11 Million Open Jobs! 2 Jobs for Every Applicant

Available Positions

Industry2007 Pos2019 Pos2022 PosAdds
Govt12.212.511.8-.4
Other5.45.95.6.2
Construct7.77.57.6-.1
Manufacturing14.212.812.7-1.5
Mining.7.7.6-.1
Logistics5.06.16.91.9
Education3.03.83.7.7
Health15.320.320.45.1
Leisure13.316.515.11.8
State/Local Educn10.210.410.20
Finance8.48.78.9.5
Information3.02.82.9-.1
Profl Svcs17.820.921.84.0
Retail15.715.615.8.1
Wholesale5.95.85.8-.1
Total137.8150.3149.812.0
https://www.bls.gov/jlt/

Industry2007 Open2019 Open2022 OpenMore Open
Government.3.5.7.4
Other.2.2.4.3
Construction.2.3.4.2
Manufacturing.3.5.9.5
Mining0000
Logistics.1.3.5.4
Education.1.1.2.1
Health.71.21.91.2
Leisure.61.01.61.0
State/Local Ed.1.2.3.2
Finance.3.4.5.2
IT.1.1.2.1
Profl Svcs.91.32.01.2
Retail.5.91.10,6
Wholesale.2.2.3.1
Total3.67.111.26.6
https://www.bls.gov/jlt/

Open Positions as a Percent of Jobs Available

Industry2007 Rate2019 Rate2022 Rate
Government2.43.65.4
Other3.14.07.3
Construction2.23.84.8
Manufacturing2.33.46.4
Mining2.13.85.6
Logistics2.74.87.4
Education Svcs2.42.94.9
Health4.35.48.6
Leisure4.35.79.8
State/Local Ed1.32.03.2
Finance3.54.25.4
IT4.64.76.7
Profl Svcs4.85.78.6
Retail3.05.26.4
Wholesale2.93.55.0
Total3.34.57.0
https://www.bls.gov/jlt/

Open Positions by Industry, 2021-22

The Department of Labor’s monthly survey provides various measures by industry. I’ve broken down the data into 15 industry segments. Eight (8) of these segments account for 5/6ths of all positions and I’ll focus on these 8.

The number of open jobs in the last year, July, 2021 – July 2022, is lead by Professional Services (2.0), Health (1.9), Leisure (1.6), Retail (1.1), Manufacturing (0.9), Government (0.7), Logistics (0.5) and Finance (0.5).

Seven industries accounted for 5/6ths of the increase from 4.6M openings in 2006-7 to 11.2M open jobs today. Health (1.2), Profl Svcs (1.2), Leisure (1.0), Retail (0.6), Manufacturing (0.5), Government (0.4) and Logistics (0.4) are the open job gainers.

The pre-pandemic increase averaged 40% of the total 15-year increase for most industries. The Manufacturing industry showed job declines between 2006 and before the Pandemic, so 80% of it’s openings increase has been since the pre-Pandemic peak. The Business and Professional Services industry has also grown faster since the Pandemic, with 68% of its job growth in recent years. The Retail industry shows an opposite pattern, with 60% of it’s job growth before the Pandemic and a relatively weaker 40% post-Pandemic (on-line sales growth impact).

Total Positions Available by Industry

Total positions increased by 12M, from 138M in 2006-7 to 150M in the last year. Just 4 industries account for all of the growth, lead by Health (5.1), Profl Svcs (4.0), Logistics (1.9) and Leisure/Hospitality (1.8). The migration from ag/extraction to manufacturing to pure services is accelerating.

Open Positions Rate by Industry

The open positions rate more than doubled, from 3.3% in 2006-7 to 4.5% in 2018-19 to 7.0% in the last year. Unfortunately, the larger and growing industry sectors have above average open position rates. Leisure and hospitality shows an incredible/unsustainable 9.8% job openings rate. Professional and business services and Health Care report nearly as high 8.6% vacancy rates. The Logistics industry has a higher than usual rate of 7.4% as it adds jobs at a faster rate in the home delivery era. The Retail and Manufacturing industries show elevated 6.4% open jobs rates. The Government and Finance industries exhibit 5.4% openings rates.

Changes in the Job Openings Rate

The overall job openings rate more than doubled from 2006-7 to the last year, from 3.3% to 7.0%. Keep in mind that 2006-7 was the peak of that business cycle with job openings at a cyclical low point. The Leisure and Hospitality industry had the largest increase, from its usually relatively high 4.3% to an “other worldly” 9.8%. The pandemic drove down travel and it has slowly recovered. The Logistics industry displayed the second highest increase, from 2.7% (it’s usual Manufacturing-like rate) to 7.4% as the Pandemic drove individual shipments to consumers. The Health Care industry continued its labor intensive growth, doubling from 4.3% to 8.6% of open positions. The Manufacturing industry evolved from its usual low 2.3% all the way up to 6.4% as labor demand in other industries grew and attracted its workers. The Professional and Business Services industry kept growing, resulting in a 3.8% increase in unfilled roles, from a typically high 4.8% to a very high 8.6%. The Retail and Government sectors had lower increases at 3%. The Finance sector had a lower than average 2% increase in open jobs.

Just a “Mix” Variance?

The US economy is very dynamic. Industries with low, medium and high job openings rates in 2006-7 each employed about 45M people. The low job openings rate industries (Govt, Manufacturing, Mining, and Educn Svcs) actually LOST 1.4M positions between 2007 and 2022. The middle rate of job openings industries (Logistics, finance, trade, other) added 2.6% net new jobs (1.7M). The high job openings rate industries (Health, Leisure, IT and Profl/Bus Svcs) added an incredible 10.8M jobs (22%)! The US has moved from agriculture to extractive to manufacturing to services employment. The personal and professional services industries are both the fastest growing and the most difficult to staff today.

