Obama’s October Surprise: The August 2012 8.1% Unemployment Rate That Declined To 7.8 for September 2012 Faked and Manipulated By Census Bureau for Political Reasons — Jack Welch Was Right — Happy Birthday Jack — Video

Posted on November 19, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Links, Literacy, media, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Raves, Regulations, Reviews, Talk Radio, Unemployment, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Now

November 19, 2013

gdp_large

Unemployment Rate

Series Id:           LNS14000000 Seasonally Adjusted Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate Labor force status:  Unemployment rate Type of data:        Percent or rate Age:                 16 years and over

unemployment_rate

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 9.0 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.3
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.9 8.6 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.1 7.8 7.9 7.8 7.8
2013 7.9 7.7 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.3

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Labor_Force_Participation_Rate
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.1 67.1 66.9 66.9 66.9 66.8 66.9 67.0
2001 67.2 67.1 67.2 66.9 66.7 66.7 66.8 66.5 66.8 66.7 66.7 66.7
2002 66.5 66.8 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.5 66.6 66.7 66.6 66.4 66.3
2003 66.4 66.4 66.3 66.4 66.4 66.5 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9
2004 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 66.0 66.1 66.1 66.0 65.8 65.9 66.0 65.9
2005 65.8 65.9 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0
2006 66.0 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.3 66.4
2007 66.4 66.3 66.2 65.9 66.0 66.0 66.0 65.8 66.0 65.8 66.0 66.0
2008 66.2 66.0 66.1 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 65.8
2009 65.7 65.8 65.6 65.7 65.7 65.7 65.5 65.4 65.1 65.0 65.0 64.6
2010 64.8 64.9 64.9 65.1 64.9 64.6 64.6 64.7 64.6 64.4 64.6 64.3
2011 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.0 64.0 64.1 64.2 64.1 64.1 64.0
2012 63.7 63.9 63.8 63.6 63.8 63.8 63.7 63.5 63.6 63.8 63.6 63.6
2013 63.6 63.5 63.3 63.3 63.4 63.5 63.4 63.2 63.2 62.8

Rick Santelli Rages Against Media Over ‘Manipulated’ Unemployment Data Allegations

October 5th 2012 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (September Jobs Report)

Jobless Rate Drops Bellow 8 Percent – Jack Welch Weighs in On Cavuto!!

Jay Carney Swats Away ‘Conspiracy Theories’ About Faked 2012 Employment Data – 11-19-2013

Jack Welch: Jobs Data Too Good to Be True – CNBC’s The Kudlow Report

Jack Welch on Hardball w/Chris Matthews

Anderson Cooper Goes After Jack Welch Over Unemployment Numbers

UnEmployment Rate – New Jobs Report – Steve Forbes: Jack Welch Is Right!

Peter Schiff Explains the Questionable Unemployment Figures on his Dec. 7, 2012 Show

Census ‘faked’ 2012 election jobs report

By John Crudele

November 18, 2013 | 8:06pm

In the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September, the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to Washington.

The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.

And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.

Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.

And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.

“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked.

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

Ironically, it was Labor’s demanding standards that left the door open to manipulation.

Labor requires Census to achieve a 90 percent success rate on its interviews — meaning it needed to reach 9 out of 10 households targeted and report back on their jobs status.

Census currently has six regions from which surveys are conducted. The New York and Philadelphia regions, I’m told, had been coming up short of the 90 percent.

Philadelphia filled the gap with fake interviews.

“It was a phone conversation — I forget the exact words — but it was, ‘Go ahead and fabricate it’ to make it what it was,” Buckmon told me.

Census, under contract from the Labor Department, conducts the household survey used to tabulate the unemployment rate.

Interviews with some 60,000 household go into each month’s jobless number, which currently stands at 7.3 percent. Since this is considered a scientific poll, each one of the households interviewed represents 5,000 homes in the US.

Buckmon, it turns out, was a very ambitious employee. He conducted three times as many household interviews as his peers, my source said.

By making up survey results — and, essentially, creating people out of thin air and giving them jobs — Buckmon’s actions could have lowered the jobless rate.

Buckmon said he filled out surveys for people he couldn’t reach by phone or who didn’t answer their doors.

But, Buckmon says, he was never told how to answer the questions about whether these nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up.

But people who know how the survey works say that simply by creating people and filling out surveys in their name would boost the number of folks reported as employed.

