by the business community to work with
schools to help students understand and meet the educational
standards that are required for labor market success.
vii
Strengthening the relationship between school and work by
making high-school transcripts and national achievement test
scores integral parts of employers' evaluations of job applicants.
The prospects for greater student effort and achievement will be
improved if student incentives are accompanied by incentives for
improving the quality of instruction. The Commission recommends:
Creation of incentives to inspire the best efforts of teachers,
administrators, and school districts.
Encouragement of experimental restructuring of schools.
2. LIFETIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING
America must develop a coherent system of lifetime education and
training. As a first step, it is essential to create a business
environment that encourages employers to invest more in their
workers. The Commission recommends:
A corporate income tax credit for education and training
expenses.
A personal income tax exemption for all employer-provided
education and training benefits.
Encouragement of multi-employer training programs.
Government programs that serve the least skilled and most
disadvantaged individuals are the other essential part of a coherent
system of lifetime education and training. The Commission
recommends:
Renewed national commitment to basic skills education for adults.
Sharpened focus of the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) on
those most in need of training.
Increased funding of JTPA.
Increased funding for grants for post-secondary training and
education.
Establishment of a Cabinet-level committee to coordinate human
resource policy.
3. PUTTING QUALITY TO WORK
America faces labor shortages requiring the most efficient use of the
skills that already exist within the population. Tensions between
work and family responsibilities prevent some individuals from full
labor market participation. The Commission recommends:
Federal support of community-based child care resource and
referral organizations.
viii
Increased subsidy of the child care expenses of low-income
working families.
Encouragement of flexible employment arrangements such as
flextime and part-time work.
Additional initiatives can facilitate the matching of job seekers with
job vacancies. The Commission recommends:
Establishment of performance standards for the public
employment service.
Increased "experience rating" of the unemployment insurance
system.
Increased sensitivity of U.S. immigration policy to labor market
needs.
Finally, productivity can be enhanced by encouraging innovative
approaches to labor-management relations. The Commission
recommends:
Assistance for employers and employees as they explore the
potential gains from worker participation, innovative
compensation arrangements, and pension portability.
Establishment of a task force to review public policies related to
labor-management relations.
4. UNDERSTANDING THE WORKFORCE
It is essential that human resource policies be informed by accurate
data and careful research. In reviewing policy, the Commission has
been dismayed by the-paucity of information on many important
issues. To assure that future decisions can be based on more complete
information about the American workforce, the Commission
recommends:
Increased funding for the Bureau of Labor Statistics to develop
quick turnaround household surveys, support longitudinal data
bases, and conduct pilot studies of new data methods.
Increased funding to the Departments of Labor and Education to
conduct experimental evaluations of human resource programs,
study the labor market status of disadvantaged individuals, and
collect information on best employment practices.
ix
INVESTING
IN PEOPLE
A Strategy to Address America's Workforce Crisis
INTRODUCTION
THE CHALLENGE
America's ability to shape the course of the twenty-first century will
depend largely on the productivity of the American workforce.
Competitive advantage has replaced military might as the principal
source of global influence. Our major trading partners have realized
that their productivity will determine both their international power
and standard of living. These countries have made substantial
commitments to educate and train their workforces. America has, in
many respects, failed to do the same.
We as a nation stand at a crossroads; one road leads to increased
competitiveness, higher standards of living, and a strong presence in
the international community; the other, to economic decline. Our
most formidable competitors have chosen the former. So too must we.
This country has always been willing to commit enormous energy
and resources in times of short-run emergencies such as those posed
by wars or domestic financial crises. When danger is imminent, the
urgency is obvious. It is always more difficult to make long-run
commitments in response to long-run threats. Nonetheless, some of
our greatest achievements have been the result of such
commitments. When the Soviet Union put Sputnik into orbit in 1957,
the nation was shocked that we were behind in the space race. We
realized that the true cost of losing the space race would be felt not
immediately but for generations to come. Our understanding of the
enormity of the long-run costs compelled us to take immediate
action, despite the absence of an immediate threat. We established a
national program of investment in education, training, and research.
Our sustained investments were inspired by a shared vision of a
nation second to none in its mathematical and scientific capability, a
nation that could win the space race.
Today, we require a similar vision to inspire a national strategy of
sustained investment in human resources over the next decade. Such
a strategy will shape both our economic future and our position in
the community of nations for many decades to come.
In 1987, the Department of Labor issued Workforce 2000, which
documented an emerging crisis in the American workplace. That
report warned the nation that demographic trends, technological
change, and increased international competition could weaken our
economic position in the next century. The crisis envisioned in
Workforce 2000 has begun to emerge. Increased demand for highly
skilled workers, combined with an aging workforce, has already
1
created shortages of skilled workers, shortages that are likely to
grow for many years. At the same time, many low-skill workers are
having increasing difficulty finding employment.
This report responds to the challenges posed by Workforce 2000. It
offers a national strategy to avert economic decline by improving the
quality of our workforce. This strategy is based on a partnership
between the private sector and all levels of government. While the
investments necessary for improving workforce quality must come
primarily from the private sector, all levels of government will be
called upon to provide funds for programs that can fill the gaps in
our nation's system of lifetime education and training. The
leadership of the federal government, and particularly that of the
Secretary of Labor, will be critical.
EVIDENCE OF AN EMERGING CRISIS
Employers report increasing difficulty in finding the job applicants
they need. While part of this difficulty is attributable to recent
reductions in unemployment, it is also a result of the "skills gap,"
the inadequate supply of American workers with the skills required
by employers. The projections in Workforce 2000 indicate that today's
gap is likely to widen as the skill requirements of new jobs increase
faster than the skill levels of the labor force.
One major factor contributing to the skills gap is the low levels of
achievement among students leaving our nation's schools. Employers
report that alarming numbers of young job applicants have such poor
reading and computation skills that it is impossible to provide them
with job-specific training. These problems are particularly acute for
the 25 percent of students who leave school before high-school
graduation. Perhaps more troubling is the fact that many of those
who do graduate possess little more than rudimentary language and
mathematics skills.
From the top to the bottom of the American talent pool, our
students' academic achievements have failed to keep pace with the
competitive requirements of the international marketplace. Our best
mathematics students would be ranked just average in almost any
Pacific rim nation. Too few of our brightest students are taking the
arduous courses of study necessary to prepare for occupations in
science, mathematics, and engineering.
Moreover, the skills shortfall is not confined to new or prospective
workers. Large numbers of experienced workers have skills that are
now obsolete or soon will be made obsolete by changes in technology
or by declines in specific industries. With technological change
accelerating and international competition increasing, the life cycles
of products, technologies, and industries from initial expansion to
2
final contraction have shortened. Shorter cycles will result in even
more rapid obsolescence of workers' skills and will heighten our need
for retraining systems.
Retraining, however, usually requires basic reading and
computational skills that are well beyond those currently possessed
by many experienced workers. At least 20 million, and possibly as
many as 40 million, adults today experience substantial literacy
problems. Employers' retraining costs are much larger for employees
with limited reading and computation abilities. American firms'
difficulties in retraining these workers further reduce our ability to
compete in the world marketplace.
If the skills gap continues to widen, both sides of the labor market
will suffer. Many employers will not be able to hire the types of
workers they need to compete in international markets. Some
employers will bid up the wage rate of the skilled workers they can
find, thereby creating higher costs and diminishing competitiveness.
Other employers will be tempted to use foreign workers or to
relocate production in foreign countries. Inevitably, some high-skill
jobs will remain vacant while large numbers of low-skill workers will
remain unemployed. The burden of this unemployment is likely to
fall most heavily on minorities. Pockets of chronic unemployment
amid otherwise tight labor markets could lead to social and political
conflict.
THE VISION
Eliminating the skills gap and enhancing our nation's competitive
position will require a substantial, ongoing national commitment to
investment in human resources. To be effective, such a commitment
must be based on a shared vision of our nation's potential.
We envision American students treating learning as a matter of
highest priority. We envision American high schools with nearly 100
percent graduation rates, producing students whose achievements
compare favorably with those of their peers in other developed
countries. We envision an America in which virtually every adult
can read and in which post-secondary education or training is a right
rather than a privilege. We envision an America in which workers
can find high-quality jobs and employers can find high-quality
workers. We envision an America in which all employers are
committed to substantial investments in the education and training
of their workers. We envision an America without barriers to labor
force participation and with full utilization of the skills of the
nation's citizenry. We envision an American labor relations system
based on cooperation.
Such an America would be, and would deserve to be, a major
political and economic power in the twenty-first century.
3
A NOTE ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We have considered the fiscal implications of the strategy we
recommend to pursue our vision. Throughout our deliberations we
have been mindful of the importance of reducing the current budget
deficit. At the same time, we are convinced that, because today's
skills deficit is so enormous, wisely chosen investments in human
capital will yield substantial returns.
We believe that much can be accomplished through additional
investments from states, communities, individuals, and American
business, and through a careful reallocation of current federal
expenditures on human resources. There is likely, however, to be a
clear and pressing need for a sustained increase in federal
expenditure on human resource programs.
We are still the world's most wealthy nation, but we are at risk for
want of human resources. We must not accept a workforce that is
undereducated, undertrained, and ill-equipped to compete in the
twenty-first century.
A NOTE ON LABOR AND MANAGEMENT COOPERATION
In a spirit of cooperation and in pursuit of mutual goals, business
and labor have worked together as peers and allies on this
Commission. Many of our recommendations call for a spirit of
cooperation like that which invigorated our work.
Often the report refers to "business" or the "business community."
Consistent with our shared vision and sense of shared responsibility,
we intend for these terms to include both management and labor. We
recognize that all elements of the business community must work
together to achieve our mutual goals.
THE COMMISSION'S STRATEGY
Pursuing our vision of America's potential will require coordinated
action on many fronts. There is widespread agreement that
investments in physical capital and in research and development
should be increased. These activities, while important, are outside
our charge to focus on human resource development. Given the
brevity of our time together and the magnitude of our task, we did
not address the economic, developmental, or health needs of young
4
children, though these issues are closely related to workforce quality
and are clearly important. In light of the many efforts already
underway, we also did not address the impacts of substance abuse on
the labor force participation of young adults or its overall impact on
workplace efficiency.
The initiative we present rests on three pillars:
Creating incentives to improve student motivation and
achievement.
Improving workforce quality through public and private
investments in lifetime education and training.
Improving the efficiency with which workers' existing skills
are utilized.
Chapters 1, 2, and 3 of this report contain the results of our
deliberations on each of these themes, as well as specific
recommendations for action by the private sector, the education
community, and all levels of government. In our review of human
resource policy, we have been dismayed by the dearth of reliable data
and research on many important questions. Chapter 4 contains our
recommendations for improving the data-gathering and research
activities of the federal government SO that our leaders' future
decisions can be based on more complete information about the
American workforce.
5
1. THE FOUNDATION OF WORKFORCE QUALITY
People begin to acquire labor market skills long before they enter the
labor market. Indeed, the quality of early life at home exerts a
powerful influence on the quality of later life at work. The school is
second only to the family in its importance as a source of the
education that forms the foundation for a lifetime of career options.
Post-secondary studies, government training programs, and
employer-provided education and training all build on this critical
foundation. The schools' contribution to workforce quality is,
therefore, a substantial one.
For too many Americans, the foundation is shaky. The educational
task before our nation is enormous. Vast numbers of our students
fail to meet the educational requirements of the workplace or match
the academic accomplishments of their counterparts abroad.
Employers report that many young people's skills are insufficient to
qualify them for entry-level jobs. Even taking into account
institutional and cultural differences, the consistent and significant
underachievement of American students, relative to their
counterparts in other countries, is of grave concern. U.S. students lag
behind in science and mathematics at every grade level and at every
stratum of ability and background. Compared with students in the
developed countries of Western Europe and the Pacific rim, the
average mathematics attainment of students in our middle and
secondary schools places them in the bottom quartile. Worse perhaps,
the top 5 percent of college-bound high-school seniors in the U.S.
have scores in advanced mathematics comparable to the average
score of all Japanese seniors.
The time has come for this country to make a commitment to
education, a commitment as ambitious and aggressive as our past
commitment to space exploration. Our national leaders must
establish national education goals to provide a framework within
which state and local governments-along with educators, the
business community, and parents-can develop plans for action and
establish systems of measurement and incentives for success. It is
vital that the nation be charged to work together and act
aggressively to meet ambitious goals.
7
1.
The President should lead governors, mayors, educators, the business
community, parents, and all citizens in developing specific national education
goals and timetables. The goals should include: reducing school dropout rates;
increasing attendance rates; improving test scores and achievement levels;
increasing parental participation; and ensuring that our nation's youth
graduate with the basic skills necessary to be successful in the workplace.
Once national goals and timetables are set, it will be necessary for
our students to expend the effort required to achieve these goals.