What Happens During a Mild Recession?

Business and Professional Services openings drop by 3% of the total or 600K people. Health industry jobs decline by a smaller 1% as they are less sensitive to the business cycle, falling by 100K. Leisure and Hospitality are very understaffed and this is harming their growth. They might trim their employment by 2% or 300K positions. The Retail industry is in a long-run decline, so a 2% decline is likely, eliminating 300K jobs. Manufacturing is more cyclical than other industries, so its labor demand will fall more sharply, 3%, removing 400K job postings. The Government sector is somewhat buffered from recession pressures, so job openings might fall just 1% or 100K. Logistics firms are struggling to deliver, so a 2% job decline is the most I see, cutting another 100K positions. The Finance sector has been less volatile, so I estimate a 1% decline and 100K dip.. The remaining industries are likely to fall in tandem, requiring an additional 400K open jobs decline to meet budgets. This total 2.4M open position trim reduces the balance to 8.8M, far above the 7.1M pre-Pandemic level in 2018-19. I don’t think that the labor market will play its usual role in transmitting/amplifying negative finance, banking, housing, international trade, energy and other disruptions through the American economy.

Summary

The US economy was at “full employment” in 2006-7 with just 4.6M unfilled positions. The extended recovery after the Great Recession delivered an even lower unemployment rate, but it also delivered a much increased 7.1M open positions. The post-Pandemic economy has returned to an amazing 3.5% unemployment rate, but the unfilled position count has climbed to a much higher 11.2M and stayed there. The current 7% vacancy rate is largely driven by 6 of the 15 industries with the highest rates: Leisure (9.8%), Health (8.6%), Profl Svcs (8.6%), Logistics (7.4%), Manufacturing (6.4%) and Retail (6.4%). American business is slowly learning to manage with a tight labor very market. Demand for labor should fall significantly in the future as firms employ greater technology, processes, capital goods and imports.

NOT.

US Labor Market: Just Like Living in Paradise

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CE16OV

US labor force employment grows and grows. 60M employed in the very glorious 1950’s. 80M by the end of the dynamic 1960’s. 100M by the end of the transforming 1970’s. 120M by the end of the conforming 1980’s. Not quite 140M by the turn of the millennium (2M shy). Just 140M at the end of the “oughts” decade. 158M before the pandemic, resuming the 20M new jobs per decade record of the sixties, seventies, eighties and nineties in the teens decade.

That is 100 million net new jobs added in my lifetime. 160M, up from 60M.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS

We have two sources, a payroll survey and a household survey. They both tell the same story.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS

A once in a century pandemic? No problem. 27 months later, total employment has been recovered, despite a 20M worker decline! Set aside politics. This is an amazing result for the US labor market, businesses and citizens.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/05/business/jobs-report-july-economy

US economy continues to add about 400,000 jobs each month. This is almost 5M jobs per year, more than twice as fast as the usual 2M jobs per year in recent history.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU01300060

The labor force participation rate for prime aged individuals (25-54) increased from 65% to 84% between 1950 and 1990 as women were accepted into the labor force. 84% was maintained for a decade and 83% for the next decade. The teens decade saw a decline to 81%. The market has remained in the 81-82% participation rate range.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSHIL

New hires averaged 5M per month in the slower growth “oughts”. New hires dropped further to just 4M per month after the Great Recession. New hires slowly built up to a new record level of 6M per month before the pandemic arrived. The pandemic had just a minor impact on new hires, with a record 6.5M new employees being hired each month in late 2021 and 2022.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSQUR

Voluntary quits averaged 2%, 1 in 50 employees, during the first decade of the 21st century. Quits dropped sharply to just 1.4%, just 1 in 70 employees, in the 3 years afterwards. The quit rate slowly returned to “normal” by 2016 and climbed further to 2.3% as the economic recovery continued for a full decade.

By October, 2021 quits had returned to the solid pre-pandemic rate of 2.3%. The quit rate jumped up to 2.8% by April, 2021 and has remained at this historically high rate.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSJOL

Job openings averaged 4M before the Great Recession. They dropped below 3M during 2009-13. They increased to 5M in 2014 and to 6M by 2016. They remained at the 6M level during 2017, before climbing to 7M for 2018-19. By Jan, 2021 job openings had recovered to 7.2M. By October, job openings had increased to a historic 11M and have remained at this unprecedented level.

This is a greater than 50% increase in open positions since before the pandemic, just 29 months ago. This is 120% more than the peak level before the Great Recession.

Most Important Measure

Profit maximizing businesses, managers and HR departments work through internal processes to list/post a job opening only when:

  1. It’s within the annual financial and headcount budget.
  2. Hiring managers conclude that current staff are unable to serve current demands from internal and external customers.
  3. Hiring managers and financial analysts believe that the incremental hired employees will generate incremental measurable profits.
  4. Hiring managers believe that they can hire new staff using existing processes to fill well defined positions.
  5. Hiring managers believe that it is worth their time to go through the firm’s hiring process.
  6. Hiring managers cannot find an “adequate” labor source through stretching existing staff or using temporary, contract, supplier or agent work forces.