Census never publicly disclosed the falsification. Nor did it inform Labor that its data was tainted.

“Yes, absolutely they should have told us,” said a Labor spokesman. “It would be normal procedure to notify us if there is a problem with data collection.”

Census appears to have looked into only a handful of instances of falsification by Buckmon, although more than a dozen instances were reported, according to internal documents.

In one document from the probe, Program Coordinator Joal Crosby was ask in 2010, “Why was the suspected … possible data falsification on all (underscored) other survey work for which data falsification was suspected not investigated by the region?”

On one document seen by The Post, Crosby hand-wrote the answer: “Unable to determine why an investigation was not done for CPS,” or the Current Population Survey — the official name for the unemployment report.

With regard to the Consumer Expenditure survey, only four instances of falsification were looked into, while 14 were reported.

I’ve been suspicious of the Census Bureau for a long time.

During the 2010 Census report — an enormous and costly survey of the entire country that goes on for a full year — I suspected (and wrote in a number of columns) that Census was inexplicably hiring and firing temporary workers.

I suspected that this turnover of employees was being done purposely to boost the number of new jobs being report each month. (The Labor Department does not use the Census Bureau for its other monthly survey of new jobs — commonly referred to as the Establishment Survey.)

Last week I offered to give all the information I have, including names, dates and charges to Labor’s inspector general.

I’m waiting to hear back from Labor.

I hope the next stop will be Congress, since manipulation of data like this not only gives voters the wrong impression of the economy but also leads lawmakers, the Federal Reserve and companies to make uninformed decisions.

To cite just one instance, the Fed is targeting the curtailment of its so-called quantitative easing money-printing/bond-buying fiasco to the unemployment rate for which Census provided the false information.

So falsifying this would, in essence, have dire consequences for the country.

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-faked-2012-election-jobs-report/

New York Post Claims Census Falsifies Unemployment Figures

The New York Post is reporting an absolute bombshell story if true.  They claim the September 2012 unemployment report was manipulated and survey data was faked, just in time for the election.  The story quotes anonymous sources, insiders from the Census Bureau who claim to have falsified survey data for the unemployment report.

The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.

And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.

Not only is the Post claiming the September 2012 unemployment surveys were manipulated but this is still going on today.  The Census actually caught one employee fabricating the unemployment statistics by falsifying survey results which should be answered by respondents.

Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.

And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.

The story might very well be true.  The unemployment rate comes from surveys, sent out to 60,000 households spread out over 2,025 geographical areas of the country..  The Bureau of Labor Statistics gives great detail into the methodology used for these surveys.  The fraud reported by the New York Post comes from the 2200 Census employees who conduct the phone interviews each month for the Household survey.  Instead of doing their job and recording the answers from the interview questions of these households, a few individuals are falsifying the survey results.  If employees were falsifying interviews and this fudging of surveys is done with enough households, such fraud could skew the unemployment rate.

“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked.

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

The Post claims the Census Bureau demands a 90% interview response rate and certain regions of the country that is hard to get.  So personnel are fudging the results and filling in the survey.  There might certainly be truth to this as employees are under pressure to produce results, no one answers their phones these days and who wants to be bothered by some Census Bureau employee asking a lot of obnoxious questions?

What is more odious is the BLS is not publishing actual response rates for the household survey.  If the Post article is true and the Census expects a 90% or greater response rate, that seems a little ridiculous demand by itself.  Below is a short explanation on how the unemployment report statistics are collected.  Read it and then imagine being part of this survey.  How accurate would you be or even responsive over time?

The survey is conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Each month, during the calendar week including the 19th day, Census interviewers contact households by telephone and in person and ask questions regarding the labor market activity of household members during the previous calendar week which included the 12th day of the month—the reference week. Personal visits are preferred in the first month in which the household is in the sample. At the first visit, interviewers prepare a roster of the household members including their demographic characteristics and their relationship to the person maintaining the household, and enter the information via laptop computers, along with responses to all survey questions.

In the months following the first interview, the interview is generally conducted by telephone. The household roster is checked for accuracy and brought up to date in each interview. About 10 percent of households are interviewed via computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) by staff in three centralized calling centers. Other telephone interviews are collected by field representatives. A personal visit is generally attempted for the fifth interview. At the end of each day’s interviewing, the data are transmitted over secure telecommunications lines to the Census Bureau’s central computer in Washington, DC.