Currently, our schools and parents expect less of our young people
than is expected of students in other developed nations. The greater
importance attributed to education by our international competitors
and the greater efforts of their students account for much of the
shortfall in American students' achievement. Indeed, a recent study
of 13-year-olds in the U.S., Korea, Spain, Ireland, the United
Kingdom, and Canada produced these ranks for U.S. students: last in
average mathematics proficiency; nearly last in average science
proficiency; last in the amount of mathematics homework reported;
nearly last in the amount of science homework; and first only in the
percent watching five or more hours of television each day. To be
sure, there are other significant differences between our education
system and those of other countries; our management of curricula
and resources is less centralized, and our schools place less emphasis
on science and mathematics. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt
that increased effort by American students would contribute
significantly to increased educational achievement.
We believe that many students lack sufficient incentives to inspire
their wholehearted engagement with learning and, furthermore, that
many aspects of the American education and employment systems
are inconsistent with the interests of learning. For example, while
the admission standards of the most prestigious colleges and
universities create strong incentives for the handful of students who
aspire to attend these select schools, most post-secondary institutions
have longstanding "open admissions" policies that guarantee access
for any resident holding a high-school diploma. Consequently,
students need merely to graduate from high school to gain admission
to college, a situation that offers few incentives to study hard or
otherwise prepare for college work. Similarly, students who choose to
go directly to work rather than pursue post-secondary education find
that their immediate earnings prospects are unrelated to their school
performance and, hence, see little reason to study.
Accordingly, it is important to create incentives that both justify and
reward scholastic effort. This is particularly true for our lowest
achievers, many of whom believe they have little to gain from school
work. A number of strategies have been offered to counter academic
underachievement Examples of these strategies include those
8
imposed by the schools ("no pass, no play" rules for school-sponsored
sports programs), those imposed by states (linking driver's license
eligibility to continued enrollment in school), those offered by
philanthropists (free college tuition for all who qualify), and those
offered by business/education partnerships (jobs for all students who
meet a prescribed educational standard). While it is too early to
judge the success of these approaches, we believe they offer models
that can be adapted to a variety of situations.
Most of the recommendations in this chapter focus on engaging
students in the learning process. No one of these recommendations in
isolation, or even the combination of all of them, is sufficient to solve
America's educational problems. Nonetheless, we believe that
engaging students' self-interest in their studies is an important step,
offering opportunities to promote achievement that are missing from
most current reform efforts.
If this strategy is to work, however, businesses must play a
significant role in creating incentives for achievement. During the
past decade, the business community has, in fact, substantially
increased its involvement in the schools. We applaud these efforts
and call for their expansion.
Of all the contributions that the business community makes, the
most important one is to help students understand the world of work
and its relationship to what is learned in school. Many young people,
particularly those in low-income urban areas, have very little
understanding of the nexus of school and work. Nothing can make
this relationship more clear than an assurance from the business
community that jobs will be available for those students who earn
adequate educational credentials.
2.
The business community should increase its presence in the schools, work
with parents and school personnel, talk directly with students, and show
through their hiring and promotion decisions that academic achievements
will be rewarded. Increased involvement of the business community will be
particularly valuable in low-income urban areas.
Business can make additional contributions by providing schools with
the information that they need to develop course content and
instructional methods that meet the current and emerging needs of
the workplace. Increasingly, employees will have to work in
cooperative groups, be able to make decisions about production
problems and processes, and develop the ability to acquire new skills
and behavior on the job. We urge schools to adjust their instructional
methods to match more closely the situation students will later face
in the workplace.
9
3. Schools should encourage the business community to provide the
information needed to develop classroom instruction that anticipates
emerging workplace needs. These techniques, emphasizing less interpersonal
competition, more cooperative effort, and increased problem-solving abilities,
should be used throughout a child's entire education. Schools should also
create the flexibility of schedules and educational formats necessary to
enable students of different abilities to meet the higher standards of
performance that are required by employers.
Another vehicle for creating incentives for students to stay in school
and study harder is to develop curricula in which applied, "hands-
on" instructional techniques are used to teach basic reading and
mathematics to students who do not choose purely academic courses
of study. The National Assessment of Vocational Education has
reported evidence that many students who do not succeed in
traditional courses of study can meet reasonable standards of
accomplishment when course work is combined with applied training
that gives meaning to their studies. Proposals offered by the
Administration and legislation introduced by members of Congress to
reauthorize the Vocational Education Act call for increased use of
vocational technical education as a vehicle for basic skills
instruction. We encourage these and related initiatives.
4. Schools should offer applied instruction, such as vocational technical
education, that emphasizes transferable academic skills including reading,
mathematics, science, communication, and problem-solving.
Students who pursue traditional academic studies also need
incentives to inspire effort. In many countries, such incentives are
created by competitive admissions policies that limit access to post-
secondary education. In this country, however, we are committed to
open admissions to most public post-secondary institutions. This
commitment may inadvertently undermine incentives for many
college-bound students, leaving them underprepared for college
curricula.
5. The Secretary of Education should institute a review of post-secondary
admissions policies and their implications for the performance of students
who aspire to post-secondary education. The review should focus on
opportunities to inspire elementary and secondary level students to prepare
more diligently for college study.
In addition to creating incentives for students to study harder in
school, we need to encourage students to undertake and excel in
scientific and technical fields. Science instruction at the elementary
10
school level is scarce at best. Few teachers are trained to teach
elementary science, and students often receive no exposure to the
sciences until they reach middle school. By then it is too late; most
U.S. students never catch up to students in societies where early
science instruction is emphasized. Moreover, too few of our
youngsters aspire to enter scientific fields, a shortage of interest that
is most pronounced among women and minorities. We believe that
schools should aggressively encourage such aspirations, and that
industries that rely on a scientific and technical workforce should
assist the schools in this endeavor.
6. Primary and secondary schools, in partnership with the business
community, should encourage the pursuit of scientific and technical courses
of study, particularly by minority and female students. Given the absence of
an adequate supply of elementary school teachers able to teach science,
federal and state governments should give immediate priority to: the
development of a kindergarten through twelfth grade plan of study in the
sciences; the design of a curriculum that provides hands-on experience for
children of all ages; and the more effective use of talented science teachers
and community resources. In the long run, special attention should be given
to the creation of an adequate supply of elementary school teachers able to
teach science.
An improved curriculum and better trained teachers will have more
impact on students if they have incentives for accomplishment.
Immediate rewards are likely to encourage effort more effectively
than rewards that come later in life.
7.
High-school students who excel in science and mathematics should be
rewarded with business internships or grants for further study.
Another way that employers can reward students for their
achievements is by offering them good jobs upon completion of
school. Currently, however, students have few means of
communicating their accomplishments to employers. Typically, when
job applicants authorize the release of their transcripts to prospective
employers, schools fail to deliver the transcripts in a timely manner.
Since hiring decisions for entry-level jobs are usually made quite
quickly, even short delays can create problems. Employers often have
difficulty interpreting the transcripts they do receive and are forced
to make decisions with little information regarding an applicant's
actual academic accomplishments. Lack of information is a
particular problem for small employers, few of whom can afford
employment testing.
11
Making transcripts an integral part of the employment process will
sharpen students' awareness of the importance of grades and other
indicators of school performance. We believe that this heightened
awareness will lead to greater effort and, consequently, to greater
achievement.
8. Schools should develop easily understood transcripts which, at the request
of students, are readily available to employers. These transcripts should
contain documentable measures of achievement in a variety of fields, as well
as attendance records. State governments should provide assistance to
facilitate the standardization of transcripts so that they will be more easily
understood.
The creation of a voluntary achievement testing program could
provide an additional way for students to document their
accomplishments. Such a program could focus on a test measuring
competencies in a variety of academic and vocational areas. It would
be necessary to develop a new test since tests currently in
widespread use are not sufficiently broad in scope to meet the wide-
ranging requirements of the achievement testing program that we
envision. Students who take the new test would be certified at
different levels of proficiency in the content areas of their choice.
After taking the examinations, students could choose whether to
distribute the results to prospective employers or post-secondary
institutions. An additional advantage of such a testing program is
that the process of documenting students' skills and achievements
would call attention to differences in student achievement across
teachers and school districts. Increased awareness of such differences
would create incentives for improved performance by teachers and
school systems.
There is a risk, however, that widespread use of test scores by
employers could place students from relatively underfunded school
districts at an additional disadvantage. It is important, therefore,
that any initiative for increased testing of high-school students be
accompanied by aggressive efforts to equalize resources across school
districts. We want to emphasize that our aim is to increase
opportunity by increasing achievement, and that both equalizing
resources and increasing incentives will be necessary if we are to
succeed.
9.
National educational and employers' associations should work together to
develop easily understood credentials, based on voluntary achievement testing
programs, that assess student proficiency levels in a wide variety of academic
and vocational areas. Testing programs must be accompanied by efforts to
equalize resources across school districts.
Schools and employers should further strengthen the linkage
between school and work by establishing school-based employment
12
services. While most schools contribute significantly to the college
placement process, few schools offer similar job placement support
for students who do not go directly to college. Some State
Employment Security agencies have already established job
placement services in high schools, and further experimentation
would be worthwhile. Such programs hold special promise in low-
income urban areas where young job applicants typically have very
little information regarding job opportunities.
10. Schools should work with State Employment Security agencies and
Private Industry Councils to establish school-based employment services with
direct connections to employers. Employers, both large and small, should be
encouraged to provide information on job openings and to consider filling
vacancies with recent accomplished high-school graduates. Students should
be provided with evidence that the system works for those who have the
necessary skills.
The prospects for greater student effort and achievement will be
improved if student incentives are accompanied by incentives for
improving the quality of teachers. Raising the level of teachers'
subject matter competence will no doubt raise student achievement.
The quality of teaching can be improved by recruiting individuals
with proven substantive competencies and by ensuring that all
teachers are masters of the subjects they teach.
11. State departments of education should improve instruction by developing
teaching opportunities for individuals who have substantive competencies but
lack education training, by instituting more rigorous testing of new teachers,
and by requiring retraining of existing teachers who lack substantive
competencies.
Teachers who do their jobs well should be professionally recognized
and rewarded in ways that promote collegiality and additional effort
by all instructional staff within an individual school. Consequently,
rewards should be based both on measures of outstanding individual
performance and on evidence of outstanding achievement by faculties
of entire schools. Possible rewards at the local, state, and national
level would range from public recognition, to promotion, to financial
bonuses. The business community should be an active partner in
creating and supporting these incentive systems. In all cases, rewards
should be based on observable criteria such as gains in student
achievement or measures of a teacher's substantive competencies.
We acknowledge successful ongoing teacher incentive programs that
provide greater status, responsibility, and compensation. Such
programs have been implemented in Dade County, Florida;
Rochester, New York; and the state of California.
13
12. Teachers who do their jobs well, either as individuals or as members of
school faculties, should be recognized and rewarded, both professionally and
financially. All levels of government should work with the private sector to
establish incentives for teacher excellence.
Just as students and teachers need incentives to inspire achievement,
SO too do individual school administrators and school systems.
Experience has shown that public recognition is an effective means
of encouraging such achievement. We urge the expansion of public
recognition programs at every level of government and encourage the
development of district or state-level comparisons based on data from
the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Such comparisons
would not only facilitate recognition programs, but would also allow
identification of the most effective educational strategies.
13. Federal, state, and local governments should increase their efforts to
give public recognition to school administrators and school systems whose
students and teachers display significant gains. Additional funding for the
National Assessment of Educational Progress would facilitate such efforts.
This nation's need for educational reform cannot be overstated. The
recommendations in this chapter will help to improve the quality of
our students, our teachers, our curricula, and our schools, but there
is reason to believe that more fundamental change will be required.
We are now witnessing a major restructuring of businesses and other
organizations across America, frequently resulting in profound
changes in employee-management relations. While educational
organizations face unique problems and challenges, it is clear that
the time has come to consider an analogous restructuring of our
schools and that much can be learned from successful restructuring
of other organizations. This learning could be facilitated by the
interaction of private sector managers and employees with their
school system counterparts.
14. The U.S. Department of Education, in cooperation with state
departments of education, should encourage experimentation involving
fundamental restructuring of schools. Encouragement should include grants,
technical assistance, and regulatory flexibility. The business community
should offer schools the benefit of its experience in organizational
restructuring.
14
2. LIFETIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING
America must develop a coherent system for providing post-
secondary education and training to adults. We believe that the need
for a system of lifetime training and retraining is large and growing.
Since over two-thirds of today's workers will remain in the labor
market beyond the year 2000, the labor force of the early twenty-first
century is, in substantial part, the labor force that we have today.
That labor force is deficient. Between 20 and 40 million adults today
have literacy problems, making it difficult for them to be trained or
retrained. Each year, additional workers with literacy deficiencies
enter the workforce; one in 10 of our 17-year-olds is functionally
illiterate. One-half of all 18-year-olds have failed to master basic
language, mathematics, and analytic skills. Employers report
difficulty both in hiring skilled workers and in finding entry-level
applicants who can read and compute well enough to participate
usefully in employer-provided training programs.
Today's labor force does not meet our current needs, and our needs
are increasing as technological change accelerates and foreign
competition intensifies. Researchers have consistently found modest
but steady increases in the average skill requirements of a broad
array of jobs. Workforce 2000 projects that the jobs of the early
twenty-first century will be very different from the jobs of today,
again requiring substantially higher skills. At the same time, the
American workforce will be aging, a circumstance that will force us
to retrain experienced workers if we are to meet the demand for new
skills.