11M job openings means that firms believe that they can generate material incremental profits by hiring up to 11M new employees.

https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/unemp-per-job-opening.htm

11M open jobs is a startling number, but the ratio of unemployed persons to open positions is much more important. The Great Recession created a 6 applicants per job market. This declined to 2:1 in 2014. During the historic extended expansion it declined to just below 1:1, an unprecedented low number. The ratio fell below 1:1 in 2021 to the current 0.5 level. Two open positions for every unemployed job seeker.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

Unemployment was quickly driven to the pre-pandemic record low of 3.5% this summer. Unemployment was below its usual minimum of 5% for 5 years just before the pandemic, leading most economists to recalibrate the “non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment” (NAIRU) down to 4% or slightly below. This is a very efficient labor market.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q#

Real (inflation-adjusted) wages have reflected this labor market situation. They remained at the $335/week level from 2000 through 2014, reflecting the slow growth of employment and GDP. Wages began to raise in real terms in 2015, reaching $360 by 2019, a 7.5% real increase. Wages were growing rapidly just before the pandemic and climbed to $390/week in the second quarter of 2020, an additional 8% increase in a few months. Real wages have since declined back to the $360 per week level as high inflation has offset higher than usual nominal wage increases. Firms have chosen to live with 11 million open positions rather than increase real wages.

Summary

Firms have 11M open positions that they believe will help them to make greater profits. Real wages are the same as they were just before the pandemic started. Firms have chosen to not increase hiring and regular wages any faster because they judge that this will cost them more profits than allowing 11M positions to remain unfilled. This is the first time in at least 50 years that firms have had to manage a labor market where employees and applicants have some market power. Despite this “standoff” in the labor market, total employment is back to the pre-pandemic level, firms are hiring record numbers of employees and labor force participation is recovering towards the pre-pandemic level, which was at a 10-year high. The overall economy has clearly slowed its growth rate to near zero, but the labor market remains in a very positive state for workers.

Good News: Black Labor Force Participation Exceeds National Average, First Time in 50 Years

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-03/black-americans-lead-recovery-in-may-labor-force-participation#xj4y7vzkg
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2022/06/17/three-questions-for-the-labor-markets-near-future/

African-American men and women have increased participation rates quickly since the depths of the pandemic.

https://www.epi.org/indicators/unemployment/
https://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab2.htm

The African-American employment to population ratio has been increasing through time, closing a 5 point gap to just 2 points before the pandemic, and squeezing it to less than 1 point most recently.

Context Since March, 1990 Peak Overall Rate

4 point decline before the pandemic. 1.5% pandemic hit. Almost 50% recovery.

3 point decline for prime age workforce, but 2 point improvement at the end of the prior economic recovery period. 2 point pandemic hit. More than 3/4ths recovered.

6 point slide before pandemic. 1.5 point pandemic hit. Perhaps 1/3rd recovered.

Up 3 points. Down 3 points. Up 3 points. Down 2 points. 80% recovered.

Context: History and Trends Through 2015+ Were Negative or Unclear for African-American LFP

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/frbp/assets/economy/articles/economic-insights/2017/q4/eiq417.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2018/blacks-in-the-labor-force/pdf/blacks-in-the-labor-force.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf

Challenges Make Black LFP Rate Improvement Even Better News

https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/newsroom-and-events/publications/economic-commentary/2021-economic-commentaries/ec-202123-whats-holding-back-employment-in-the-recovery-from-the-covid19-pandemic.aspx
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf
https://www.epi.org/indicators/unemployment/

Historically high concentrations of Black workers were hard hit by the pandemic.

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf
https://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0255_poverty_by_race

Positive Factors Supporting the Increase

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2018/blacks-in-the-labor-force/pdf/blacks-in-the-labor-force.pdf

Size, growth and share all matter. Black workers may have quietly reached a “critical mass” where they face less obstacles and benefit from more positive network effects.

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2018/blacks-in-the-labor-force/pdf/blacks-in-the-labor-force.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2018/blacks-in-the-labor-force/pdf/blacks-in-the-labor-force.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf

A history of higher than average labor force participation by those with some college education and a growing share of people in that category.

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf

Black men have worked full-time schedules about the same as all men, while Black women have worked full-time more often than other women.

Context: The Labor Market

Real wages are up for African-Americans.

From 1975-97, African-American unemployment rates were 10% or higher. They briefly found the 7-8% level at the end of the Clinton presidency/expansion. They popped back up to 10% and recovered to about 8% before the “Great Recession”. They jumped up to 17% and then slowly declined to 10% by 2015. The extended recovery brought them down below 7% in 2018 and to a record low of less than 6%, briefly during 2018-19. The pandemic flirted with 17% rates once again. Instead of taking a decade to recover, unemployment rates have recovered in 2 years.

https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2020/african-american-history-month/pdf/african-american-history-month.pdf
https://www.epi.org/indicators/unemployment/

Black unemployment continues to be higher than other groups, but the gap is smaller than it once was.

References: Many Challenges Remain for African-Americans in the US Labor Market.

https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/newsroom-and-events/publications/economic-commentary/2021-economic-commentaries/ec-202123-whats-holding-back-employment-in-the-recovery-from-the-covid19-pandemic.aspx

https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/race-in-the-workplace-the-black-experience-in-the-us-private-sector

Good News: Increased Labor Force Participation

For each comparison, I’ll focus on the pre-pandemic Feb, 2020 numbers, the effective bottom rate in Jun/Jul, 2020 and today’s rate at May, 2022, about 2 years later.

The overall labor force participation rate dropped by 2 points from 63.4% to 61.4% and has recovered about half-way to 62.3%.

While many hope for a faster recovery, this 1% increase in 2 years is faster than from prior recessions. It is also taking place in the context of a long-term decline from 2000 to 2015, followed by a plateau and a bit of an increase in 2019 as the recovery from the “Great Recession” moved into a record length with record low unemployment.