From the number of households and individual Census employees it is clear the Census would have to falsify many interviews to actually skew the survey results enough to manipulate the unemployment rate.  The Post story quotes the employee already busted for falsifying survey interview responses that he did so on the demand from management at the Census Bureau.

The question of intentional hoodwinking for political agendas versus low paid workers having to interview people all day on a quota is really unanswered.  Yet none of that matters.  If any portion of this story is true, it means data integrity is compromised.  All sorts of policies, funds, legislation and even Wall Street are tied to the unemployment rate.  Suspecting fictional statistics, just the concept, could result in no confidence of government statistics.  That is an unmitigated disaster on a host of fronts.

Census appears to have looked into only a handful of instances of falsification by Buckmon, although more than a dozen instances were reported, according to internal documents.

In one document from the probe, Program Coordinator Joal Crosby was ask in 2010, “Why was the suspected … possible data falsification on all (underscored) other survey work for which data falsification was suspected not investigated by the region?”

On one document seen by The Post, Crosby hand-wrote the answer: “Unable to determine why an investigation was not done for CPS,” or the Current Population Survey — the official name for the unemployment report.

With regard to the Consumer Expenditure survey, only four instances of falsification were looked into, while 14 were reported.

We look at the unemployment statistics in great detail every month and the way to prove the Census is falsifying data is by a probability and error margin analysis check.  Such an analysis is quite involved.  To detect Census employee fraud, such an analysis should be performed on individual employee interview results.  This still leaves the question of how honest actual survey respondents are as well.  In terms of statistical accuracy, we’ve never liked the Household survey.  The error margin is too great and we believe the Census should cross correlate survey results with other labor market metrics for a reality check.  While not a poll, a survey is just that, asking people to volunteerinformation.  To make matters worse, recently some of the revisions to GDP methodology are truly questionable and the last thing America needs is even more manipulated or skewed economic statistics

At the time the September 2012 unemployment report was released, the results were so extreme we compared it to falling through a worm hole in statistical space.  Yet that month is not the only one which seems to be skewed.  Every month we analyze these reports digging out the figures to explain the unbelievable, such as the unemployment rate dropping dramatically while the net gain of those employed is basically static.

We question the conspiracy element of the Post story that the Census would actually falsify the unemployment rate to skew an election.  The reason that seems absurd is the press pays no attention to the pathetic labor market and neither Presidential candidate in 2012 was offering a damn thing to actually increase jobs.  It is also doubtful a sudden drop in the unemployment rate would sway the election results, even though the official unemployment rate sweeps millions of Americans needing a job under the political and statistical rug.

What could very well be true is an increasing nonresponse rate to Census survey unemployment questions.  Generally speaking people do not have the time, feel obligated to answer such surveys or even pick up a land line, unlike 50 years ago.  We also question how honest people are who do answer surveys as well as the type of person to respond versus those who do not.  Just by asking individuals would seem to put bias into the sampling group.  One would think America could obtain more accurate data collection methods than a survey in order to find out what people are doing each month for work.  After all, the NSA knows every single thing we say or do these days.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/new-york-post-claims-census-falsifies-unemployment-figures-5436

Then

October 5, 2012

Over 23 Million Americans Looking For A Full Time Job As The Total Unemployment Rate U-6 Unchanged At 14.7%–Unemployment Rate U-3 Drops To 7.8% The Same Rate As January 2009!–Obama’s October Surprise As GDP Growth Rate Falls–Videos

Describing “Shadow Government Statistics” — John Williams 

Unemployment Rate Falls to 7.8% on New Jobs Report

BREAKING: U.S. Adds 114,000 Jobs, Unemployment Rate Drops to 7.8 

October 5th 2012 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (September Jobs Report) 

Today’s report includes a surprise drop in the unemployment rate-but it is statistically questionable. Payroll numbers continued modest improvement. The unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 7.8 percent, following a decline to 8.1 percent in August. Payroll jobs in September gained about as expected with a modest 114,000 increase, following an rise in August of 142,000 (originally up 96,000) and an increase of 181,000 in July (previous estimate of 141,000). The net revisions for July and August were up 86,000. Market expectations were for a 113,000 boost for September.

Private payrolls advanced 104,000 in September after increasing 97,000 the month before. The consensus projected a 130,000 increase.