We believe that responsibility for investing in the workforce of the
future resides primarily in the private sector. It is important,
therefore, to establish an environment that encourages private
invèstment in human capital. The first section of this chapter
proposes changes that will help create such an environment.
While private investment in human capital is crucial, it will not be
sufficient to meet all our needs. Public initiatives at the federal,
state, and local levels will be required to fill the gaps in our system
of lifetime education and training. If we are to fill these gaps, we
must reverse the decline in federal monies devoted to human
resource programs. Between 1978 and 1988, federal expenditures on
these programs fell from 0.85 percent to 0.45 percent of the Gross
National Product. These low levels of funding make it impossible to
serve many who are in need. For example, for every three adults now
enrolled in Adult Basic Education programs, there is one on a
waiting list. Given the increasing importance of workforce literacy,
we cannot afford to continue turning away people who want to learn.
15
In addition to increasing the level of public resources, we must focus
our expenditures on those economically disadvantaged persons whose
needs are unlikely to be met by private investment alone. The Job
Training Partnership Act (JTPA), America's largest federal training
program, is not sufficiently targeted on such individuals. Below we
discuss the JTPA amendments that the Secretary of Labor has
recently proposed to address this problem. These amendments also
encourage coordination across programs and agencies. In the second
section of this chapter, we make recommendations regarding the
funding, focus, and coordination of our public education and training
programs.
EMPLOYER INVESTMENTS IN HUMAN CAPITAL
If we are to maintain our status as a major economic power, we must
create an American workforce that can adapt to increasingly
sophisticated methods of production. Adaptation will require
retraining, and retraining will in turn require that workers (both
young and old) have strong reading, computation, problem-solving,
and reasoning skills. Both basic skills instruction and retraining will
require substantial new investments.
U.S. firms are already spending significant amounts of money on the
education and training of their workers. It has been estimated that
employers currently spend $30 billion annually on formal training.
While this amount seems large, it is important to remember that
these expenditures are spread across 108 million workers and equal
only 1.4 percent of firms' payroll expenses. In addition, the
expenditures are very unevenly distributed across workers, with
high-wage workers receiving the vast majority of the training.
One major obstacle that inhibits employer-provided training is that
workers who leave a firm take their skills with them. Workers'
mobility reduces employers' expected returns on training
investments, thereby reducing the level of those investments. In
some countries, such as Germany and Sweden, widespread use of
apprenticeship programs helps to lengthen the period of time that
workers stay with the firm, thereby giving the firm a longer period
of time to recoup its investment. In other countries where
employment relationships between many workers and their
employers are long lasting, mobility of human capital is a lesser
concern. According to a report from the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development, the average U.S. worker has been in
his job for 7.2 years. Of the 14 member countries included in the
report, only Australia has lower average job tenure. In the U.S.,
where there are limited numbers of apprenticeship programs and
where job turnover is relatively high, public policies are needed to
encourage human capital investment.
16
The difficulty that employers have in recouping their investment in
human capital is similar to the problem that firms face when they
invest in research and development. The benefits of research and
development often spill over to other firms and the rest of society. As
a result, such investments may produce greater benefits for others
than for the firm making the investment. Consequently, we use tax
policy to create incentives for research and development. As is the
case with research and development, one employer's investment in
training may benefit other employers when trained workers move
between firms (the mobility problem). Just as society can benefit
from additional expenditures on research and development, SO too
can we benefit from additional human capital investments.
France has already established a refundable training tax credit
which essentially requires all firms to spend at least a minimum
amount on education and training. Under this system, firms must
either spend a specified minimum percentage of their payroll to train
their employees or pay that same percentage into a government
administered training fund. The experience in France indicates that
virtually all employers make at least the minimum required training
expenditure; that is, few firms actually pay the tax. While we do not
endorse the specific approach chosen by France, we do believe that
the time has come for America to establish a corporate income tax
credit to stimulate human capital investment.
There are several concerns that should guide the design of such a tax
credit. First, a tax incentive for training should be carefully designed
SO that it stimulates new investment and does not subsidize training
that would have occurred in the absence of tax incentives. The
research and development tax credit focused incentives by basing the
credit on the difference between current expenditures and the
average of expenditures over the three previous years. We advocate a
similar approach for the training tax credit. For technical reasons,
however, we suggest the use of a longer base period.
A second important concern about the design of a training tax credit
is the definition of allowable expenditures (i.e., those that qualify for
the credit). Since many categories of expenditures could be distantly
related to training, the credit must be based on fairly narrow and
specific expenditure categories. In the absence of such limitations,
firms would have incentives to adopt extremely broad definitions of
training expenses. It is important, however, to limit the definition
without limiting employers' choices regarding the content and
intensity of training. We suggest that the training tax credit be based
on expenditures in the following categories: compensation of
employees whose sole duties are the design, implementation, or
presentation of training programs; the purchase or development of
instructional materials and equipment; and payments to third parties
(e.g., schools) that provide education or training services.
17
A final important question is whether the tax credit should be
limited to expenditures for the training of a particular category of
workers. For example, the credit could be restricted to training
expenditures for employees who are nonexempt under the Fair Labor
Standards Act. A restriction of this type would reduce the revenue
loss associated with the credit and would focus the subsidy on those
workers who currently receive the least training. A potential
problem with a restricted credit is that it would not encourage the
broad spectrum of training that many believe is required. We
encourage the Department of Labor to consider this issue as specific
tax credit proposals are developed.
15. The federal government should create a tax credit to encourage
employers to increase expenditures on education and training, guided by the
concerns discussed above.¹
The extent and content of employer-provided education and training
are major determinants of workers' economic futures. Consequently,
workers want to participate in the design of these programs. Recent
successful collaborations between unions and management in the
automobile and telecommunications industries, as well as
participative training programs in the computer and health care
industries, have shown the tremendous value of worker input in the
design and operation of training programs.
16. Employers should be encouraged to seek input from workers in making
decisions about training. The Department of Labor should collect and
disseminate information on successful collaborative training programs.
Just as the corporate tax treatment of employer-provided education
and training expenses can affect the level of human capital
investment, SO too can the personal tax rules. For 10 years ending in
1988, employer-provided education was not treated as taxable income
to the employee. With the expiration of section 127 of the personal
income tax code at the end of 1988, employer-provided education
benefits became taxable income if the education was not required for
the employee's current position. This new treatment discourages
workers from accepting employer-provided education related to new
occupations. Many low and middle income workers cannot afford to
pay taxes on these benefits, even if the education is crucial for
advancement. Tax provisions that discourage preparation for new
occupations make little sense in a rapidly changing economy, where
our workforce must adapt with increasing speed.
1 Commissioner Becker has requested that we note his dissent from this recommendation.
18
17. Personal income tax rules should be changed, restoring the exemption
for employer-provided education and training benefits that are not directly
related to an employee's current job. Reinstating section 127 of the personal
income tax code would achieve this objective.
Other obstacles that discourage firms from investing more in their
workers are the difficulty and expense associated with creating
effective training programs. Most firms are not primarily in the
business of providing education or training, and many are not
familiar with the most effective instructional techniques. These
problems are particularly acute for small firms, but even large firms
may encounter difficulty providing training in highly specialized
skills. Many of these employers would benefit from technical
assistance. One promising focus for such assistance is computerized
education and training techniques that can often be a cost-effective
method of providing training to employees.
18.
The federal government should encourage the provision of basic skills
education, as well as specific job training, by providing technical assistance
and collecting information on "best practices. In particular, the use of
computerized training methods should be encouraged through the
dissemination of information on the use of computers in military,
apprenticeship, and other forms of training.
Another way that firms can reduce the difficulties of providing
training is to form multi-employer training programs. The premise of
such programs is simple; employers are more willing to invest in
their workers' training if they know that other employers in the
industry are doing the same. That way, when workers move between
firms, the firms' investments are exchanged rather than lost.
Unionized construction firms already have multi-employer
apprenticeship programs, created under collective bargaining
agreements. Individual employers support these programs through
contributions to a centralized training fund. The workers who are
trained emerge with a set of specific job skills, competencies, and
credentials that are of value to many employers.
Programs of this type hold promise for the non-unionized sector as
well, but may be viewed as violations of U.S. antitrust laws. The
antitrust concern is analogous to that raised regarding multi-firm
research and development activities. This concern was addressed
through the passage of the National Cooperative Research Act of
1984, which permits the establishment of certain research and
development partnerships. A similar legislative initiative may be
needed to allow for employer training cooperatives in non-unionized
industries.
19
19. Employers should be encouraged to work together to establish training
programs and certification procedures for skills that workers gain through
on-the-job training. Antitrust laws may need to be amended to allow non-
unionized employers to cooperate in the provision of training.
Vendor-provided training is most commonly used by small employers
who do not have training programs of their own. Thirty-one percent
of all formal, employer-provided training is purchased outside the
firm. Working in partnership with business, community colleges are
becoming an increasingly vital and dynamic source of education,
training, and retraining, by providing customized classes responsive
to employers' evolving needs. We endorse these partnerships and
encourage their expansion.
As is the case with other types of training, vendor-provided training
is most valuable when workers leave the training with certified
competencies or other credentials that are well understood and
widely valued by employers. Certification programs for many types of
training have already been developed by state governments and
professional associations. An added advantage of such programs is
that they provide both workers and employers with information
about the quality of training provided by different vendors. For
example, vendors that produce large numbers of graduates who pass
the state's occupational test gain a good reputation, making it more
difficult for ineffective or fraudulent programs to survive.
20. The federal government should provide technical assistance to state
governments, professional associations, and the business community as they
develop explicit standards for job skills and competencies based on specific
occupational tests. The results of these tests should be used to create easily
understood, portable credentials that certify a worker's skills.
GOVERNMENT TRAINING PROGRAMS
Although the private sector has an important role to play in
providing lifetime education and training, we cannot realistically
expect private employers to meet the universe of need, especially for
those individuals with the most severe skill deficiencies. Even if
primary and secondary schools are greatly improved, there will
always be some individuals who leave school without the basic skills
needed to function effectively in the workplace. Providing a "second
chance" for those who are severely disadvantaged has been, and
must continue to be, a major role of government training programs
at the federal, state, and community levels.
An enormous number of adults with literacy problems today will still
be part of the workforce well into the twenty-first century.
20
Increasing the literacy of native-born adults and strengthening the
English proficiency of immigrants will be continuing needs. Current
government support for the provision of basic education to adults,
however, falls far short of meeting those needs. Our literacy
programs now serve only 1 to 2 percent of eligible adults. Waiting
lists for adult basic education classes average 35 percent of
enrollment; waiting lists in urban areas are even longer.
In this country, we are strongly committed to publicly supported
education for children and teenagers through the high-school level.
This commitment takes the form of a right, established in the
constitution of every state. Although relevant federal and state
programs exist, the commitment to meeting the basic skill needs of
adults is much weaker. That weakness is inconsistent with the
importance of upgrading the skill level of the nation's workforce. It
has been estimated, for example, that the current waiting lists for
programs funded by the Adult Basic Education Act could be
eliminated at a cost of $64 million per year. While this estimate
might prove to be conservative if program expansion produces
greater demand, it points to one way that our commitment to basic
skills education could be strengthened at a relatively low cost.
It is important to recognize, however, that many individuals with
young children will have difficulty taking advantage of basic skills
education programs unless affordable child care is available. In
Chapter 3 we address this issue and make recommendations for
increasing the availability and affordability of child care.
21.
Federal and state governments should work together to ensure lifetime
access to basic skills education for adults, with the objective of eliminating
illiteracy among adults by the year 2000.
Federal education and training programs were strengthened in 1982
by the passage of JTPA, which focused services on economically
disadvantaged adults and youth. Nonetheless, there is room for
improving JTPA's effectiveness in providing services to those who
need them most. The combined effect of the JTPA's performance
incentives and funds allocation formula makes it difficult for
deliverers to serve individuals in need of remedial education. As a
result, the program tends to "cream," serving some individuals
among the economically disadvantaged population who are likely to
find employment without assistance. Creaming reduces the
effectiveness of the program by devoting resources to some
individuals who derive little or no net benefit from participation. In
its recent report, the JTPA Advisory Committee suggested changes
that would result in more intensive and coordinated services for
those among the economically disadvantaged who could benefit most
from participation. Amendments proposed by both the Secretary of
Labor and members of Congress are consistent with the Committee's
suggestions.
21
22. We endorse Job Training Partnership Act amendments to increase
targeting of resources on those in need of remedial education, to improve
coordination of JTPA with other human resource systems, and to increase
the emphasis on basic skills remediation.
Since its enactment in 1982, JTPA has received no increases in
funding. Because of inflation, real expenditures are now 25 percent
below the 1982 level. In 1987, Title II-A of JTPA (the title receiving
the largest allocation) had an annual budget of $1.9 billion, enabling
it to serve only 5 percent of the eligible population of disadvantaged
youth and adults.
23. The level of funding for Title II-A of the Job Training Partnership Act
should be increased to enable a greater percentage of the eligible population
to be served. In addition, expenditures should be indexed to assure that future
funding levels keep pace with inflation.