The Hispanic rate generally followed the overall rate since 2000. However, the rate increased by a full 2 points in 2019. Hispanic labor force participation encountered a larger drop of almost 3 points, but has recovered one-half of the decline.

The Asian LFP rate follows the same general decline and flattening, with a somewhat higher rate in 2018-19 than the minimums from 2014-16. It dropped a little less than the overall average during the pandemic, by 1.7% and has fully recovered to the pre-pandemic level!

Black Americans showed the same general decline after 2000 to a minimum of 63% in 2015, with a significant and maintained increase to 64% in 2016 and a further 1% increase in 2019. Black labor force participation fell by a little more than 3 points to just 60%. It quickly added 1 point and in the last 6 months has added 2 more points, returning to its pre-pandemic 11 year high!

The White rate followed the overall pattern, but remained at the 63% plateau through the middle of 2019 before inching up by one-half percent. The participation rate was 1.8% lower in Jun/Jul, 2020. It did not change materially through the 3rd quarter of 2021, and has since added 0.4%. The White rate has recovered only 30% of the lost participation rate.

Women had added about one point of participation between 2016 and the beginning of 2020. Their participation declined a little less than men, at 1.8%. Women were slow to return to the work force during 2021, but have now closed one-half of the gap.

The Male participation rate remained flat from 2014 through the end of 2019. Note that male participation has been declining for 70 years. 2.1% of men left the labor force by Jun/Jul, 2020. The return during 2020-2021 was slow. The more recent increase has 40% of the absent men returned to the workforce.

Black men did not see a major participation rate increase in 2019. They experienced a 2.6% decline from the pandemic, followed by a 1% increase in the next year and a dramatic improvement in 2022 to a participation rate above the pre-pandemic level.

About 1.5% of Black Women were attracted into the labor force in 2019. Their pandemic decline was a very high 3.9%. They have added 2.7% of participation, so are about 3/4ths recovered.

Hispanic men did not show a clear participation increase in 2019. Their rate fell by a large 2.8% in the pandemic. It has rebounded by 2%, so is about 2/3rds recovered.

An additional 3% of Hispanic women entered the labor force during 2018-19. Their participation rate fell by 3.3% and remained low through the third quarter of 2021. It has grown by less than 1%, leaving it at a one-fourth recovery level.

White men did not increase their engagement during 2019 and recorded a 1.8% participation decline. There has been no significant recovery at this date.

Looking at the long-term trend, it may be that the 2015-19 rates were just a “pause” in the long-term decline. This topic warrants a separate article.

A smaller percentage of White women were drawn into the labor force during 2019, less than 1%. Their participation rate declined by 1.4% by Jun/Jul, 2020 and by 2% total in mid-2021 before beginning to recover. They have recovered by one-fourth to one-third of their decline.

Teenagers were least impacted by the pandemic, returning to prior work levels in less than a year.

College age young adults added almost 2 points of participation during 2018-19. They dropped a stunning 5.3% during the pandemic. They have recovered a solid 2.8%, so are a little more than 50% back.

The 55 and older group didn’t add many workers in 2019. Their participation declined by 1.1% and then by 1.7% total during 2021. They have recovered about one-third of the maximum decline.

The prime age (25-54) work force participation rate dropped 3 points, from 84% to 81%, between 2000 and 2015 in periods often decried as “jobless recoveries”. This group added 2 points of participation during 2016-19 as the recovery was extended, jobs added and unemployment reduced to record lows. Participation dropped by 2.1% in the pandemic. It has recovered 1.5%, so it is about three-fourths back to the elevated pre-pandemic level. The monthly increase rate looks very solid.

Prime age men added almost 1% of participation from 2016-2019 before losing 1.5% in the pandemic. They have added 1 point of participation, so are two-thirds recovered.

Prime age women added almost 3 points of participation from 2016-19, but experienced a 1.7% reduction during the pandemic. They have added 1.4% to their participation rate, reaching 80% of total recovery to the high pre-pandemic level.

https://www.epi.org/indicators/unemployment/

The even simpler ratio of employment to population shows a near total recovery in the prime age population. The steepness of the curve indicates that this will continue, at least in the short-run, even though the peak ratio was only 80.2%, 80.2% and 80.5% in 3 prior economic expansions. In 1999, the recent record was 81.9%.

Summary

From 2000 to 2015, the overall, male and white-male labor force participation rates declined by 4%, 5.5% and 5%. These rates bottomed out from 2016-18, with small increases in 2019. The recovery from the pandemic is fighting long-term trends that result in lower labor force participation (lower and later marriages, declining/flat pay for lower-skilled workers, increased disability claims, increased criminal, drug and alcohol records, social acceptance of not working, electronic entertainment options, etc.). Minority groups saw stronger 1-2% participation rate increases in the last years before the pandemic.

Hispanics, Blacks, teens and college students experienced pandemic dropout rates much higher than the 2% average from Feb, 2020 to Jun/Jul, 2020.

Overall, one-half of the decline has been recovered, but there are significant differences among the groups. Adults 55+ have remained close to their reduced rates. White men (a big share of the labor force) have made little progress returning to the labor force. Less than one-fourth of Hispanic women have returned. Two-thirds of the Hispanic male decline has been recovered. Three-fourths of the Black female gap has been closed. Teen participation has recovered (90%). Asian participation has fully recovered. Black male participation is above the pre-pandemic level.

The prime age group (25-54) has regained 1.5% of its 2.1% decline and the recovery trend looks solid in spite of the slower recovery groups.