Wage inflation has been volatile and the latest number was on the up side. Average hourly earnings growth improved to 0.3 percent in September, following no change in August. Analysts forecast a 0.2 percent rise. The average workweek nudged up to 34.5 hours in September from 34.4 hours in August. Expectations were for 34.4 hours.

Turning to the household survey, the unemployment rate drop reflected an 873,000 spike in household employment versus a 368,000 drop in August. The labor force rebounded 418,000 after a 368,000 decrease in August. The household survey is much smaller than the payroll survey and is more volatile

September Unemployment Falls to 7.8% 

Jack Welch Hardball w/Chris Matthews 10/5/12 

Jack Welch, the lionized former chairman of General Electric Co, provoked cries of outrage in Washington on Friday when he appeared to accuse the White House of manipulating September job figures for political gains.
White House officials dismissed as “ludicrous” a tweet Welch sent to his more than 1.3 million followers that suggested U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration rigged the data as a way of recovering from a poor Wednesday night showing in a debate against Mitt Romney, his Republican challenger for the White House.

“Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers,” Welch said in a posting on Twitter, apparently referring to Obama, who formerly served as a senator from Illinois.

The tweet was repeated more than 2,000 times, with many mocking posts comparing Welch to New York real estate tycoon Donald Trump – who during his failed bid for the presidency loudly argued that Obama was not born in the United States – and Clint Eastwood, who gave a widely panned speech to an empty chair at the Republican National Convention in August.
Officials in Washington quickly dismissed the idea that the Labor Department report – which showed U.S. unemployment falling to a four-year low of 7.8 percent – could be rigged.
“That’s a ludicrous comment. No serious person believes that the bureau of labor statistics manipulates its statistics,” said Alan Krueger, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. “The jobs report and all of their other statistics are prepared by career employees. They use the same process every month. They use the same process for Republican and Democratic administrations.”

The tweet was by no means Welch’s first criticism of Obama on his Twitter feed, where he has regularly spoken out in favor of Romney, as well as weighing in on sports. During the presidential debate in Denver, Colorado, on Wednesday night, Welch tweeted: “HOW can anyone vote for Obama after this performance..he has demonstrated his incompetence.”

Word of the Day: Unemployment (U3 and U6) 

FACT CHECK: LABOR SECRETARY SOLIS MISLEADS ON JOBS REVISIONS 

The AFL-CIO Reacts to the September BLS Jobs Report 

Employment Level

142,974,000

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Employment Level

Employment Level

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 136559(1) 136598 136701 137270 136630 136940 136531 136662 136893 137088 137322 137614
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417(1) 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472(1) 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245(1) 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150(1) 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146028(1) 146057 146320 145586 145903 146063 145905 145682 146244 145946 146595 146273
2008 146397(1) 146157 146108 146130 145929 145738 145530 145196 145059 144792 144078 143328
2009 142187(1) 141660 140754 140654 140294 140003 139891 139458 138775 138401 138607 137968
2010 138500(1) 138665 138836 139306 139340 139137 139139 139338 139344 139072 138937 139220
2011 139330(1) 139551 139764 139628 139808 139385 139450 139754 140107 140297 140614 140790
2012 141637(1) 142065 142034 141865 142287 142415 142220 142101 142974
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Civilian Labor Force

155,063,000

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 142267(1) 142456 142434 142751 142388 142591 142278 142514 142518 142622 142962 143248
2001 143800 143701 143924 143569 143318 143357 143654 143284 143989 144086 144240 144305
2002 143883 144653 144481 144725 144938 144808 144803 145009 145552 145314 145041 145066
2003 145937(1) 146100 146022 146474 146500 147056 146485 146445 146530 146716 147000 146729
2004 146842(1) 146709 146944 146850 147065 147460 147692 147564 147415 147793 148162 148059
2005 148029(1) 148364 148391 148926 149261 149238 149432 149779 149954 150001 150065 150030
2006 150214(1) 150641 150813 150881 151069 151354 151377 151716 151662 152041 152406 152732
2007 153144(1) 152983 153051 152435 152670 153041 153054 152749 153414 153183 153835 153918
2008 154075(1) 153648 153925 153761 154325 154316 154480 154646 154559 154875 154622 154626
2009 154236(1) 154521 154143 154450 154800 154730 154538 154319 153786 153822 153833 153091
2010 153454(1) 153704 153964 154528 154216 153653 153748 154073 153918 153709 154041 153613
2011 153250(1) 153302 153392 153420 153700 153409 153358 153674 154004 154057 153937 153887
2012 154395(1) 154871 154707 154365 155007 155163 155013 154645 155063
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Labor Force Participation Rate