Cost/benefit studies indicate that the Job Corps' residential program
(Title IV-B of JTPA), which provides a structured and supportive
learning environment for extremely disadvantaged youth, is an
effective education and training program. We believe that the proven
success of the Job Corps program justifies its expansion.
24. The level of funding for the Job Corps program should be increased.
Recent legislative changes have reduced the share of JTPA funds to
be allocated at the state level by governors. This change has had the
unfortunate effect of increasing the difficulty of arranging training
programs, such as industry-wide collaborative programs, that span
service delivery areas within a state. While we make no
recommendation to address this problem, we suggest that the
Secretary of Labor consider allocating a significant portion of
discretionary JTPA funds to statewide programs.
An additional concern about current government training programs
is that many economically disadvantaged men face financial barriers
to their participation. Current training programs provide little or no
financial support to participants. Since men are typically ineligible
for welfare programs, they may find it difficult to sustain themselves
and their families while participating in training programs. Efforts
are needed to draw low-income men, particularly black men, into
training programs and into the labor force.
25. The federal government should expand and strengthen training
programs for the disadvantaged with emphasis on the needs of low-income
men with family responsibilities. These programs should provide
opportunities for structured work experience, with precisely defined
objectives, responsibilities, and duration.
22
Disabled persons are another group that can benefit from programs
to enhance employability. Limited resources, however, force us to
make difficult choices about who will be served by these programs.
We can either spend small amounts of money on a large number of
people, or we can concentrate our resources on those who stand to
make substantial gains. Just as we want JTPA to focus on the
severely disadvantaged because they are likely to benefit most, we
want our disability programs to focus on those among the disabled
who are likely to realize the largest labor market gains.
26. Vocational rehabilitation and disability programs should try to identify
and focus on those individuals who are most likely to gain substantial
economic benefit from program participation.
Another significant public initiative for training and education is
student grants and loans. While both grants and loans for student
aid have grown in real terms since the 1970s, the growth in loans has
been much more dramatic. A recent study by the American Council
of Education reports that low-income minority students are less
likely to obtain a Guaranteed Student Loan than are similar low-
income white students. Other research indicates that grants
encourage higher rates of participation in post-secondary education
among minorities.
27. Additional federal resources should be devoted to training and education
grants for low-income students who have graduated from high school or
received a general equivalency diploma.
The responsibility for federally supported education and training
programs is shared by a variety of federal and state agencies: the
Department of Labor's JTPA program is administered by local
Private Industry Councils; under the Job Opportunities and Basic
Skills (JOBS) component of the Family Support Act, the Department
of Health and Human Services funds training programs for welfare
recipients through state welfare departments; and adult basic
education and vocational education programs are administered
through state education departments. This fragmentation and
associated administrative complexity make it difficult to integrate
training services, respond strategically to evolving workforce needs,
and use limited resources efficiently. The necessary coordination
across executive agencies can only be achieved through Presidential
leadership.
28. The President should create a permanent committee, including business
and labor representatives as well as the Secretaries of Commerce, Education,
Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Labor, to
coordinate human resource policy on a continuing basis. The committee's
first task should be to merge education and training programs wherever
possible.
23
3. PUTTING QUALITY TO WORK
There are two fundamental ways to improve the quality of the
workforce. One is to invest in the labor market skills of the
population; the other is to make more efficient use of the skills that
already exist. The previous two chapters have focused on the former;
here we consider the latter.
One way to promote labor market efficiency is to reduce the barriers
that prevent some individuals from fully participating in the labor
force. One of these barriers is employment discrimination against
minorities, women, older workers, and disabled persons. Although
employment discrimination is prohibited by a variety of state and
federal laws, there is a continuing need for vigilance and active
enforcement on the part of responsible agencies. These laws are
motivated by principles of fairness, but their enforcement creates the
additional benefit of promoting efficiency by focusing labor market
decisions on objective factors such as skill requirements and
applicants' qualifications. We have no new anti-discrimination
initiative to recommend, but we encourage the vigorous enforcement
of existing laws.
Another way to promote labor market efficiency is to create
supportive work environments that ease the tension between work
and family responsibilities, thereby facilitating the labor force
participation of individuals with such responsibilities. In coming
decades, the slow growth of the labor force will create incentives for
employers to create supportive work environments. The
recommendations in the first section of this chapter suggest several
ways to facilitate this process.
Matching job seekers with job vacancies is another important factor
determining the efficiency with which the labor market operates.
Human resources are wasted if qualified applicants are available
while jobs go unfilled. The second set of recommendations in this
chapter offers ways to facilitate the process of matching workers
with jobs so that the skills already available in the labor market are
used more effectively.
Another fundamental determinant of labor market efficiency is the
level of worker productivity. The third set of recommendations in
this chapter offers ways to increase productive efficiency through
worker participation in the management process and through
innovative compensation arrangements.
25
FACILITATING WORK/FAMILY BALANCING
As women's labor force participation has increased, both dual-earner
couples and families headed by single working mothers have become
much more common. American workers, both men and women, who
in the past had an adult partner in the home, now find themselves
juggling work and family responsibilities which are likely to be in
frequent, and unavoidable, conflict. The pressures come in many
forms including difficulties with child care and elder care
arrangements as well as family illness. From the employer's
perspective, work/family conflicts lead to unscheduled absences,
tardiness, misuse of working time, and difficulty in retaining valued
employees and attracting new ones.
Some employers already realize that they can no longer adhere to
the old principle that family issues have no place at work.
Enlightened self-interest has inspired a few of them to establish
programs to help employees solve work/family problems. Emerging
labor shortages will undoubtedly induce additional employers to do
the same. There is a compelling public interest in accelerating the
process of creating supportive work environments that enable all
workers to be full participants in the workforce.
The labor force participation rate of married women with young
children has, on average, increased more than one percentage point
each year since 1950. Today, 63 percent of all mothers with children
under the age of 14 are in the labor force. This economic change has
brought about unprecedented social changes, including increased
needs for day care for pre-school children and after-school care for
many older children.
We have confined our deliberations to the child care needs of parents
who are employed, seeking employment, or participating in an
education or training program. As noted in the Introduction, the
developmental needs of disadvantaged children whose parents are
not in the labor force was deemed beyond our purview.
Throughout our year-long deliberations, we followed the considerable
number of legislative initiatives designed to address the child care
issue. Because of the rapid evolution of these initiatives, it was not
possible for us to endorse a particular bill. We have, therefore,
chosen to make recommendations that describe certain features for
strengthening our child care system while maximizing parental
choice among a variety of affordable, quality child care options.
Community-based resource and referral organizations have
demonstrated their effectiveness both in providing the information
that parents need to make appropriate choices and in stimulating the
supply of child care services. In most communities, however, these
organizations are inadequately funded. We are convinced that an
26
expansion of community-based resource and referral organizations
would have three major benefits. First, it would help parents find
appropriate child care arrangements while preserving maximum
parental choice. Second, it would enhance each community's ability
to identify and react to its own needs and priorities, including pre-
school and after-school programs, sick child care, and transportation.
Third, it would serve as a magnet for community-based, public/
private partnerships, thereby creating a vehicle for employer
involvement and support. In sum, community-based resource and
referral organizations can create a facilitative network without
adding an additional layer of government. We strongly urge federal
leadership to encourage the expansion of community-based child care
resource and referral organizations.
29.
The federal government should provide grants to the states to support
the efforts of community-based child care resource and referral
organizations.
The child care concerns of many parents are aggravated by the high
cost of quality care. Child care is a financial burden to many
families; it is virtually unaffordable to a large number of low-income
Americans. For these people, child care problems can be a serious
barrier to job training and employment.
Under current tax law, a child care tax credit is available to families
with working parents who have children under the age of 15. A high
degree of flexibility in the program allows parents to select from a
wide variety of arrangements. We are persuaded that the existing
tax credit for child care is an extremely useful way to help parents
with their child care expenses while maintaining parental choice.
The principal drawback to the current credit is its irrelevance to
poor families because they typically pay no income taxes. This
problem could be corrected by making the credit refundable to low-
income parents.
30.
The existing child care income tax credit should be made refundable to
parents too poor to pay income taxes.
Even after the credit is made refundable, many families will still
lack the resources to pay for quality child care. We believe that the
federal government should provide additional child care subsidies to
low-income families. We have been unable to agree on a choice
among the alternative ways to provide increased subsidy, such as a
more generous child care tax credit, vouchers, or grants to child care
providers. We do agree, however, that increased federal subsidization
should be targeted on low-income families.
27
31.
The federal government should increase its subsidization of the child
care expenses of low-income families. 2
Another way to help families with their dependent care needs is to
encourage employers to provide dépendent care benefits. Such
encouragement could take the form of tax incentives or matching
grants for employers, but we are concerned about the fiscal
implications of these approaches. A second way to encourage the
provision of dependent care benefits is to demonstrate the returns
that employers can expect from such programs. While anecdotal
evidence suggests that employer-sponsored child care initiatives
improve employee morale and reduce tardiness and absenteeism,
little hard evidence exists on the ability of these initiatives to
improve employees' productivity or employers' profitability. Many
employers, especially smaller ones, are likely to be more willing to
provide child care or other work/family support if such support can
be demonstrated to have positive, bottom-line effects.
32.
Government should support and disseminate research that examines the
effectiveness and profitability of different types of employer-sponsored
dependent care arrangements. The Secretary of Labor should encourage
employers to offer the types of benefits that are found to be most effective.
Another important issue related to the labor force participation of
individuals with young children is employers' parental leave policies.
The availability of such policies can greatly improve parents' abilities
to fulfill both their family and work responsibilities. After extensive
deliberation, we have been unable to reach agreement on whether
employers should or should not be required by law to provide
parental leave. As a result, we have chosen not to make any
recommendation on mandated parental leave. We do, however,
strongly encourage employers to make such leaves available, and we
expect that future labor shortages will compel many employers to do SO.
A related dilemma in creating supportive work environments is the
need to offer employees flexible work schedules without jeopardizing
the firm's productivity and profitability. Such flexibility may be
particularly valuable for older workers and women with young
children. Some employers have already adopted a variety of flexible
scheduling arrangements, including flextime, part-time employment,
and leaves of absence. Of the many employers who have not yet
introduced scheduling flexibility, some may find it difficult to do so
because of the nature of their business. We believe, however, that
other employers would be able to adopt these arrangements and may
simply need encouragement to do SO.
2 Commissioner Becker has requested that we note his dissent from this recommendation.
28
33. Public and private employers, in cooperation with employees, should
increase the availability of flextime, leaves, career-oriented part-time
employment with fringe benefits, and other arrangements to increase work
schedule flexibility. The Secretary of Labor should use her position of
leadership to expand such arrangements within the Department of Labor and
to encourage their adoption by other public and private employers.
34. Federal and state governments should examine existing overtime laws to
determine whether they can be modified to facilitate voluntary flextime
arrangements without compromising the protection of workers provided by
the overtime laws.
MATCHING WORKERS AND JOBS
One way to enhance labor market efficiency is to facilitate the
process of matching the skills that are needed by employers with the
skills job seekers bring to the labor market. Several existing
institutions and programs influence this matching process including
the public employment service, the unemployment insurance system,
U.S. immigration policy, and programs for dislocated workers. Since
the General Accounting Office has already initiated a major
evaluation of dislocated worker programs, we chose not to devote
additional resources to a second evaluation. This section focuses on
the public employment service, the unemployment insurance system,
the enhancement of workers' geographic mobility, and immigration
policy.
The public employment service (ES) is made up of the U.S.
Employment Service and individual State Employment Security
agencies, all supported by an annual federal budget of approximately
$800 million. This federal/state system is responsible for delivering a
variety of labor market services including: the matching of job
seekers with job vacancies through testing, assessment, and referral
activities; the enforcement of the job search requirements of
unemployment insurance and other programs; and data collection for
the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Given the significance of these activities, it is important to find ways
to make the ES as effective as possible. The most promising way to
improve the ES would be to develop a system of accountability
similar to that used in JTPA. Accountability must, however, be
introduced in ways that both recognize the multiple functions
assigned to the ES and preserve and enhance the flexibility available
at the state level.
29
The Resource Allocation Formula (RAF), a system for creating
accountability in the ES, was tried in the past with little success. The
RAF was a performance-based allocation mechanism that
encountered major problems of inflexibility and difficulty in
measurement. Eventually this formula was abandoned. Since then,
however, our experience with JTPA has taught us a great deal about
the use of performance standards in employment and training
programs. Much of what has been learned could now be used by the
ES. The Secretary of Labor already has the statutory authority
under the 1982 Wagner-Peyser amendments to set performance
standards for the ES; we urge the Secretary to consider performance
standards for the ES similar to those used by JTPA.
Some adjustments would be needed to accommodate the mission of
the ES. Standards should be based on placement rates, wage rates,
client characteristics, new job orders, differences in state economies,
and efforts to integrate ES services with other federal, state, and
local employment and training programs. There will inevitably be
costs associated with implementing performance standards, but the
JTPA experience convinces us that the benefits of such an
undertaking would justify the costs. Once ES performance standards
are in place, states should be encouraged to consider innovative
methods to meet the standards.
35.
The Department of Labor should reconsider the use of performance
standards for the employment service in light of what has been learned from
the experience with the Job Training Partnership Act.
Another major institution affecting labor market efficiency is the
unemployment insurance (UI) system. This system is a combination
of federal and state programs which fund payments to laid-off
workers with payroll taxes collected from employers. One major
concern about today's UI system is the surprisingly small percentage
of unemployed individuals who receive UI benefits. Between 1980
and 1988, the percentage of the unemployed who received benefits
fell from 50 percent to 32 percent. This change has already prompted
a substantial effort by the Department of Labor to understand and
address this problem. Unfortunately the process will take at least
two years of data collection and analysis. We strongly endorse this
effort and expect that the results of the study will be of great use in
resolving the coverage problem. While it would be premature for us
to make recommendations on the coverage issue, other important UI
issues related to experience rating, employer incentives, and the
solvency of state systems can and should be addressed.
30
The UI system is financed by payroll taxes that are "experience
rated"; that is, each firm's tax payments are based on the extent to
which its employees use the UI system. The experience rating is,
however, incomplete; firms that make heavy use of layoffs have tax
obligations that are smaller than the UI benefits paid to workers laid
off by those firms. Other firms that use layoffs sparingly have tax
obligations that are larger than the UI benefits paid to their laid-off
workers. The system results in a subsidy from firms that use layoffs
sparingly to firms that make heavy use of layoffs.
The degree of experience rating within each state is determined by
the minimum and maximum tax rates set by the state UI system. If
a firm is at the maximum tax rate, layoffs will not increase the
firm's tax obligation. Hence, firms who are facing the maximum tax
rate have an incentive to respond to economic downturns by laying
off workers rather than by cutting back on workers' hours. There is
substantial evidence that firms at the maximum tax rate do, in fact,
tend to use this option; that is, research indicates that our current
UI system encourages layoffs.
Another important aspect of the UI system is the fact that employers
pay taxes on workers' wages up to a maximum level of earnings,
called the tax base. If the tax base is too low, employers have an
incentive to substitute smaller numbers of high-skill workers (with
high earnings) for larger numbers of low-skill workers (with low
earnings). While the magnitude of this incentive is likely to be small,
it should, nonetheless, be eliminated.
Finally, a state's choice of a UI tax base and rate schedule affects not
only firms' decisions about hiring and laying off workers, this choice
also affects the solvency of the state's UI system. Many states rely on
tax surcharges to increase their UI solvency, which has the
undesirable effect of reducing the degree of experience rating in the
system. The preferred alternative is for states to adjust their tax
rates and tax base to increase both their fund solvency and their
degree of experience rating.
36. State Unemployment Insurance systems should be modified to increase
the degree of "experience rating" and reduce the risk of fund insolvency. The
degree of experience rating can be increased by changing the tax base, tax
rates, and other features of state systems (such as non-charged benefits).
Measures taken to reduce risks of insolvency should be designed to increase,
rather than decrease, the level of experience rating in states. The
Unemployment Insurance Service of the Department of Labor should
encourage the adoption of such changes by providing technical assistance and
by monitoring the degree of experience rating of individual state systems.
31
One perennial difficulty in matching workers and jobs is that the job
vacancies and the unemployed workers are often in different parts of
the country. It is in the public interest to help job seekers explore
opportunities in other locations and relocate when necessary.
Currently, moving expenses are subsidized through the personal
income tax. Despite this subsidization, however, a geographic
mismatch of workers and jobs remains.
37. The federal government should develop programs to encourage
nationwide job search and worker relocation. In particular, these programs
should provide residents of each state with information about job openings in
other states and develop creative, low-cost measures to provide transportation
for job seekers and workers who relocate.
Immigration is another important factor influencing the operation of
the labor market. The current focus of immigration policy is on the
humanitarian principles of family reunification and refugee
resettlement. During fiscal years 1985-1987, an average of 591,078
immigrants legally entered the United States each year. Fewer than
9 percent of these immigrants entered under worker preferences,
which by law are subject to an annual cap of 54,000. In fact,
immigrants admitted as workers accounted for less than 4 percent of
all immigration because their spouses and unmarried minor children
used more than one-half of the available visas in the worker
preference categories.
In designing immigration policy, it is important to recognize that
long-term market forces are likely to correct labor shortages, even if
immigration policies are not adjusted. By using immigration policies
to relieve shortages, we may miss the opportunity to draw additional
U.S. citizens into the economic mainstream. We should always try,
therefore, to train citizens to fill labor shortages. In some cases,
however, it may be necessary to draw on foreign workers more
heavily than we do today.
38. Although our immigration policy should be made more responsive to
labor market needs, we must always strive to upgrade the skills of American
citizens before we draw on foreign workers to fill shortages. Increased
sensitivity to labor market needs should be achieved without compromising
the humanitarian objectives of immigration policy. To establish a sound basis
for revising immigration policy, the Department of Labor should focus
significant research effort on the likely impacts of proposed changes in
immigration policy on skills gaps and wage structures.
32
WORKER PARTICIPATION AND COMPENSATION
A growing body of evidence indicates that worker productivity can be
increased through innovations in employee relations. Programs that
allow employees to participate in workplace decisions affecting their
jobs appear to have a particularly strong effect on performance and
productivity. Financial incentives such as gainsharing and ownership
programs give employees a stake in the goals of the firm and can
create incentives for employees to advance those goals. Available
research suggests that participation, financial incentives, and other
innovations are particularly effective when they are introduced as a
package.
Work environments that involve a high degree of participation
typically have low rates of worker turnover. With greater stability,
firms are willing to invest more in the training of their workers,
thereby increasing workers' productivity and earnings as well as
firms' profits. Increasing worker participation may, therefore, be an
essential component in creating a more productive, high-wage
economy.
One obstacle to the implementation of participation programs is our
lack of knowledge regarding which types of programs are most
effective in different contexts. Most of the information we have
comes from success stories; we know very little about situations in
which the programs have failed. We need carefully designed
experiments in a variety of environments where the programs are
not introduced as a result of prior problems (or successes) and where
the situation before and after can be carefully observed.
Another obstacle that inhibits increased use of participation
programs in non-union firms is Section 8(a)(2) of the National Labor
Relations Act. This section of the Act creates potential confusion
about the legality of participation programs by making it an unfair
labor practice for an employer to "dominate or interfere (with)
or
contribute financial or other support" to a labor organization. A
company-sponsored participation program could be considered a
labor organization if it addressed terms and conditions of
employment and could, therefore, be illegal. Experts at the
Department of Labor and elsewhere believe that the potential for
litigation in this area has inhibited participation programs.
39.
The federal government should encourage worker participation by
disseminating information on "best practices, by setting an example with
participation programs for federal employees, and by clarifying the legality
of cooperative programs under the National Labor Relations Act.
33
While the structure of employee compensation is, and should be, set
by the private sector, the federal government can help to enhance
labor market efficiency by providing information on innovative and
"best practice" compensation arrangements.
40.
The Department of Labor should conduct research and disseminate
information to help employers and employees explore the promises and
problems of innovative compensation plans.
Pensions and other fringe benefits are an important component of
employee compensation. As our workforce has become more mobile,
we have become increasingly concerned about the portability of
pensions and other fringe benefits.
41.
The Secretary of Labor should initiate a study of both the opportunities
and problems involved in adding portability features to existing public and
private pension programs and other fringe benefits.
Effective relations between labor and management are also an
important factor in ensuring workforce quality and labor market
efficiency. Many observers believe that our labor laws and policies
are an outmoded remnant of an era when adversarial relationships
were the norm. These observers also suggest that the present system
of labor-management relations and the consequent employment
practices impede efforts to develop greater cooperation between labor
and management. Questions about the relationship between public
policy and labor-management relations are complex and deserve a
separate, in-depth examination by a task force of leaders from labor,
business (including small business), and government. Among other
issues, this task force should address worker participation; ways to
restructure the union certification process to reduce litigation and
delay; the distinction between mandatory and permissive bargaining
topics; and issues concerning the definition of bargaining units.
42.
The Secretary of Labor should create a tripartite task force to examine
labor-management relations and to provide recommendations for public
policy.
34
4. UNDERSTANDING THE WORKFORCE
It is imperative that our human resource policy be informed by
accurate data and careful research. The collection, analysis, and
dissemination of information is a traditional and appropriate role of
government. Today the Department of Labor, through its Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS), plays a major role in the federal government's
data collection effort. While the quality of data currently collected by
the BLS is exceptional, budgetary limitations have constrained the
ability of the BLS to develop new data sources in response to
emerging needs. The first section of this chapter establishes the
pressing need for additional support of the BLS.
In addition to collecting data, both the Departments of Labor and
Education conduct and support a broad array of research, evaluation,
and information dissemination activities intended to inform public
policy and private action. It is essential that these activities be
guided by rigorous standards of social science research and that they
be carefully focused on the most pressing policy issues. In the second
section of this chapter, we make suggestions concerning a human
resource research agenda for the 1990s.
LABOR MARKET DATA FOR THE 1990s
Data provided by the BLS are used by the government to implement
programs, monitor the economy, allocate funds, and index transfer
payments. These data are also used by the private sector for
economic planning, collective bargaining, wage administration, and
escalation of long-term contracts. Financial markets around the
world await the monthly BLS releases to judge the future outlook of
the American economy and the likely directions of financial markets.
The data provided by the BLS affect billions of dollars of public and
private expenditures. For example, a 1 percent increase in the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) leads to increased federal expenditures
on entitlement programs and reduced revenues from (indexed)
income tax receipts totaling $5 billion. One-half of the U.S.
population live in households where income is directly affected by
changes in the CPI. Changes in the Producer Price Index can trigger
as much as $300 billion worth of changes in long-term contracts.
Local area unemployment statistics are important components of
formulae which allocate billions of dollars of federal funds to states
and local areas. Finally, wage information collected by the BLS
affected nearly $40 billion in 1987 funding for Rehabilitation
Services, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), Medicaid,
vocational education, alcohol and drug abuse programs, and mental
health services.
35
The BLS experienced budget reductions in the late 1970s and
extremely deep cuts in the early 1980s. As a result, BLS eliminated
19 major data collection programs in 1982 alone. Since that time
there has been a series of across-the-board reductions in the BLS
budget. In this climate, it has been extremely difficult to undertake
new initiatives and to incorporate new methodological improvements
into existing programs. Rather, considerable effort has been made
simply to protect and preserve the integrity of current data
dissemination efforts.
There is a pressing need for quick access to new household survey
data. While regular monthly employment surveys are processed very
quickly, it takes at least two years to set up, collect, and analyze new
household surveys in response to special needs. It is difficult, if not
impossible, for policymakers to wait two years for answers to their
questions. In recent years the BLS has developed a capability to
conduct timely surveys of firms, but resource constraints have
prohibited comparable innovation for household surveys. Such
surveys would cost $1 million annually, and would cut by one-half
the time needed to answer pressing policy questions. This is but one
example of an important need that has gone unmet for want of a
relatively small amount of money.
43. The funding of the data collection and dissemination efforts of the
Bureau of Labor Statistics should be significantly increased. New resources
should be devoted to the development of quick turnaround household surveys,
support of longitudinal data bases, and pilot studies of new data methods.
For more specific information on priority initiatives, see Commission
background paper #44.
A HUMAN RESOURCE RESEARCH AGENDA FOR THE 1990s
Quality, nonpartisan labor market research is the best foundation for
labor market policy. Absent this research, policy will be based, at
best, on intuition and, at worst, on special interests. As a part of our
effort to review human resource policy, we commissioned a series of
background papers summarizing a broad spectrum of academic and
nonacademic research on subjects relevant to our charter. The titles
and authors of. these papers are listed in Appendix 3. The dearth of
reliable information on many important questions frustrated many
paper authors and impeded our deliberations.
This paucity of research is due in large part to low levels of
government funding for human resource research. Since 1975,
inflation-adjusted funding levels for research and evaluation have
been cut by 52 percent in the Department of Labor, while those in
the Department of Education have been cut by 63 percent. We
36
believe that it is essential that the Departments of Labor and
Education take the lead in addressing this problem by increasing
their support of research.
One particularly important focus for their research is the
effectiveness of government-funded human resource programs.
Policymakers need to know which programs work, which do not, and
why. Unfortunately, answering these questions is often expensive
and time consuming. For example, the process of evaluating JTPA is
expected to cost $20 million and take a total of six years (ending in
1992). This commitment to research is entirely reasonable since the
program spends nearly $4 billion each year. One reason for the
expense of the JTPA evaluation is the high cost of conducting
experiments in which randomly selected individuals participate in a
program and are then compared to individuals who are not
participants. This experimental approach, modeled on those used in
medicine and the physical sciences, has produced most of what little
we know about the effectiveness of training programs.
Unfortunately, we know even less about the long-run effects of
training programs because long-run experiments are particularly
expensive and time consuming. Hence, we call for an increased
commitment to principles of experimental design in the long-run
evaluation of human resource programs.
Another important focus for Department of Labor funded research is
to develop a better understanding of emerging labor market trends.
The growth in the proportion of minority men with low earnings is
an example of an important but poorly understood trend. A better
understanding of this, as well as other phenomena, would enable
policymakers to design more effective programs for assisting those
who are disadvantaged in the labor market.
It is also essential that Department of Labor research focus on the
study of private sector labor market innovations by collecting
information on which innovations work, which do not, and the
conditions under which some work while others do not. The
dissemination of this information will allow many organizations to
learn from the successes and failures of a few. In some cases the
Department of Labor may be able to encourage private initiatives
that facilitate measurement of the results of specific innovations
(e.g., controlled experiments). In general, the most important factors
to be measured are bottom-line effects on productivity, employees'
incomes, and employers' profits.
44. Research should be viewed as a major component of the missions of
both the Departments of Labor and Education and should be funded
accordingly. The research agenda should emphasize experimental evaluations
of human resource programs, analysis of determinants of the labor market
status of the economically disadvantaged, and collection and dissemination of
information on best employment practices.
37
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: COMMISSION CALENDAR
July 11, 1988
Establishment of Commission on Workforce Quality and
Labor Market Efficiency by the Secretary of Labor, The
Honorable Ann McLaughlin
September 19, 1988
White House Reception for Commissioners with President
Ronald Reagan
September 19, 1988
First Commission Meeting, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, DC
December 6, 1988
Second Commission Meeting, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, DC
April 4, 1989
Third Commission Meeting, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, DC
May 2, 1989
Public Hearing, Northlake Community College, Irving,
Texas
May 4, 1989
Public Hearing, Indiana World War Memorial, Indianapolis,
Indiana
May 9, 1989
Public Hearing, School District of Philadelphia,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
May 11, 1989
Public Hearing, Best Western Grosvenor, San Francisco,
California
May 12-13, 1989
Commission Conference, "International Lessons for U.S.
Employment Policy," Institute of Industrial Relations,
University of California at Berkeley
June 3-4, 1989
Commission Subcommittee Meetings, Annapolis, Maryland
June 20, 1989
Fourth Commission Meeting, American Red Cross
Headquarters, Washington, DC
August 1, 1989
Final Commission Meeting, National Alliance of Business,
Washington, DC
Labor Day 1989
Release of Commission Report to the Secretary of Labor,
The Honorable Elizabeth Dole
41
APPENDIX 2: COMMISSION CHARTER
Structure: The commission shall consist of not more than 21 members appointed by the
Secretary of Labor and shall include public officials, leading business and union
representatives, educators, and other members of the public knowledgeable about human
resources. The commission shall be chaired by a person chosen by the Secretary of Labor. If
the commission chooses to operate through subcommittees such subcommittees shall present to
the commission their findings and recommendations for action by the full commission.
Mission: The commission is charged with making specific recommendations for the
Department of Labor and the nation to increase the excellence of the American workforce. To
carry out its mission the commission shall have the following direct responsibilities:
1. Examine the roles and effectiveness of privately and publicly provided job training and
education.
2. Determine the best mechanisms to keep the education system and training providers
continuously informed of the changing skill needs of employers and workers.
3. Consider the problem of financing private investments in human capital and determine
the best ways to access financial capital markets for that purpose.
4. Assess the appropriate roles of employers, unions, and government in retraining and
relocating dislocated workers.
5. Examine ways in which private and public job placement agencies can enhance the
efficiency of the changing labor market of the future.
6. Assess the need for greater flexibility of employers' policies to facilitate labor force
entry.
7. Evaluate the opportunities to enhance productivity through alterations of the
employment arrangement such as innovative pay systems and benefit structures,
employment security provisions, and worker involvement.
The commission shall have such other responsibilities in the field of human resources as the
Secretary may deem necessary to fulfill its mission.
Meetings: The commission shall meet at least four times a year at the call of the commission
chairperson. Any subcommittees of the commission shall meet at the call of their chairperson
with the concurrence of the commission chairperson. Hearings on behalf of the commission
may be held by one or more members of the commission with the authorization of the
commission chairperson.
Management: The commission shall have an executive director who shall be an academic in
the field of human resources. The staff of the commission shall be composed principally of
employees of the Department of Labor. The commission is authorized, within the limits of its
budget, to contract out such of its work as the commission chairperson deems necessary in
order to carry out its mission.
Reports: The commission shall issue a brief report of its work on December 15, 1988. A final
report making specific recommendations shall be made at the termination date.
Termination Date: It is anticipated that the commission shall require 12 months to complete
its work. The commission shall terminate, in any event, not later than 15 months from the
date of this charter.
42
APPENDIX 3: BACKGROUND PAPERS
The background papers listed below were solicited to assure that the process of developing
policy recommendations would be informed by a comprehensive review of literature relevant
to the diverse issues the Commission would address. The papers reflect the thoughtful work of
leading experts from academic and private research institutions as well as Commission staff.
These researchers became our colleagues while transforming disparate sources of information
into a base of knowledge for our deliberations on policy. The Commission gratefully
acknowledges their effort.
The papers are available in a companion volume to this report titled, Investing in People: A
Strategy to Address America's Workforce Crisis, Background Papers.
Paper
Author(s)
1. "Incentives for Learning: Why American High-
John Bishop
School Students Compare So Poorly to Their
Cornell University
Counterparts Overseas"
2. "Schooling for the Modern Workplace"
Russell W. Rumberger
University of California at Santa Barbara
Henry M. Levin
Stanford University
3. "Trends in Science and Engineering Education
Michael G. Finn
and the U.S. Labor Market"
National Research Council
4. "Empowering Schools and Teachers: A New
James E. Rosenbaum
Link to Jobs for the Non-College Bound"
Northwestern University
5. "Second Chance Basic Skills Education"
Larry Mikulecky
Indiana University at Bloomington
6. "The Firm's Decision to Train"
Donald O. Parsons
Ohio State University
7a. "Empirical Evidence on Private Training"
Charles Brown
University of Michigan
7b. "Evidence on Private Sector Training"
Stephen L. Mangum
Ohio State University
7c. "Evidence on Private Sector Training"
William M. Ouweneel
IBM Corporation
8a. "Introducing New Technology into the
Patricia M. Flynn
Workplace: The Dynamics of Technological and
Bentley College
Organizational Change"
8b. "Introducing New Technology into the
Greg Kearsley
Workplace: Retraining Issues and Strategies"
Park Row, Inc.
43
9. "Survey of Government-Provided Training
Burt S. Barnow
Programs"
Lewin/ICF
Laudan Y. Aron
Lewin/ICF
10. "The Effectiveness of Government Training
Margaret C. Simms
Programs"
Joint Center for Political Studies
11. "Black Male Youth: Their Employment
Robinson G. Hollister
Problems and Training Programs"
Swarthmore College
12. "Facilitating the Flow of Information Between
Jorie W. Philippi
the Business and Education Communities"
Performance Plus Literacy Consultants
13. "Issues in Financing Post-Secondary Education
Arthur M. Hauptman
and Training"
Consultant
Jamie P. Merisotis
Consultant
14. "The Tax Treatment of Training and
John M. Quigley
Educational Expenses"
University of California at Berkeley
Eugene Smolensky
University of California at Berkeley
15. "The Unemployment Experience of the
Jonathan S. Leonard
Workforce"
University of California at Berkeley
Michael W. Horrigan
Bureau of Labor Statistics
16. "Unemployment Insurance: The Worker's
James C. Cox
Perspective"
University of Arizona
Ronald L. Oaxaca
University of Arizona
17. "Unemployment Insurance Financing, Short-
Daniel S. Hamermesh
Time Compensation, and Labor Demand"
Michigan State University and National Bureau of
Economic Research
18. "Utilization of Public and Private Job Search
Harry J. Holzer
Mechanisms: The Experiences of Employers and
Michigan State University
Employees"
19. "The Role of the Employment Service"
Malcolm S. Cohen
University of Michigan
David W. Stevens
University of Missouri at Columbia
20. "Labor Force Participation of Older Workers"
Richard V. Burkhauser
Vanderbilt University
Joseph F. Quinn
Boston College
44
21. "Labor Force Participation and Employment
Harry J. Holzer
Among Young Men: Trends, Causes, and Policy
Michigan State University
Implications"
22. "Labor Force Participation Among the
Robert Moffitt
Economically Disadvantaged"
Brown University
23. "Labor Force Participation Among Disabled
Monroe Berkowitz
Persons"
Rutgers University
Edward Berkowitz
George Washington University
24. "Labor Force Participation of Dual-Earner
Ellen Galinsky
Couples and Single Parents"
Families and Work Institute
25. "Cultural Issues Affecting Labor Force
Harriet Pipes McAdoo
Participation"
Howard University
26. "Facilitating Women's Occupational
Deborah M. Figart
Integration"
American University
Barbara R. Bergmann
American University
27. "Impact of Child Care on the Bottom Line"
Dana E. Friedman
The Conference Board
28. "Addressing the Supply Problem: The Family
Dana E. Friedman
Day Care Approach"
The Conference Board
29a. "Part-Time and Temporary Work"
Rebecca M. Blank
Princeton University
29b. "Temporary Work"
Heidi Hartmann
Institute for Women's Policy Research
June Lapidus
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
30. "Working Hours Flexibility"
Graham L. Staines
Bank Street College of Education
31. "Mixing Careers and Child Rearing"
Charles S. Rodgers
Work/Family Directions, Inc.
Francene S. Rodgers
Work/Family Directions, Inc.
32. "The Effects of Mandating Benefits Packages"
Olivia S. Mitchell
Cornell University and National
Bureau of Economic Research
33. "Innovative Compensation Systems: Implications
Michael Schuster
for Employers, Unions, and Government"
Syracuse University
34. "Employee Ownership Plans"
Robert N. Stern
Cornell University
45
35a. "Employee Participation, Work Redesign, and
Thomas Kochan
New Technology: Implications for Public Policy
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
in the 1990s"
Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld
Michigan State University
John Paul MacDuffie
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
35b. "Employee Participation and Involvement"
David I. Levine
University of California at Berkeley
George Strauss
University of California at Berkeley
36. "Efforts to Solve Quality Problems"
Michael J. Smith
University of Wisconsin at Madison
Francois C. Sainfort
University of Wisconsin at Madison
Pascale C. Sainfort
University of Wisconsin at Madison
Conrad Fung
University of Wisconsin at Madison
37. "Impediments to Innovative Employee Relations
Richard N. Block
Arrangements"
Michigan State University
Benjamin W. Wolkinson
Michigan State University
38. "Cooperative Efforts to Solve Employment
William N. Cooke
Problems"
University of Michigan
39. "Current Economic Issues in Employee Benefits"
Stephen A. Woodbury
W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research and
Michigan State University
40. "Pre-Employment Testing and Employee
Lawrence M. Rudner
Productivity"
LMP Associates and American Institutes for Research
41. "Functional Context Education: Policy and
Thomas G. Sticht
Training Methods from the Military Experience"
Applied Behavioral & Cognitive Sciences, Inc.
42. "The Role of Unions in Improving Workforce
H. Peter Cappelli
Quality, Labor Market Efficiency, and Effective
Commission Staff and University of California at
Employee Management"
Berkeley
43. "Employer Training of Work-Bound Youth: An
Nevzer Stacey
Historical Review and New Results"
Commission Staff and U.S. Department of Education
Nabeel Alsalam
U.S. Department of Education
44. "Data Needs for Labor Market Analysis"
Michael W. Horrigan
Commission Staff and Bureau of Labor Statistics
46
APPENDIX 4: PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Commission held public hearings in order to offer a wide spectrum of individuals and
organizations the opportunity to provide their views and recommendations on improving the
workforce. Hearings were held in Irving, Texas, May 2, 1989; Indianapolis, Indiana, May 4,
1989; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, May 9, 1989; and San Francisco, California, May 11, 1989.
These locations were selected to encourage broad-based participation both with respect to
regions of the country and diversity of perspective.
The public was asked to address a number of topics related to workforce quality and labor
market efficiency. Among these topics were education and training and their financing and
tax treatment, matching workers and jobs, enhancing labor force participation through
workplace flexibility, and industrial relations and productivity.
One hundred-sixteen (116) witnesses presented testimony at the hearings. Written statements
were submitted by an additional 105 individuals and organizations. The hearings were a rich
source of information, providing many new perspectives on the issues in our charter. The
Commission expresses its appreciation to the members of the public who shared their thoughts
with us.
WITNESSES PRESENTING TESTIMONY
Mark Ahearn
R. N. Beck
State Director, Representing
Executive Vice President
The Honorable Dan Coats
Bank of America
United States Senate
San Francisco, California
State of Indiana
Indianapolis, Indiana
Marvin E. Berger
Chairman, Pennsylvania State Job Training
Natalie S. Allen
Coordinating Council and
President
President, Rayco Auto Services, Inc.
Philadelphia High School Academies, Inc.
Media, Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Sally Boofer
James T. Allison
Manager of Field Operations, Indiana Program
Assistant Superintendent of Public Instruction, and
Green Thumb, Inc.
State Director, Career-Vocational Education
Seymore, Indiana
California State Department of Education
Sacramento, California
Glen Bounds
Provost
Pamela O. Anderson
Dallas Community College District
President, Career Resources
Dallas, Texas
North Central Indiana Private Industry Council, Inc.
Peru, Indiana
John C. Brooks
Deborah Arrindell
Commissioner, State of North Carolina
Public Policy Director
Department of Labor
Wider Opportunities for Women, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
Washington, DC
47
Judith Brown
Donald J. Davis
Member, Board of Directors
Co-Executive Director
American Association of Retired Persons
UAW-GM Human Resource Center
Washington, DC
Auburn Hills, Michigan
R. M. Brown, III
Richard DeLone
Chairman
Richmond Private Industry Council, Western Job
President
Training Partnership Association and
DeLone, Kahn, & Associates
Human Resources Director
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Kaiser Permanente-Richmond
Richmond, California
William E. Earl
Manager, Policy Benefits
Dennis L. Bybee
American United Life Insurance Co. and
Chief, Management Information Systems Division
Member, Indianapolis Private Industry Council
Department of Defense Dependents Schools
Indianapolis, Indiana
Arlington, Virginia
Eunice Elton
Dale Campbell
Assistant Commissioner for Community Colleges and
President
Technical Institutes
Private Industry Council of San Francisco, Inc.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
San Francisco, California
Austin, Texas
Manfred Emmrich
Ralph G. Cantrell
Director
Commissioner
Employment Security Commission of North Carolina
Virginia Employment Commission
Raleigh, North Carolina
Richmond, Virginia
Dave Farley
Gloria Carpenter
Chairman
Chair, Conference Committee
California Employer Council and
Pennsylvania Service Delivery Area Association
Employer Relations Administrator
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Simpson Paper Company
San Francisco, California
Virginia Felstehausen
American Vocational Association
Meredith L. Carter
Lubbock, Texas
Vice President/Dean
Indiana Vocational Technical College, Central
Happy Fernandez
Indiana and
President
Member, Indianapolis Private Industry Council
Delaware Valley Child Care Council and
Indianapolis, Indiana
Associate Professor
Perry Chapin
Temple University
President
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
South Central Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
Bob Firenze
Des Moines, Iowa
Director
William E. Christopher
Indiana Labor-Management Association
Commissioner
Indianapolis, Indiana
Indiana Commission on Vocational and Technical
Education
Pamila J. Fisher
Indianapolis, Indiana
Assistant Chancellor of Educational Services
Yosemite Community College District
The Honorable Ronald R. Cowell
Pennsylvania State House of Representatives
Modesto, California
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Robert Foster
Larry Crecy
Director of Public Relations
National Caucus and Center on Black Aged, Inc.
Indiana American Legion
Washington, DC
Indianapolis, Indiana
48
Robert G. Garraty
Walter Hayden
Executive Director
Legislative Director, Indiana Council American
Pennsylvania MILRITE Council and
Federation of State, County and Municipal
Chairman, Public Policy Committee
Employees
Consortium for State Labor-Management Initiatives
Indianapolis, Indiana
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Maryann Haytmanek
David J. Gillette
Counselor/Coordinator, New Directions Program
Executive Director
Lehigh County Vocational-Technical School
New York State Job Training Partnership Council
Schnecksville, Pennsylvania
Albany, New York
Howard Himmelbaum
Hugh L. Gordon
Deputy Director
SER-Jobs for Progress
Derson Group, Ltd. and
Dallas, Texas
Volunteer, National Alliance of Business
Marietta, Georgia
David G. Hoffman
Chairman, Governor's Mini-Cabinet on Employment
John J. Grier
and Training
Chairman
State of Alaska
Pennsylvania Employer Advisory Council
Juneau, Alaska
Bristol, Pennsylvania
Elizabeth P. Howe
William D. Grossenbacher
Director
Administrator, Texas Employment Commission and
Michigan Department of Labor
Interstate Conference of Employment Security
Lansing, Michigan
Agencies, Inc.
Austin, Texas
Arnold M. Howitt
Associate Director, John F. Kennedy School of
Pamela Grosvenor
Government
Chairman
Harvard University
Albuquerque Advisory Committee of Employers
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Albuquerque, New Mexico
James Hubbard
Cecil Groves
The American Legion
Chancellor
Washington, DC
Texas State Technical Institute
Sally A. Jackson
Waco, Texas
Director
The Honorable David M. Halbrook
Illinois Department of Employment Security
Mississippi State House of Representatives
Chicago, Illinois
Jackson, Mississippi
Herbert Johnson
Resse Hammond
Executive Director
Director, Education and Training
Illinois Veterans Organizations and
Jobs for Vets
International Union of Operating Engineers
Chicago, Illinois
Washington, DC
Sam H. Jones
William Hanigan
President
Vice President, Administration and Personnel
Indianapolis Urban League and
Zagar, Inc.
Member, Indianapolis Private Industry Council
Cleveland, Ohio
Indianapolis, Indiana
Frederick W. Hansen
Martha Kuhl
Auto Tech Program Director
Chair, Economic and General Welfare Commission
Youth for Service
California Nurses Association
San Francisco, California
Oakland, California
49
David Kuter
Linda Marks
Chairman, Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation
Consultant
Committee
Work Options
Wisconsin American Legion
San Francisco, California
Fund du Lac, Wisconsin
Carroll Marsalis
David Lacey
Project Manager, Skills Development Department
President and Chief Executive Officer
Tennessee Valley Authority
Philadelphia Private Industry Council
Knoxville, Tennessee
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
C. Dianne Martin
Laurie Laskey
Project Coordinator, Caregiver Assistance Service
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering and
Computer Science Department
Coalition of Advocates for the Rights of the Infirm
Elderly
George Washington University and
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Board Advisor
International Association for Computing in Education
Ernest Leach
Washington, DC
President
Fresno City College
James Martin
Fresno, California
Executive Director
Philadelphia Area Labor-Management Committee
David Little
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Chair
Iowa Job Service Employers Steering Committee
Ted Martinez
Centerville, Iowa
Chair, Committee on Human Resource Development
National Council for Occupational Education
Bonnie Longnion
Dean of Continuing Education
Lancaster, Texas
North Harris County, East Campus
Linda de Mello
Kingwood, Texas
Executive Director
Michael J. Lotito
Alumnae Resources
Chairman, Legislative Affairs Committee
San Francisco, California
American Society for Personnel Administration
Harriet Miller
San Francisco, California
Executive Director
Oscar Lowery
Fort Wayne Women's Bureau, Inc.
Chairman
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Indiana Council on Vocational Education
Indianapolis, Indiana
Nancy L. Mirth
District Service Manager, Ohio Operations
Michael McAfee
GTE North Incorporated and
Executive Director
Chairman
Vietnam Veteran Resource and Service Center
Williams County Job Service Employer Committee
Dallas, Texas
Medina, Ohio
Richard K. McMillan
Madeline Mixer
Co-Executive Director
UAW-GM Human Resource Center
Regional Administrator, Women's Bureau
Auburn Hills, Michigan
U.S. Department of Labor
San Francisco, California
Dorothy McNutt
President
Barbara J. Mock
Texas Association of Post-Secondary
Member, Pennsylvania Employer Advisory Council
Occupational Education Administrators
and Attorney-At-Law
Texas City, Texas
Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania
50
Franklin G. Mont
Henry H. Perritt, Jr.
Deputy Secretary of Labor and Industry, Representing
Professor of Law
The Honorable Robert Casey, Governor
Villanova University
State of Pennsylvania
Villanova, Pennsylvania
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Sandra Pierce
Peter Muller
Director of Industrial Relations and Administration
East Bay District Manager
RAE Corporation and
Associated General Contractors of California
Chairman, Private Industry Council, SDA 2, Illinois
Oakland, California
McHenry, Illinois
Pattie Powell
Kathye Jacobs Murphy
Trustee
Executive Director
Dallas County Community College District
Career Planning Center, Inc.
Dallas, Texas
Los Angeles, California
Carol Prell
James E. Nickels
Industry Education Council of California
Director, Labor Education Program
San Francisco, California
University of Arkansas at Little Rock
Little Rock, Arkansas
Mary S. Pyle
Education Consultant
Charles F. Nielson
National Council on Vocational Education
Vice President, Corporate Staff
Washington, DC
Texas Instruments Incorporated
Dallas, Texas
Lane A. Ralph
Assistant State Director, Representing
Selma Nunez-Borja
The Honorable Richard Lugar
San Lorenzo, California
United States Senate
State of Indiana
Barney Olmsted
Indianapolis, Indiana
Co-Director
New Ways to Work
Markley Roberts
San Francisco, California
Economist and Director, Office of Employment and
Training
Gerald A. Olson
Economic Research Department, AFL-CIO
Chairman, Private Industry Council
Washington, DC
SDA 3, Northern Illinois and
Assistant Vice President of Human Resources
Carol Ann Rudolph
Rockford Memorial Hospital
President
Rockford, Illinois
Child Care Management Resources
Bethesda, Maryland
George Ondick
Ellen O'Brien Saunders
State Committee on Veterans
Administrator
Employment and Training and
Ohio Bureau of Employment Services
Executive Director
Columbus, Ohio
Ohio AMVETS
Columbus, Ohio
Victoria Saunders
Director, Human Resources
Tom Owens
United Medical Manufacturing Company and
Associate Director, Education and Work Programs
Member
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
Indianapolis Private Industry Council
Portland, Oregon
Indianapolis, Indiana
Douglas J. Peek
Jack Scott
Director, Division of Education and Training
Director, Projects with Industry
Kentucky Labor Cabinet
Goodwill Industries of America, Inc.
Frankfort, Kentucky
Bethesda, Maryland
51
Robert R. Scruggs
Robert Turner
Chairman
President
Employers' National Job Service Committee,
Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.
Region IV
Washington, DC
Greensboro, North Carolina
Theresa Turner
Jesusita Semides
Human Relations Coordinator
President
Indiana State Teachers Association
Tradeswomen, Inc.
Indianapolis, Indiana
San Francisco, California
Joel Vela
Vice President of Instruction
May Shayne
North Lake Community College
Researcher, Tennessee JTPA Program
Irving, Texas
Vanderbilt Institute for Public Studies
Representing Max Castillo
Nashville, Tennessee
President
San Antonio College
Regina Siciliano-Kutchins
San Antonio, Texas
State Director, California Program
Green Thumb, Inc.
Hector Velazquez
Petaluma, California
President
National Puerto Rican Forum
Richard Simmons, Jr.
New York, New York
Director
Michigan Employment Security Commission
Sam Webster
Interlink Board of Directors
Detroit, Michigan
Texas Instruments
James P. Smith
Dallas, Texas
Program Director
John Calhoun Wells
70001 Training & Employment Institute
President
Indianapolis, Indiana
John Gray Institute
Beaumont, Texas
Robert Sorrell
President
William Wetsell
Philadelphia Urban League
Texas Instruments
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Dallas, Texas
Eugene Spitzer
A. William Wiggenhorn
Area Supervisor, Texas Program
Corporate Vice President and Director
Green Thumb, Inc.
of Education
Waco, Texas
Motorola, Inc.
Schaumburg, Illinois
Bob Stinson
Labor Representative
Joyce L. Winterton
Executive Director
Madison-Grant Private Industry Council
National Council on Vocational Education
Anderson, Indiana
Washington, DC
Letty D. Thall
Alan J. Zuckerman
Executive Director
Director of Public Affairs
Delaware Valley Child Care Council
OICs of America, Inc.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Washington, DC
52
INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS SUBMITTING
WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Jackie Abdullah
James Christie
Division of Unemployment Insurance
Governor's Office
Covington, Kentucky
State of West Virginia
Charleston, West Virginia
William Anderson
California Community College
Wisconsin Employer Committee
Madison, Wisconsin
Sacramento, California
Louis Coppola
Floyd Astin
Cyclops Corporation
Department of Employment Security
Mansfield, Ohio
Salt Lake City, Utah
John Coughlin
Robert E. Astrup
Department of Industry, Labor, and Human Relations
Minnesota Education Association
State of Wisconsin
St. Paul, Minnesota
Madison, Wisconsin
The Honorable Norman H. Bangerter
John Craft
Governor
School District of Philadelphia
State of Utah
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Salt Lake City, Utah
Richard DeCosmo
John Bartlett
Delaware County Community College
Department of Commerce
Media, Pennsylvania
State of Texas
Austin, Texas
Gus De La Torre
Personnel Management Association Aztlan
Bill Blackwell
Oakland, California
Arrow Aluminum Industries, Inc.
Charles Deppert
Martin, Tennessee
Indiana State AFL-CIO
James Byford
Indianapolis, Indiana
Kentucky Department of Education
The Honorable Edward D. DiPrete
Frankfort, Kentucky
Governor
State of Rhode Island
Bret Cahill
Providence, Rhode Island
Thonotosassa, Florida
Dorothy Dowker
Neil Carey
Michigan Employer Committee
National Career Development Association
Freeland, Michigan
Alexandria, Virginia
Dennis Erickson
Orville Carver
Schroeder Brothers Corporation
Pennsylvania Green Thumb, Inc.
Cumberland, Maryland
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
Paul Eustace
The Honorable Richard Celeste
Department of Labor
Governor
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
State of Ohio
Boston, Massachusetts
Columbus, Ohio
H. Dean Evans
Forrest Chisman
Department of Education
Southport Institute for Policy Analysis
State of Indiana
Washington, DC
Indianapolis, Indiana
53
Barbara Fallin
Joseph Hogan
Metric Systems Corporation
Community Civil Rights Worker and
Fort Walton Beach, Florida
U.S. Department of Labor (Retired)
Moraga, California
Fred Fox
Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry
Marion Holmes
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
School District of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
David Gamse
American Association of Retired Persons
Kathleen Hoyt
Washington, DC
Vermont Department of Employment and Training
Montpelier, Vermont
Paul Garcia
Department of Labor
Elizabeth Hurwitz-Schwab
State of New Mexico
The Schwab Company
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Cumberland, Maryland
The Honorable Terry Goddard
Bill Jamieson
Mayor
Arizona Department of Economic Security
City of Phoenix
Phoenix, Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Alan D. Johnson
Donald Grabowski
Indiana Department of Employment and Training
National Association of State and Territorial
Services
Apprenticeship Directors
Muncie, Indiana
Albany, New York
Stanley P. Jones
Pamela Grosvenor
Employment Security Department
Albuquerque Advisory Committee of Employers
State of Nevada
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Carson City, Nevada
Herbert Grover
John L. Jones
Department of Public Instruction
Connersville, Indiana
State of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin
Aurelia Jones-Smith
Governor's Office
Robert A. Guadagnino
State of Mississippi
Department of Labor
Jackson, Mississippi
State of New Jersey
Trenton, New Jersey
Karen Karkula
International Association of Personnel in Employment
Clinton Hamann
Security, Minnesota Chapter
San Diego Community College District
Minneapolis, Minnesota
San Diego, California
K. R. Kiddoo
William Hanigan
Employment Development Department
Ohio Job Service Employer Committee
State of California
Euclid, Ohio
Sacramento, California
Cheryl Herbaugh
Joy M. Korpela
First National Bank
Kreative Plastics, Inc.
Cumberland, Maryland
Frostburg, Maryland
Peter Hernandez
Carmela Lacayo
American Iron and Steel Institute
Asociacion Nacional Pro Personas Mayores
Washington, DC
Los Angeles, California
John Hodges
Gerald Lamkin
Ohio AFL-CIO
Indiana Vocational Technical College
Columbus, Ohio
Indianapolis, Indiana
54
Theodore Landsmark
Millie Minor
Mayor's Office of Jobs and Community Services
City of Niceville
Boston, Massachusetts
Niceville, Florida
The Honorable Greg Laughlin
Milan Moravec
U.S. House of Representatives
National Semiconductor Corporation
State of Texas
Santa Clara, California
Victoria, Texas
Charles J. Morris
Mary Lawing
School of Law
Virginia Employment Commission
Southern Methodist University
Chesapeake, Virginia
Dallas, Texas
William Lepley
Anne Mortenson
Department of Education
Eastern Virginia Medical School
State of Iowa
Norfolk, Virginia
Des Moines, Iowa
Austin J. Murphy
Betty J. Lockwood
Committee on Education and Labor
Minnesota Employer Committee
Washington, DC
Marshall, Minnesota
Colleen B. Nelson
S. R. McCann
Barton's Coffee House and Restaurant
International Brotherhood of
Pinto, Maryland
Electrical Workers
Walnut Creek, California
The Honorable William A. O'Neill
Governor
Mary McDonald
State of Connecticut
McDonald Plumbing Company, Inc.
Hartford, Connecticut
Fort Walton Beach, Florida
The Honorable Kay A. Orr
Dick McGowan
Governor
Alabama Job Service Employer Committee
State of Nebraska
Montgomery, Alabama
Lincoln, Nebraska
John McNulty
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Modine Manufacturing Company
U.S. House of Representatives
Racine, Wisconsin
State of California
Walter J. Makiej, Sr.
San Francisco, California
Lowell, Massachusetts
The Honorable Rudy Perpich
Kenneth Melley
Governor
National Education Association
State of Minnesota
Washington, DC
St. Paul, Minnesota
Hugo Menendez
Maryann Polaski
Florida Department of Labor and
International Association of Personnel in
Employment Security
Employment Security
Tallahassee, Florida
New Brunswick, New Jersey
The Honorable Bob Miller
Mario Ramil
Governor
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
State of Nevada
State of Hawaii
Carson City, Nevada
Honolulu, Hawaii
Kathy Millsap
Douglas Reid
Mayor's Youth Employment Program
Xerox Corporation
Orlando, Florida
Stamford, Connecticut
55
Suzan Repasky
J. E. Starnes
Victor Temporary Services
Shulton, Inc.
Winter Park, Florida
Memphis, Tennessee
Marilyn Rodgers
Robert D. Stokes
California Nurses Association
Villanova University
San Francisco, California
Villanova, Pennsylvania
Werner Rodgers
State Superintendent of Schools
Frank S. Swain
Atlanta, Georgia
U.S. Small Business Administration
Washington, DC
Patricia Sandmeyer
Kelly Tractor Company and
John D. Taylor
Florida Job Service Employer Committee
Illinois Department of Commerce and
Miami, Florida
Community Affairs
Springfield, Illinois
R. F. Schoch
Kelly Springfield Tire Company
Patrick Taylor
Cumberland, Maryland
Taylor Energy Company
Toni Scott
New Orleans, Louisiana
Cub Cadet Corporation and
Jeanne Van Vlandren
Job Service Employer Committee
Brownsville, Tennessee
Department of Labor and Industry
State of Vermont
Jack Sheinkman
Montpelier, Vermont
Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union,
AFL-CIO
Basil J. Whiting
New York, New York
Long Island Railroad
Jamaica, New York
Ray Siehndel
Department of Human Resources
Wisconsin Employer Committee
State of Kansas
Madison, Wisconsin
Topeka, Kansas
James Woodman
Albert Simmons
Texas Education Agency
Urban League of Madison County, Inc.
Austin, Texas
Anderson, Indiana
John Yoder
The Honorable George Sinner
Walter N. Yoder and Sons, Inc.
Governor
State of North Dakota
Cumberland, Maryland
Bismarck, North Dakota
Virginia Yueill
Rodo Sofranac
Department of Labor
Arizona Job Training Coordinating Council
State of Nebraska
Phoenix, Arizona
Lincoln, Nebraska
Jeffrey Sonnenfeld
Amicie Zimmerman
Harvard University
Home Health Care Management
Boston, Massachusetts
Wyomissing, Pennsylvania
56
APPENDIX 5: OUTREACH PROGRAM
The outreach program was an important component of the Commission's fact-finding process.
The program involved meetings between senior staff of the Commission and representatives of
major labor, business, education, employment and training, advocacy, research, and
community-based organizations to discuss the Commission's charge and to become aware of the
multitude of perspectives on the issues before us. The meetings were scheduled as an early
event on the Commission's calendar to assure that our recommendations benefited from the
extensive knowledge and experience of these organizations.
The organizations with whom we met generously shared data, research results, insights, and
ideas. The Commission gratefully acknowledges the contributions of these organizations and
their representatives.
Advocacy, Research, and Information
Business
Karen J. Baehler
Douglas E. Adair
Director
Executive Vice President
Social and Economic Programs
Council on Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional
Education
Roosevelt Center for American Policy Studies
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
Edward J. Burkeen
William A. Bealtz
AISI Fellow
President
American Iron and Steel Institute
Bureau of National Affairs
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
Willis Goldbeck
Forrest Chisman
President
Director
Washington Business Group on Health
Project on Adult Literacy
Washington, DC
Southport Institute for Policy Analysis
Fred Krebs
Southport, Connecticut
Executive Director
Horace B. Deets
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Executive Director
Washington, DC
American Association of Retired Persons
Susan F. Mills
Washington, DC
Director
Research and Information Services
Catherine Morrison
National Restaurant Association
Director
Washington, DC
Public Policy Studies
The Conference Board
Lewis Sears, Jr.
Washington, DC
TRW, Inc.
Vice President of the National Association of
Dallas L. Salisbury
Manufacturers
President
Committee on Employment, Training and Dislocation
Employee Benefit Research Institute
Representing the National Association of
Washington, DC
Manufacturers
Washington, DC
57
Community-based Organizations
Education
Carl A. Gee
Gordon Ambach
Executive Director
Executive Director
OIC of Greater Milwaukee
Council of Chief State School Officers
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Washington, DC
Duke Hamilton
Madeleine B. Hemmings
President
Executive Director
Twin Cities OIC, Inc.
National Association of State Directors of Vocational
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Education
The Reverend William Harris
Washington, DC
Executive Director
Frank Mensel
OIC of Atlanta
Director of Federal Relations
Atlanta, Georgia
American Association of Community and Junior
Elton Jolly
Colleges
President and Chief Executive Officer
Washington, DC
Opportunities Industrialization Centers of America
Thomas Shannon
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Executive Director
Frank Lomax, III
National School Boards Association
Executive Vice President
Alexandria, Virginia
National Urban League
New York, New York
Scott Thompson
Executive Director
Cynthia Marano
National Association of Secondary School Principals
Executive Director
Reston, Virginia
Wider Opportunities for Women
Washington, DC
Richard A. Ungerer
Executive Director
Fannie Munlin
National Institute for Work and Learning
Executive Director
Washington, DC
National Council of Negro Women
New York, New York
Gary D. Watts
Assistant Executive Director for Professional and
Hector Velazquez
Organizational Development
President and Chief Executive Officer
National Education Association
National Puerto Rican Forum
Washington, DC
New York, New York
Lyndon A. Wade
John Wherry
Executive Director
President
National School Public Relations Association
Atlanta Urban League, Inc.
Atlanta, Georgia
Arlington, Virginia
Ernie Wilhoit
Gene Wilhoit
President, Board of Directors
Executive Director
Teen Life Center
National Association of State Boards of Education
Stamford, Connecticut
Alexandria, Virginia
Alan J. Zuckerman
Joyce L. Winterton
Director of Public Affairs
Executive Director
OICs of America, Inc.
National Council on Vocational Education
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
58
Employment and Training
Raymond C. Scheppach
Executive Director
Martin Jensen
National Governors Association
Executive Director
Washington, DC
National Job Training Partnership, Inc.
Washington, DC
Frank Swain
Chief Counsel for Advocacy
Robert Knight
U.S. Small Business Administration
President
National Association of Private Industry Councils
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
John Thomas
Kenneth M. Smith
Executive Director
President
National Association of Counties
Jobs for America's Graduates
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
Kathleen Utgoff
Government
Former Executive Director
Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation
Alan Beals
Executive Director
Washington, DC
National League of Cities
Winifred I. Warnat
Washington, DC
Director of Vocational-Technical Education
Helen Burstyn
Office of Vocational and Adult Education
Deputy Secretary
U.S. Department of Education
Premier's Council
Washington, DC
Ontario, Canada
Labor
Paul V. Hippolitus
Director
Michael G. McMillan
Plans, Projects, and Services
Executive Director
President's Committee on Employment of People with
Human Resources Development Institute
Disabilities
AFL-CIO
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
G. Pisarzowski
Rudy Oswald
Senior Policy Advisor
Director of the Economic Research Department
Premier's Council
AFL-CIO
Ontario, Canada
Washington, DC
Richard Q. Praeger
Executive Vice President
Dorothy Shields
Interstate Conference of Employment Security
Director of the Education Department
Agencies
AFL-CIO
Washington, DC
Washington, DC
59
APPENDIX 6: COMMISSION STAFF
David L. Crawford Executive Director
Laurie J. Bassi Deputy Director
James F. Taylor Associate Director
John R. Beverly, III
John P. Giraudo
Suzanne A. Brown
Michael W. Horrigan
H. Peter Cappelli
Nevzer G. Stacey
John D. Carter
Tommy M. Tomlinson
Amy B. Chasanov
Nancy Zurich
Nancy Duhon
The Commission gratefully acknowledges the outstanding contributions of its staff, who
labored alongside us during the course of the past year. Under the able leadership of David
Crawford and Laurie Bassi, this diverse and accomplished staff made our work both effective
and enjoyable.
We thank the U.S. Department of Education for contributing the efforts of Tommy Tomlinson
and Nevzer Stacey. We also thank the IBM Corporation for lending us the expertise of Jack
Carter. Finally, we acknowledge the cooperation and support we received from the U.S.
Department of Labor.
60
ORDERING INFORMATION
To order additional copies of this report, Investing in People: A Strategy to Address America's
Workforce Crisis (stock number 029-000-00428-5), you can call the Superintendent of
Documents Order Desk at (202) 783-3238 or FAX your order to (202) 275-0019. Please identify
the book by title and stock number. Prepayment is required; Visa and MasterCard are
accepted. You can also write to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC 20402-9328, to request price information.
61
Commission on Workforce Quality and
Labor Market Efficiency
U.S. Department of Labor
Washington, DC 20210