Labor force participation has not increased quickly in prior periods. Based on the significant increases in the last 6-months, a continued increase in the participation rate through the end of the year is likely. I estimate that the pre-pandemic participation rate of 63.4% will be reached in the 1st quarter of 2023.

Good News: Widespread 2% Unemployment Rates

14 States Are Currently Below 3%

North Dakota, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kansas, South Dakota, Minnesota and Nebraska form a low unemployment core in the Great Plains area. Utah, Idaho and Montana represent the Rocky Mountains. Vermont and New Hampshire lead in New England. Alabama leads the South, while Indiana leads the Midwest.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm

22 Metro Areas with 1M+ Population (of 51) Enjoy Unemployment Rates Under 3%

https://www.bls.gov/web/metro/laulrgma.htm

Large and Small Metro Areas Have Many Low Unemployment Areas

https://www.bls.gov/web/metro/laummtrk.htm

Low Unemployment Rates in US History

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

May, 1953: 2.5%

Feb, 1968 – Dec, 1969: 3.5-3.8%

Oct, 2000: 3.9%

Dec, 2006: 4.4%

Jan, 2016: 4.8% through Feb, 2020: 3.5%. 4 years “below full employment”.

Estimates of Natural (Non-accelerating Inflation) Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU) Have Been Biased Upwards and Influenced by One Period of High Inflation and Supply Chain Disruptions

https://www.chmura.com/blog/2019/july/19/how-low-can-the-unemployment-rate-goauthormikechmura

In retrospect, the period before 1976 (oil, trade, inflation shocks) should have used a 4.5% NAIRU for policy decisions. The jump to 6% in the late 70’s and early 80’s is supported by history. The NAIRU was deemed to be 5% or higher as late as 2010, but could have been pegged lower. Based on the lack of inflation during the teens, the rate probably should have been set at 4% or lower.

Macroeconomic Theory

Classical economics asserted that labor markets will naturally find equilibrium wages and quantities of labor employed at the individual labor market (micro) and total economy level. The Keynesian view, embraced by 90% of professional economists, is that there are market imperfections at both the individual market level and total economy level. Most importantly, wages are “sticky downwards”. Currently employed workers resist “losing” wages by accepting pay cuts when demand is lower. Aggregate supply (production) does not automatically create an equal amount of aggregate demand in the short-run, as businesses, individuals, banks and governments often choose to save more during economic downturns or periods of greater risk. Hence, a downturn in the economy caused by any source may result in a prolonged negative spiral, rather than automatically delivering lower prices in product, money and labor markets, which could help to recover these markets.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/09/22/how-low-can-unemployment-go

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/09/22/how-low-can-unemployment-go

Microeconomic Theory: Why is There Any Unemployment?

Economists point to frictional and structural factors. Frictional unemployment occurs because labor market information and decisions are not perfect and instantaneous. As with other markets: housing, commercial real estate, offices, bank loans, farm fields, airport gates, container ships, utilities, R&D, IPO’s, private equity, M&A, retail inventories, etc, labor markets are imperfect. It takes time for equilibrium to be found. Given the increased concentration of labor in major metropolitan markets and internet-based recruiting systems, frictional unemployment has decreased in the last 20-30 years.

Structural unemployment occurs because of mismatches between the current skills possessed and skills demanded in a given place or due to legal or regulatory limitations. Binding minimum wages have been a smaller factor in the last 40 years but may have greater impact in the future. Regulatory requirements for professional licensing have increased significantly in the last 50 years (with some “liberalization” seen in recent years), slowing the ability for individuals to move between professions.

The overall labor force participation rate increased for many years as women entered the workforce, but has declined significantly in the last 20 years for men and for women. I’ll provide a detailed analysis of these factors next week. For our purposes, focusing on short-term changes, recent history shows that the labor force participation rate can be 1-2% higher overall. Some workers have not returned from the pandemic challenges. Some early retirees may return to the labor force. Teens and college students may join the labor force at recent wage rates. Marginal groups (elderly, long-term unemployed, handicapped, drug/alcohol recovery, crime history, minorities, limited language skills, inexperienced) may be considered for more positions.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU01300060

The media tends to emphasize the increased specialization and technical content required for modern jobs. This has resulted in greater structural unemployment, especially among lower-skilled individuals who held and lost manufacturing jobs between 1970-2000. It has also reduced movement between industries which require a core base of knowledge to be effective, with health care being a prime example.

On the other hand, modern corporations that worked through a dozen post-WW II business cycles eventually adapting to the “business cycle”. First, based on Japanese manufacturing, TQM or lean six sigma manufacturing principles, they reduced their operating leverage. Companies devised factories, offices, distribution centers, product lines and national businesses that could be equally profitable from 70-95% of capacity, rather than 85-95% of capacity. Second, they reduced their unavoidable “fixed costs” by importing goods, outsourcing business functions (manufacturing, IT, accounting, legal, marketing, distribution, sales, R&D) and employing temporary labor. Third, businesses systematized their processes so that core production processes could be operated by individuals with limited specialized or tribal knowledge, including managers and support staff. Fourth, businesses increasingly used matrix and project structures to effectively redeploy staff to any areas of need. So, while variable production staff is a smaller share of employment, the remaining “fixed cost” support staff can be more flexibly deployed. Fifth, after 40 years of process re-engineering, data warehouses, activity based costing and balanced scorecard reporting, companies deeply understand variable costs and incremental benefits driven by sales, production, product lines, facilities, territories and projects. “Knee-jerk” reactions to business cycle downturns are less common as firms better understand short-term incremental profits and medium-term costs of hiring and training. Sixth, firms have improved their ability to define “critical success factors” for every position. This has eliminated many irrelevant experience, degree, culture, personality and other factors from hiring screens. Seventh, firms have increasingly rotated staff through line and staff roles, allowing talented individuals to move between these roles and function effectively. Eighth, firms are more strategically oriented, growing profitable product lines and territories and dropping or “selling off” marginal channels. This means that the incremental positive value of most positions persists, even in an economic downturn.