63.6%

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Labor Force Participation Rate

Labor Force Participation Rate

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.1 67.1 66.9 66.9 66.9 66.8 66.9 67.0
2001 67.2 67.1 67.2 66.9 66.7 66.7 66.8 66.5 66.8 66.7 66.7 66.7
2002 66.5 66.8 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.5 66.6 66.7 66.6 66.4 66.3
2003 66.4 66.4 66.3 66.4 66.4 66.5 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9
2004 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 66.0 66.1 66.1 66.0 65.8 65.9 66.0 65.9
2005 65.8 65.9 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0
2006 66.0 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.3 66.4
2007 66.4 66.3 66.2 65.9 66.0 66.0 66.0 65.8 66.0 65.8 66.0 66.0
2008 66.2 66.0 66.1 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9 66.0 65.8 65.8
2009 65.7 65.8 65.6 65.6 65.7 65.7 65.5 65.4 65.1 65.0 65.0 64.6
2010 64.8 64.9 64.9 65.1 64.9 64.6 64.6 64.7 64.6 64.4 64.5 64.3
2011 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.1 64.0 64.1 64.1 64.1 64.0 64.0
2012 63.7 63.9 63.8 63.6 63.8 63.8 63.7 63.5 63.6

Unemployment Level

12,088,000

Series Id:           LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Unemployment Level

Unemployment Level

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 5708 5858 5733 5481 5758 5651 5747 5853 5625 5534 5639 5634
2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
2006 7064 7184 7072 7120 6980 7001 7175 7091 6847 6727 6872 6762
2007 7116 6927 6731 6850 6766 6979 7149 7067 7170 7237 7240 7645
2008 7678 7491 7816 7631 8395 8578 8950 9450 9501 10083 10544 11299
2009 12049 12860 13389 13796 14505 14727 14646 14861 15012 15421 15227 15124
2010 14953 15039 15128 15221 14876 14517 14609 14735 14574 14636 15104 14393
2011 13919 13751 13628 13792 13892 14024 13908 13920 13897 13759 13323 13097
2012 12758 12806 12673 12500 12720 12749 12794 12544 12088

Unemployment Rate U-3

7.8%

Series Id:           LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.1 7.8

Unemployment Rate U-6

14.7%

Series Id:           LNS13327709 

Seasonally Adjusted 
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers 
                      plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force
                      plus all marginally attached workers 
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed 
Type of data:        Percent or rate 
Age:                 16 years and over 
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force 
                     plus marg attached

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2000 7.1 7.2 7.1 6.9 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 6.8 7.1 6.9
2001 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6
2002 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.8
2003 10.0 10.2 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 9.8
2004 9.9 9.7 10.0 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 9.4 9.2
2005 9.3 9.3 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.7 8.6
2006 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9
2007 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8
2008 9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.1 11.8 12.7 13.5
2009 14.2 15.1 15.7 15.8 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.8 17.2 17.1 17.1
2010 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.6 16.9 16.8 16.9 16.6
2011 16.1 15.9 15.7 15.9 15.8 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.0 15.6 15.2
2012 15.1 14.9 14.5 14.5 14.8 14.9 15.0 14.7 14.7

Background Articles and Videos

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                   USDL-12-1981
until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, October 5, 2012

Technical information:
 Household data:       (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:   (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:         (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                    THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- SEPTEMBER 2012

The unemployment rate decreased to 7.8 percent in September, and total nonfarm 
payroll employment rose by 114,000, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported 
today. Employment increased in health care and in transportation and warehousing 
but changed little in most other major industries.

Household Survey Data

The unemployment rate declined by 0.3 percentage point to 7.8 percent in September. 
For the first 8 months of the year, the rate held within a narrow range of 8.1 
and 8.3 percent. The number of unemployed persons, at 12.1 million, decreased by 
456,000 in September. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.3 percent), 
adult women (7.0 percent), and whites (7.0 percent) declined over the month. 
The unemployment rates for teenagers (23.7 percent), blacks (13.4 percent), and 
Hispanics (9.9 percent) were little changed. The jobless rate for Asians, at 
4.8 percent (not seasonally adjusted), fell over the year. (See tables A-1, A-2, 
and A-3.)

In September, the number of job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs 
decreased by 468,000 to 6.5 million. (See table A-11.)

The number of persons unemployed for less than 5 weeks declined by 302,000 over 
the month to 2.5 million. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 
27 weeks or more) was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 
percent of the unemployed. (See table A-12.)

Total employment rose by 873,000 in September, following 3 months of little 
change. The employment-population ratio increased by 0.4 percentage point to 
58.7 percent, after edging down in the prior 2 months. The overall trend in 
the employment-population ratio for this year has been flat. The civilian labor 
force rose by 418,000 to 155.1 million in September, while the labor force 
participation rate was little changed at 63.6 percent. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes 
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose from 8.0 million in August 
to 8.6 million in September. These individuals were working part time because 
their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time 
job. (See table A-8.)

In September, 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, 
essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally 
adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were 
available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. 
They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work 
in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 802,000 discouraged workers in 
September, a decline of 235,000 from a year earlier. (These data are not 
seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking 
for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 
1.7 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in September had 
not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such 
as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 114,000 in September. In 2012, 
employment growth has averaged 146,000 per month, compared with an average 
monthly gain of 153,000 in 2011. In September, employment rose in health care 
and in transportation and warehousing. (See table B-1.)

Health care added 44,000 jobs in September. Job gains continued in ambulatory 
health care services (+30,000) and hospitals (+8,000). Over the past year, 
employment in health care has risen by 295,000.

In September, employment increased by 17,000 in transportation and warehousing. 
Within the industry, there were job gains in transit and ground passenger 
transportation (+9,000) and in warehousing and storage (+4,000).

Employment in financial activities edged up in September (+13,000), reflecting 
modest job growth in credit intermediation (+6,000) and real estate (+7,000).

Manufacturing employment edged down in September (-16,000). On net, manufacturing 
employment has been unchanged since April. In September, job losses occurred 
in computer and electronic products (-6,000) and in printing and related 
activities (-3,000).

Employment in other major industries, including mining and logging, construction, 
wholesale trade, retail trade, information, professional and business services, 
leisure and hospitality, and government, showed little change over the month.

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up by 
0.1 hour to 34.5 hours in September. The manufacturing workweek edged up by 
0.1 hour to 40.6 hours, and factory overtime was unchanged at 3.2 hours. 
The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private 
nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 33.7 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In September, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm 
payrolls rose by 7 cents to $23.58. Over the past 12 months, average hourly 
earnings have risen by 1.8 percent. In September, average hourly earnings of 
private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5 cents 
to $19.81. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for July was revised from 
+141,000 to +181,000, and the change for August was revised from +96,000 to 
+142,000.

____________
The Employment Situation for October is scheduled to be released on
Friday, November 2, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmEmployment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]