Overall, firms have learned their “applied intermediate microeconomics” and clearly defined the marginal benefits and costs of every position. They understand exactly what incremental profit can be delivered from each position. Hence, the demand for labor services is significantly greater than it was historically, including through the downside of the business cycle. That means that the natural unemployment level is lower than in the past. Firms can profitably put more people to work than ever before.

Economists, Forecasters and Pundits are Reluctant to Predict Unemployment Below 3% Because it Was Rare Historically.

https://www.reuters.com/business/feds-bullard-says-unemployment-rate-can-go-below-3-this-year-2022-02-01/

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/09/22/how-low-can-unemployment-go

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/15/economy/unemployment-rate-goldman-sachs/index.html

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14424.htm

https://theweek.com/articles/696915/how-low-unemployment

Lobbyists, Journalists, Politicians and Analysts Highlight the Downsides to “Very Low” Unemployment

From a firm’s perspective, a low unemployment labor market causes increased recruiting, hiring and training costs. It results in less well-matched staff to job roles resulting in lower initial productivity. Companies might even, aghast, inadvertently hire some staff with marginally negative profit results. Hence, very low unemployment rates will increase labor costs, reduce profits, reduce demand for labor and possibly bankrupt previously functional firms.

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/downside-low-unemployment/

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/32-unemployment.htm

https://www.uschamber.com/economy/the-divide-between-job-openings-and-willing-workers-widens

https://www.umassglobal.edu/news-and-events/blog/low-unemployment-rates

Trade-off Between Unemployment and Inflation: The Phillips Curve

In the 1970’s fight between Keynesians and Monetarists/Classical Economists/Rational Expectations teams, the Keynesians emphasized the historical existence of a short-term trade-off between unemployment and inflation, especially when unemployment was very low due to a high level of aggregate demand. The conservative side noted that the historical data was inconsistent. The “rational expectations” camp emphasized that unexpected increases in inflation would lead to increased wage demands by labor. In the long-run, there is no such thing as a “free lunch”, so effective real wages would return to the level determined by the “marginal productivity of labor”. Based on recent data (pre-pandemic), it appears that the US economy can run at 3.5-4.0% unemployment without triggering significant upward wage pressures. In the post-pandemic world, the “natural” unemployment rate (NAIRU) is unclear. The labor supply has basically recovered to the pre-pandemic level. Wages are up 5% in nominal terms but are down 2% in real terms (see below).

There are Many Unemployment Measures. They Move Together.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/18/what-does-the-unemployment-rate-measure/
https://www.richmondfed.org/research/national_economy/non_employment_index

Labor Market Slack

In a period of healthy economic growth, the economy is constrained by the limited availability of labor as an input to drive the economic engine.

https://www.richmondfed.org/research/national_economy/non_employment_index

Underemployed individuals provide the logical next best full-time employees. The current slack measure is 3.5%, (7.1% – 3.6%) on the low side, but not so low that conversions from this underemployed group to full-time employment cannot be expected.

Real Wage Rates in a Growing Economy

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000003
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPIAUCSL

Jun, 2020 – Jun 2022. Nominal wages up 4.7%/year. CPI up 6.1%. 1.4% real wage decrease.

Dec, 2020 – Dec, 2021. Nominal wages up 4.9%. CPI up 7.3%. 2.4% real wage decrease.

May, 2021 – May, 2022. Nominal wages up 5.2%. CPI up 7.9%. 2.7% real wage decrease.

Nominal wage rates have increased by 5% annually in a period of 7% inflation. Employers have been able to economically justify these increases while adding 7 million people to the labor force.

Beveridge Curve: Job Openings Versus Unemployment Rate.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20140513.htm

https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/economic_brief/2021/eb_21-36

Historically, there was a well-defined relationship between the national level of job openings as a percent of the labor force and the unemployment rate. Job openings were a low 2-2.5% of the labor force at the beginning of the business cycle, accompanied by higher (6-10%) unemployment, but improved to 4% openings and 4% unemployment. The current labor market has far more job openings, up to 11 million, almost twice as many job openings as unemployed workers, but the unemployment rate has only fallen to 3.6% so far. This is uncharted territory. There are more voluntary quits, so employees are switching jobs at a faster rate. The labor force participation rate has increased with these jobs and higher wages offered. But firms have not found enough acceptable hiring matches to significantly reduce the open positions level. Through time, they are likely to achieve their hiring goals, driving the unemployment rate down below 3%.

https://numbernomics.com/unemployment-vs-job-openings-2/

Summary

  1. The demand for labor already exists. 11 million open positions is 7% of the labor force. We have enough active demand for ZERO % unemployment.
  2. The supply of labor increased by 7 million people since the depths of the pandemic. The rate of monthly additions has slowed from 500-600,000 to 300,000, but that is still 3.6 million jobs added on an annual basis. We only have 6 million total people unemployed!

3. The labor force participation rate is only 62.5%. There is room for millions to return to the labor market. Before the “Great Recession” in 2008 it was at 67%. Many metro areas, large and small, enjoy labor force participation rates above 65%.

4. The underemployed population can provide up to 3% of the total labor market’s full-time jobs.

5. Frictional unemployment is minimal in the internet age. Structural unemployment may be lower than described in the media, as firms have been adapting to the “information age”, high technology and the service economy for 40-50 years.

Finally, many states and metro areas currently have unemployment rates in the “twos”. Nebraska and Utah stand at 1.9%. Minneapolis (1.5%), Birmingham (1.9%) and Indianapolis (2.0%) demonstrate that otherwise unremarkable (!!!) metro areas can function with very low unemployment rates.

Unemployment: We Should Be Dancing in the Streets

Record high of 6.6 million hires per month, above pre-pandemic record 6.0M.

Record low layoffs at 1.3M per month, down from 1.8M pre-pandemic record. Yes 5 new hires for every layoff!

Record 11 million plus, up from pre-pandemic record of 7 million.

Record 7% of jobs are open, far above pre-pandemic 4.4% record level.

Job seekers to open positions ratio is less than 1/2, all-time record low, down from pre-pandemic record that was just below 1:1.

Average hourly wage up 12% to record $31.95.

Hours worked is slightly higher than before the pandemic.

Record high 2.9% versus pre-pandemic record of 2.3%.

Unemployment rate is 3.6%, just above pre-pandemic 3.5%. Prior 3.5% rate was in 1969. This is the best in 50 years.

Underemployment rate at 7.1% is just above 7.0% pre-pandemic level. Underemployment rate was last this low in 2000.

Long-term unemployment is at 1.2%, same as pre-pandemic level. The economy last delivered this positive level in 2000.

African-American unemployment rate is at a near-record 6% low. It was a little lower briefly before the pandemic.

Initial unemployment claims reached the pre-pandemic low of 190,000 during 2022, but has increased slightly to 210,000. This compares with typical levels of 400,000 in recent decades.

Continued unemployment claims are at a 50-year record low of 1.3 million, down from the pre-pandemic level of 1.8M. 1.3M was last seen in 1969!

Civilian labor force at 164.4M is just below the all-time record of 164.6M.

Prime age labor force participation rate fell from 84% to 81% by 2014. It recovered to 83% by the end of 2019. It has reached 82.5% so far in 2022.

Teen labor force participation has slowly increased for a decade.

College age labor force participation has remained the same.

“Older” age labor force participation hit an all-time low of 29% in the early 1990’s, and then began to climb all the way to 41% in 2012. It remained at 40% throughout that decade. It dropped with the pandemic and has since recovered to 39%.

Female labor force participation continued its long climb to a peak of 60% in the late 1990’s. It dropped below 57% by 2014. It increased to 58% in the last 2 years of the decade. It has recovered to 57% after the pandemic.

The male labor force participation rate has been declining for 70 years. It reached 69% in 2014 and remained there, without falling, throughout the decade. The rate dropped to 66% during the pandemic and has since recovered to 68%.

https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/econ_focus/2021/q1/district_digest#:~:text=Over%20the%20past%2050%20years,pandemic%2C%20it%20has%20fallen%20further.

Labor force participation has declined by about 10% for HS grads, some college and college grad groups. Non-HS grads’ participation has actually increased. The similarity of participation changes by education and gender points to broader social factors playing a major role in these “economic” changes.

Summary

The measures of demand for labor are all at record levels. Unemployment rates are at long-term lows, just above the pre-pandemic levels which were driven by a decade long economic recovery. Labor force participation is down by 1% compared with pre-pandemic levels. Overall, this recovery from the pandemic challenges exceeds all expectations.

Good News: Private Pension Funding Ratios Near 100%

Milliman Summary of 100 Largest Plans Offers Best Details

https://us.milliman.com/en/insight/2022-Corporate-Pension-Funding-Study

Just 5% of the largest plans have a funded status (assets/liabilities) less than 80%.

This is in spite of an increase in lower risk/lower return fixed income/bond funding growing from 30% to 50% of invested assets.

Plan assets took a big hit in 2008 but have slowly recovered.

Historically, 80% funded was considered to be “fully funded”. Corporations increased contributions after 2008 to slowly ensure plan funding ratios would increase. The 96% level in 2021 is unusually high, driven by many years of increased corporate cash contributions and higher than expected investment returns that have offset planned future investment returns which have dropped from 9% to 6.5%, thereby decreasing the ability of firms to simply rely upon investment returns to fund their pension liabilities.

Almost one-half of the largest firms have funded ratios of 90-105%, a very safe level. More firms have greater than 105% funding than have less than 90% funding.

Pension accounting is a complex and subjective area. Cash contributions have consistently exceeded the accounting basis expenses recognized. This reflects a conservative actual funding strategy.

The net unfunded pension liability is an immaterial share of the value of major corporations.

https://www.blackrock.com/institutions/en-us/insights/investment-actions/corporate-pensions-funding-ratios

Blackrock summarizes funded status for 200 large defined benefit pension plans. The funded ratio declined in 2008 and has slowly recovered. It reached 95% in 2021.

https://www.mercer.us/newsroom/s-p-1500-pension-funded-status-increased-by-13-percent-in-2021.html

Mercer summarizes 1,500 defined benefit pension plans. 80% funded is pretty typical since the Great Recession. Mercer reports 97% funded status at the end of 2021.

Summary

Defined benefit pension plans are an increasingly smaller share of all retirement savings plans. However, corporations are funding their future liabilities at a fully adequate level.

Good News: Lower US Workplace Injury and Death Rates

Injuries

https://fitsmallbusiness.com/workplace-injury-statistics/
https://www.bls.gov/charts/injuries-and-illnesses/total-nonfatal-work-injuries-and-illnesses-by-year.htm#
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/the-quest-for-meaningful-and-accurate-occupational-health-and-safety-statistics.htm
https://www.globaltrademag.com/industries-with-the-highest-rates-of-workplace-injuries/
https://www.workerscompensation.com/news_read.php?id=27835
https://www.workerscompensation.com/news_read.php?id=27835
https://www.bls.gov/charts/injuries-and-illnesses/number-and-rate-of-nonfatal-work-injuries-and-illnesses-by-industry.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/osch0054.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/the-quest-for-meaningful-and-accurate-occupational-health-and-safety-statistics.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/osch0054.pdf

Workplace Fatalities

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/02/21/558963.htm
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
https://govfailure.com/item/osha-didnt-speed-decline-in-workplace-deaths/

1915 rate estimated to be 60.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/the-life-of-american-workers-in-1915.htm

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0016.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-injuries/number-of-fatal-work-injuries-by-employee-status-self-employed-wage-salary.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/worker_memorial.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4822a1.htm
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4822a1.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/worker_memorial.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4822a1.htm
https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-injuries/number-and-rate-of-fatal-work-injuries-by-industry.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/worker_memorial.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0016.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-injuries/civilian-occupations-with-high-fatal-work-injury-rates.htm
https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0013.pdf
https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-injuries/number-and-rate-of-fatal-work-injuries-by-occupation.htm
https://www.publichealthpost.org/databyte/men-hard-at-work/
https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/02/21/558963.htm
https://www.bls.gov/charts/census-of-fatal-occupational-injuries/rate-of-fatal-work-injuries-per-100000-fte-by-age.htm

The baby boomers have caused the relatively higher death rate aged 55+ groups to almost double their share of total workers. While the death rate for EACH age group has gone down in the last 20 years, the blended average has been flat for the last decade.

Covid Provided Special Challenges and the Results Could Always Be Even Better

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/osh.pdf

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/29/bls-estimates-that-13-us-workers-die-on-the-job-per-day-on-average.html

https://aflcio.org/reports/death-job-toll-neglect-2021

Good News: US Workers Are Much More Engaged at Work

https://www.gallup.com/workplace/352949/employee-engagement-holds-steady-first-half-2021.aspx

In the last 20 years, 40% more employees are “engaged” at their workplace and one-sixth less are “disengaged”. American employers have bought into claims by Gallup and others that “engaged workers are productive workers” and made the investment in building culture, training managers, measuring managers and work teams and attending to basic employee satisfaction dimensions. Firms have made these changes out of self-interest, believing that the investment in helping employees to be engaged will pay off.

While 26% or 36% “engaged” may seem like poor numbers, consider that the global average in Gallup surveys is just 20%. Gallup defined “engaged” at a high enough level in their survey to ensure that corporations would see the low numbers and turn to Gallup and other organizational development consultants for help.

Note that even with 36% engaged, that means that 64% are un-engaged or actively dis-engaged. Hence, the “Great Resignation” is not unexpected in a tight labor market.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/great-attrition-or-great-attraction-the-choice-is-yours

How Did They Do It? (Firms Improve Workplaces)

Gallup points to 4 factors.

https://www.gallup.com/workplace/284180/factors-driving-record-high-employee-engagement.aspx

More companies now take culture and management seriously, from CEO to front-line workers, making real, sustained changes as they did with total quality, lean six sigma operations and branding. Firms define mission, vision and values and operationalize these “soft” dimensions in performance reviews, promotion and retention.

Second, firms focus their organizational development efforts on front line managers, the people who impact the most employees. Good front-line managers are then prepared to be good middle managers, so this makes sense. Companies embrace organizational behavior research which says that managers must consider both task and people dimensions. Managers must be the responsible parties, adjusting their style and decisions to the situation. Gallup published a book that helps to train managers in applied situational leadership.

Other consulting firms and authors provide training materials and seminars to help managers be more effective.

Third, firms take communications seriously, overcommunicating, teaching communications, reviewing communications, etc.

Fourth, firms hold managers accountable for results. These measured results include employee satisfaction. Firms have learned to use 360-degree feedback systems to identify very weak managers, help average managers to develop and promote the most effective managers to greater responsibility and impact.

Most firms employ some version of “The Balanced Scorecard”, ensuring that managers are evaluated on, and therefor focus upon all four dimensions: earnings/mission, customer satisfaction/sales, operations effectiveness, asset management (including human resources).

Higher Paid Employees are More Satisfied

How Does Gallup Measure Engagement?

Gallup statisticians crunched numbers from prior work to identify a small number of questions that are correlated to results such as turnover, productivity, sales, profits, etc. The Q12 survey is disarmingly simple. It can be administered monthly for all work teams and employees. Once managers are trained to understand the meaning of the results, opportunities for improvement are straightforward. Once employees see that managers are responding to their feedback, a positive feedback loop can be started. Q12 is not a “magic bullet”, but the questions touch on dimensions that employees truly value and improvements in management performance are noticed by employees.

https://www.gallup.com/workplace/356063/gallup-q12-employee-engagement-survey.aspx

PostScript: Engagement Fell Back a Bit in Late 2021

https://www.gallup.com/workplace/388481/employee-engagement-drops-first-year-decade.aspx

Good News: US and Immigrants

US is top desired destination for immigrants

https://news.gallup.com/poll/245255/750-million-worldwide-migrate.aspx

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/these-are-the-countries-migrants-want-to-move-to/

New Zealand is Most Attractive Based on Immigrant Desires Per Destination Population

Best Countries to Migrate to

Immigrants “Vote With Their Feet”. 50 Million in US.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/top-25-destinations-international-migrants

US Remains a Welcoming Country, Overall