HOUSEHOLD DATA Summary table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
Category Sept. 2011 July 2012 Aug. 2012 Sept. 2012 Change from: Aug. 2012- Sept. 2012
Employment status
Civilian noninstitutional population 240,071 243,354 243,566 243,772 206
Civilian labor force 154,004 155,013 154,645 155,063 418
Participation rate 64.1 63.7 63.5 63.6 0.1
Employed 140,107 142,220 142,101 142,974 873
Employment-population ratio 58.4 58.4 58.3 58.7 0.4
Unemployed 13,897 12,794 12,544 12,088 -456
Unemployment rate 9.0 8.3 8.1 7.8 -0.3
Not in labor force 86,067 88,340 88,921 88,710 -211
Unemployment rates
Total, 16 years and over 9.0 8.3 8.1 7.8 -0.3
Adult men (20 years and over) 8.7 7.7 7.6 7.3 -0.3
Adult women (20 years and over) 8.1 7.5 7.3 7.0 -0.3
Teenagers (16 to 19 years) 24.5 23.8 24.6 23.7 -0.9
White 7.9 7.4 7.2 7.0 -0.2
Black or African American 15.9 14.1 14.1 13.4 -0.7
Asian (not seasonally adjusted) 7.8 6.2 5.9 4.8
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity 11.3 10.3 10.2 9.9 -0.3
Total, 25 years and over 7.7 6.9 6.8 6.6 -0.2
Less than a high school diploma 13.9 12.7 12.0 11.3 -0.7
High school graduates, no college 9.6 8.7 8.8 8.7 -0.1
Some college or associate degree 8.4 7.1 6.6 6.5 -0.1
Bachelor’s degree and higher 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 0.0
Reason for unemployment
Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs 8,028 7,123 7,003 6,535 -468
Job leavers 972 878 942 957 15
Reentrants 3,484 3,380 3,318 3,306 -12
New entrants 1,323 1,311 1,277 1,247 -30
Duration of unemployment
Less than 5 weeks 2,743 2,711 2,844 2,542 -302
5 to 14 weeks 2,902 3,092 2,868 2,826 -42
15 to 26 weeks 2,029 1,760 1,845 1,860 15
27 weeks and over 6,197 5,185 5,033 4,844 -189
Employed persons at work part time
Part time for economic reasons 9,270 8,246 8,031 8,613 582
Slack work or business conditions 5,900 5,342 5,217 5,523 306
Could only find part-time work 2,844 2,576 2,507 2,572 65
Part time for noneconomic reasons 18,329 18,866 18,996 18,736 -260
Persons not in the labor force (not seasonally adjusted)
Marginally attached to the labor force 2,511 2,529 2,561 2,517
Discouraged workers 1,037 852 844 802
–  Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data. NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted

ESTABLISHMENT DATA Summary table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Category Sept. 2011 July 2012 Aug. 2012(p) Sept. 2012(p)
EMPLOYMENT BY SELECTED INDUSTRY (Over-the-month change, in thousands)
Total nonfarm 202 181 142 114
Total private 216 163 97 104
Goods-producing 33 20 -22 -10
Mining and logging 6 -1 -1 1
Construction 30 3 1 5
Manufacturing -3 18 -22 -16
Durable goods(1) 4 18 -20 -13
Motor vehicles and parts 2.9 12.8 -6.9 -3.4
Nondurable goods -7 0 -2 -3
Private service-providing(1) 183 143 119 114
Wholesale trade -3.0 8.8 7.0 -1.6
Retail trade 14.2 3.2 8.3 9.4
Transportation and warehousing 1.8 14.2 7.7 17.1
Information 34 8 1 -6
Financial activities -6 1 7 13
Professional and business services(1) 59 41 19 13
Temporary help services 23.7 13.0 0.1 -2.0
Education and health services(1) 58 40 25 49
Health care and social assistance 47.5 27.7 22.2 44.5
Leisure and hospitality 20 24 38 11
Other services 3 9 -2 9
Government -14 18 45 10
WOMEN AND PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES(2) AS A PERCENT OF ALL EMPLOYEES
Total nonfarm women employees 49.4 49.3 49.3 49.3
Total private women employees 47.9 47.8 47.8 47.8
Total private production and nonsupervisory employees 82.5 82.6 82.6 82.6
HOURS AND EARNINGS ALL EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours 34.4 34.4 34.4 34.5
Average hourly earnings $23.16 $23.52 $23.51 $23.58
Average weekly earnings $796.70 $809.09 $808.74 $813.51
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2007=100)(3) 94.5 95.9 96.0 96.4
Over-the-month percent change 0.4 -0.2 0.1 0.4
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2007=100)(4) 104.4 107.6 107.7 108.4
Over-the-month percent change 0.7 -0.1 0.1 0.6
HOURS AND EARNINGS PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours 33.6 33.7 33.7 33.7
Average hourly earnings $19.53 $19.77 $19.76 $19.81
Average weekly earnings $656.21 $666.25 $665.91 $667.60
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2002=100)(3) 101.5 103.5 103.6 103.7
Over-the-month percent change 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2002=100)(4) 132.5 136.7 136.8 137.3
Over-the-month percent change 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.4
DIFFUSION INDEX(5) (Over 1-month span)
Total private (266 industries) 57.9 54.9 51.3 52.8
Manufacturing (81 industries) 53.7 48.8 38.9 39.5
Footnotes (1) Includes other industries, not shown separately. (2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries. (3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours. (4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls. (5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment. (p) Preliminary
NOTE:  Data in this table have been corrected.  For more information see http://www.bls.gov/bls/ceswomen_usps_correction.htm.

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: