BLS Analysis for March 2018

Bob Marshall’s March 2018 BLS Analysis for Recruiters; 4/6/18

 

March BLS Preface

 

TBMG Coaching Updates and News

 

Bob Marshall – Coaching & Speaking Updates:

 

California Staffing Professionals (CSP) Annual Conference, Westin Mission Hills, Rancho Mirage, California, June 7th-9th, 2018

 

Again, this year, I will be presenting at the CSP Annual Conference that will be held from Thursday, June 7th, 2018 to Saturday, June 9th, 2018; this time at the Westin Resort & Spa in Rancho Mirage, CA.  On Friday morning, from 9:00am – 10:30am, I will conduct a 90-minute session entitled, “Establishing Elegant Rapport through Elegant Communication.”  Then, from 10:45am – 12:15pm, I will conduct a second 90-minute session entitled, “Words Matter, Messages That Work, – Voicemails and Emails.”

 

* Special San Diego area Note:  For those of you in the San Diego area, if you are interested in my in-office training (individual and desk-level) and are available for that training during June 11-June 18, please let me know for a special offer.  Since I will be in the San Diego area for my CSP presentations, I will offer a discount on my usual fees plus NO charge for my airfare or other expenses.  First come, first served, so contact me for specific details as soon as possible.  Thanks!

 

“Look for excellence, not perfection.  Everyone has flaws; the key is how they deal with them.”

 

WHY A COACH?

 

“Teachers open the door; but you must enter by yourself”—Chinese Proverb

 

In the opinion of ex-Dallas Cowboys football coach Tom Landry who coached from 1960-1988,

 

“A coach is someone who tells you what you don’t want to hear,

who has you see what you don’t want to see,

so you can be who you have always known you could be.”

 

Is now the time to pick a Coach?

 

I realize that taking that first step to engage a Coach to help you reach a higher level of production is not as easy as it sounds.  After all, your training investment – and your time – are important and deserve every consideration.  I share your feelings.  I believe that how you approach your recruitment career matters…that you should get what you pay for, and then some…that you should enjoy your time with your Coach as you are benefiting from it…and that you should never settle for the ordinary.

 

So for those of you who have been toying with the idea of working with a recruitment coach, now may be the time.  Only you can come to that decision point.

 

When considering ‘individual change management’, consider this theosophical proverb, “When the student is ready, the teacher will appear!”

 

“Bob Marshall is a speaker’s speaker and a trainer’s trainer.  He has a gift for taking the cornerstones of the business and compelling people and teams to not only hone their skills but to execute. We’ve had Bob engage our teams a number of times over the last few years and our groups always come away more focused on the core and more energized to perform. Come ready to learn because this man knows the business and will make you better!”

 

—David Alexander, President, Adecco & Soliant, January, 2017

 

If you are ready to take the first step, you can read descriptions of my coaching plans, and all of my products, on my website @ www.themarshallplan.org.  Then, call me directly at 770-898-5550 or email me @ bob@themarshallplan.org.

 

Preface

 

Many of you continue to correspond with me about these monthly BLS analyses and have asked if it is OK to use them in your presentations.  The answer is, of course, yes!  That is why I spend the time to assemble this information.  I would encourage any of you who have that desire to weave any of the information I have printed below into your presentations.  I write these analyses for the benefit of our recruitment industry in general and for the members of my distribution list in particular.  So use this info as you deem appropriate.

 

I also write these monthly BLS analyses to not only counterbalance the negative/incorrect press reporting of our general economic state but, more than that, to remind all of my recruitment readers that, at the level we work, there is no unemployment and so we must recruit to find the candidates our client companies so desperately need!

 

So, to my recruiter colleagues, get out there and do what your name implies…RECRUIT!  When your client companies have unique and difficult positions to fill, they need you.  When they are being picky, they need you.  When they are longing for more production from fewer employees, they need you.  Go fill those needs.  These should be the halcyon days in the recruitment arena!

 

Finally, always remember that we are not in an HR business, but in a ‘circumventing the time factor in the hiring sequence’ business—and adding value to our client companies.

 

 

Job Hopping:  Workers in favor but CFOs not so much, Robert Half finds

Daily News, April 5, 2018

 

Substantially more workers see rewards in job hopping than before — especially those from younger generations — but managers don’t necessarily agree, according to a survey released today by Robert Half International Inc.

 

The survey found 64% of professionals polled think changing roles every few years can be beneficial, with the biggest perk being a higher salary.  This marks a 22% increase from a similar survey conducted 4 years ago.

 

However, a separate survey of CFOs found 44% are not at all likely to hire a candidate with a history of job hopping because they want to avoid losing them in the future.

 

Workers and managers are close to agreeing on one thing:  When asked the number of role changes in 10 years that constitute a job hopper, professionals said 5 and CFOs cited 6.

 

“In today’s candidate-short market, keeping key performers engaged should be top of mind for managers,” said Paul McDonald, senior executive director for Robert Half.  “Businesses worried about losing talent to the competition should focus on improving corporate culture and strive to be the type of company employees want to stay with long term.”

 

Other key findings from the research includes:

 

*75% of employees ages 18 to 34 view job hopping as beneficial, compared to 59% of workers ages 35 to 54 and 51% of those 55 and older.

 

*Workers with a college degree or higher see the most benefit in changing jobs every few years (67%).

 

*Company size matters:  51% of CFOs at companies with more than 1,000 employees said a history of frequent job changes isn’t relevant if the candidate is the right fit.

 

*The biggest drawback of job hopping, cited by 46% of workers, is being perceived as a flight risk.

 

Robert Half developed the surveys, which were conducted by independent research firms.  The survey of workers includes responses from more than 1,000 US workers employed in office environments.  The CFO survey is based on telephone interviews with more than 2,200 CFOs from companies in more than 20 of the largest US metropolitan areas.

 

 

Pay Gap caused by Fewer Women in Higher-Paying Roles:  Korn Ferry

Daily News, March 30, 2018

 

The pay gap between men and women in the US is real, but predominately caused by fewer women than men in higher-paying roles, according to research released by executive search firm Korn Ferry International Inc.  The Korn Ferry Gender Pay Index analyzed gender and pay for more than 1,300,000 employees in 777 companies in the US, drawn from Korn Ferry’s PayNet database.

 

The data found women earn nearly 20% less than men as a whole.  However, that gap is significantly reduced when comparing women and men in the same jobs.

 

“This pay gap issue can be remedied if organizations address pay parity across the organization and continue to strive to increase the percentage of women in the best paying parts of the labor market, including the most senior roles and functions such as engineering and technical fields,” said Korn Ferry Senior Client Partner Maryam Morse.

 

The index found that when comparing pay between genders overall in the US, men are paid 17.6% more than women, which is in line with research from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  However, the gap fell to 7% when evaluating the same job level, such as director.  The gap tightened to 2.6% when considering the same level at the same company; when male and female employees at the same level and the same company worked in the same function, the average gap was less than 0.9%.

 

Korn Ferry released the index in advance of Equal Pay Day, which takes place April 10.  The date symbolizes how far into the year women must work to earn what men earned in the previous year.  The National Committee on Pay Equity launched the event in 1996 as a public awareness event to illustrate the gap between men’s and women’s wages.

 

 

CMO, VP of Digital Marketing Top Staffing Firm’s List of Highest-Paying Martech Jobs

Daily News, March 28, 2018

 

Chief marketing officer and VP of digital marketing rank as the highest-paying marketing technology jobs, according to Mondo, a New York-based IT and digital marketing staffing provider.

 

Mondo’s annual Tech and Digital Marketing Salary Guide lists 10 MarTech jobs garnering salaries of $170,000 or more for 2018:

 

  1. CMO: $155,000 to $247,400
  2. VP of Digital Marketing: $137,500 to $200,000
  3. VP of MarTech Solutions: $140,000 to $210,000
  4. Director of Web Analytics: $100,000 to $185,000
  5. Director of Interactive: $127,500 to $180,000
  6. VP of eCommerce: $125,000 to $180,000
  7. Marketing Automation Architect: $145,000 to $180,000
  8. UX Specialist/Information Architect: $110,000 to $175,000
  9. Google Analytics Expert: $100,000 to $170,000
  10. VP of Interactive: $130,000 to $170,000

 

In addition, the 2018 Mondo MarTech Salary Guide found the professionals in highest demand are UX designer/developers and marketing automation managers — along with front-end developers — with salaries of up to $160,000 a year.

 

“In 2018, we are seeing a huge demand for digital marketing professionals with marketing automation skills, such as Marketo, Eloqua and Pardot,” said Gianna Scorsone, senior VP of marketing and sales operations for Mondo.  “We expect to see a spike in salaries for these positions and for experts with advanced high-end MarTech skills.”

 

Mondo’s 2018 MarTech Salary Guide data is based on the company’s placements over the past year in New York City, San Francisco, Washington DC, Philadelphia, Denver, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta and Dallas.

 

 

Gig Work becoming ‘New Normal,’ Kelly Research finds

Daily News, March 26, 2018

 

Gig work is becoming the new normal, according to the 2017 Gig Economy Talent Manager Research report released today by Kelly Services.

 

65% of talent and hiring managers surveyed stated the gig economy is rapidly becoming the new normal for how businesses organize work.  And 43% of organizations engaging gig workers experience at least a 20% labor cost savings; 72% say using gig workers/free agent talent gives their team/organization a competitive advantage.

 

The report describes gig work as any engagement for which talent is paid for a discrete task, project or period of time.  Dozens of terms fall under the “gig work” umbrella — from freelancers and independent consultants, to micropreneurs and independent contractors.

 

The research included a Workforce Optimization Maturity Index which provides insight into the maturity level with which firms currently leverage the gig workforce.  Those that use gig workers less effectively than their peers are called laggards; those with stronger skills and commensurate benefits are competents and differentiators.  The most-skilled organizations are innovators, which comprised just 13% of all companies.

 

“The research shows that hiring gig workers is pervasive across regions and industries, but there’s still room for improvement,” said Amy Anger, VP and global practice strategy lead, gig economy, for Kelly Services.  “The majority of hiring managers say a flexible workforce will be a key way to differentiate and compete in the future, yet 39% of organizations are what we call gig-work laggards: they aren’t currently using gig workers heavily nor strategically.”

 

The survey was conducted online by Inavero on behalf of Kelly Services.  It included more than 2,100 talent managers worldwide.

 

 

Economic Uncertainty, Gig Economy, Demographics make Adecco’s ‘Megatrends’ List

Daily News, March 22, 2018

 

Geopolitical and economic uncertainty, the gig economy and a new demographic mix are among 6 global “megatrends” affecting the world of work, according to The Adecco Group’s annual report released this week.

 

The full list of 6 trends:

 

Geopolitical and economic uncertainty — These factors increase companies’ need for flexibility. b“The workforce an organization requires today may not be the same as in a few years’ time,” according to the report.  “Businesses therefore value agility and flexibility more and more, to stay ahead in a rapidly changing world.  Flexible talent solutions are becoming an important source of competitive advantage.  Many of our most successful clients adopt as much as 50% flexibility within their workforce.”

 

The Gig Economy — More people choose to work a portfolio of jobs, or gigs, in place of traditional full-time roles, and online platforms help to match supply and demand.  “The flipside of this flexibility for workers and companies is that society needs to update its social protection systems to fit the demands of a changing world,” according to the report.  “We need to guarantee ‘flexicurity’ for everyone in the workforce.”

 

Skills imbalances — New jobs require new skills, and workers need education to upskill and reskill.  “In the US, 1,400,000 computer specialist roles will be created by 2020 yet more than 70% of vacancies will go unfilled,” the report said.  “Meanwhile, as automation and robotics adoption rises, as many as 14% of the global workforce will need to switch roles by 2030.”

 

New demographic mix — Populations are growing older in many countries and their workforces are shrinking, leading to talent shortages.  On the other hand, more people now choose to work during their retirement.  And another change — millennials will comprise 50% of the global workforce by 2020.  Adecco said it’s aiming to serve millennials and other demographic groups that are “digital natives” by putting in place mobile applications such as Adecco & Moi in France and its digital platforms Adia, Yoss and Vettery.

 

Automation, artificial intelligence and machine learning — Machines increasingly perform repetitive tasks, enabling workers to focus on higher value-added activities.  “Going forward, we see the combination of automation and flexible HR solutions as the next key driver of productivity for our clients,” the report said.  “For example, the automotive industry, with amongst the highest adoption of robotics in manufacturing globally, is also one of the largest users of flexible employment.”

 

Digitization, big data and analytics — The staffing industry is evolving from a branch-based model to a combination of online and offline models.  Meanwhile, digital marketplaces have the potential to transform direct-hire recruiting, and new, data-driven business models are emerging.  “The traditional idea of a branch network applies less to the new world of work, or to the needs of our candidates and clients,” CFO Hans Ploos van Amstel said in a statement in the annual report.  “We are evolving the way we deliver our core services from a purely branch-based system to an omni-channel delivery.  Of course, that local visibility and presence is still vital, especially for smaller customers, but we’re moving to fewer, big branches.”

 

 

Applicants with Impressive Résumés Frequently Disappoint in Job Interviews, Robert Half Finds

Daily News, March 20, 2018

 

Applicants with impressive résumés frequently disappoint in job interviews, according to research released today by Robert Half International Inc.  More than 6 in 10 senior managers surveyed, 64%, said it’s common for an applicant with a promising résumé not to live up to expectations when interviewed.

 

The research also found that, on average, managers review 40 résumés per job opening and spend 12 minutes looking at each one.  (40 x 12 = 480 mins = 8 hours).  They interview an average of 7 people per open position, and those meetings take an average of 41 minutes each.  (7 x 41 = 287 mins = 4 hours and 47 minutes.).

 

Verifying relevant experience is the top reason employers interview job candidates, at 61%, followed by assessing soft skills and corporate culture fit at 21% and evaluating technical skills at 18%.

 

A lack of technical abilities and soft skills are common reasons new hires don’t work out, at 51% and 49% respectively.

 

“Finding good résumés is just one piece of the hiring puzzle,” said Paul McDonald, senior executive director for Robert Half.  “The full process can be challenging, but recruiters lighten the load and accelerate the timeline for employers by sorting through application materials, conducting initial interviews, and assessing skills and corporate culture fit.  This allows hiring managers to focus their attention on candidates with the greatest potential.”

 

The survey was developed by Robert Half and conducted by an independent research firm.  It includes responses from more than 300 senior managers at US companies with 20 or more employees.

 

 

Working from Office Still Norm, but Shift to Flexible Work Underway, Randstad finds

Daily News, March 19, 2018

 

Working at the office during opening hours still dominates, but an agile way of working is underway, according to Randstad’s first-quarter ‘Workmonitor’ survey released today.  Both globally and in the US, 68% of survey respondents stated that they still work in a traditional manner: everyone works at the office during opening hours.  India came in at the highest end at 85% and The Netherlands was at the lowest end at 45%.

 

However, the survey did find a clear shift toward an agile way of working.  44% of respondents globally — including 43% in the US — stated that the way of working is shifting from traditional (always at the office) to agile (from multiple locations and outside standard opening hours).  And 41% globally said they already have an agile way of working and can work from anywhere at any time; in the US, the figure was 36%.

 

Other results from the survey include:

 

*Work-life balance:  82% of the global respondents like agile working as it allows them to maintain a good work-life balance and 81% said it improves their productivity, creativity and job satisfaction.  On the other hand, 44% indicate that it causes a lot of pressure on their personal life, as they never seem to be “disconnected” from work.  Strikingly, 47% of the male respondents have that feeling, whereas 40% of the female respondents say they do.

 

*Work location:  65% of the global respondents prefer to work from home or another location from time to time, and 56% state that their employer provides them with the technological equipment to do so.  In addition, 64% of the global respondents say they would prefer to work from home or another location, but they don’t have the possibility to do so in their job.  Finally, 59% globally prefer to work at the office; in this respect, India leads with 81% and the Netherlands scores lowest with 47%.

 

*Personal contact:  In order to stay informed and aligned with colleagues, 69% of the global respondents say they regularly have in-person or face-to-face meetings, versus 36% stating they have virtual team meetings via video conferencing.

 

The Randstad Workmonitor covers 33 countries around the world.  The first-quarter study was conducted online from Jan. 10 to Jan. 26.  The minimum sample size is 400 interviews per country.

 

 

Construction, Healthcare Roles Make Strong Showing on Indeed’s Best Jobs for 2018 List

Daily News, March 15, 2018

 

The best jobs in 2018 come from a wider variety of industries than last year, with a particularly strong showing from construction and healthcare-related roles, according to the best jobs of 2018 list released by jobs website Indeed.  The list is based on salary — jobs with a baseline salary of at least $75,000 — and jobs that have seen the most growth in number of postings on Indeed since 2014.

 

Commercial project manager leapt from No. 19 last year to the number one spot in 2018 — propelled by an average base salary of $81,023 and 277% growth in job postings between 2014 and 2017.  Overall, 16 jobs appeared in the results that weren’t on the list last year.

 

“Last year, this list was dominated by jobs in the tech sector, with software engineer and developer roles coming out on top,” said Indeed Senior VP Paul D’Arcy.  “While these roles are still at the top of our list, it is interesting to see a strong showing by construction jobs that were completely absent last year like pre-construction manager, which jumped straight to the top 5.”

 

The top 25 jobs are:

 

 

 

Report Questions Perception of Skills Gap

Daily News, March 14, 2018

 

While the prevalent national narrative is that there is a troubling skills gap among college-educated workers in the US labor market, analysis conducted by the National Association of Colleges and Employers questions whether the skills gap is as pervasive as it is cast to be.

 

In a NACE Journal article titled “Is There Really a Skills Gap?”, Edwin Koc, NACE’s director of research, public policy, and legislative issues, writes that this perceived “skills gap” has become an issue for higher education for two reasons:

 

*While certain “middle-class” jobs were filled in the past more frequently than not by those with a high school or some post-secondary education, they are now jobs for which employers are nearly universally demanding candidates with bachelor’s degrees.

 

*The “skills gap” is frequently attributed to a failure of the US education system, and more and more the part of the education system that is increasingly being blamed for the skills shortage is our nation’s colleges and universities.

 

“Despite several employer-based assessments of the employment market, there is no credible supporting evidence of a national skills gap that would warrant a comprehensive national response in the way of radical reform of the American higher education system,” Koc said.

 

He states that hires have exceeded separations, and the openings they create, for every month since 2010. “A mass of jobs in the United States are not going unfilled; a relatively small fraction of job openings are taking longer than the desired time to fill,” he said.

 

He added that the existence of a national skills shortage is also belied by national wage data. Since the recession, wage increases have held steady in the 2.0% to 2.5% range.

 

“There has been no significant jump, nor has there been a noticeable blip, in the trend suggesting a tremendous increase in demand not capable of being met with the supply of available workers,” Koc said.

 

In his report, however, Koc wrote that there are situations that result in skills shortages. These include when an employer’s location — particularly if it’s a rural location — makes finding the right skills difficult, employers aren’t willing to pay wages that would attract workers with the right skills, and rapidly changing technology requiring workers to constantly update their skills.

 

 

US Hiring Outlook Remains Strong for Q2:  Manpower Report

Daily News, March 13, 2018

 

US employers reported the hiring outlook remains strong for the 2nd quarter, according to the latest Manpower Employment Outlook Survey released today by ManpowerGroup Inc.  The US ranked among the strongest outlooks for hiring among 44 countries surveyed in the report.  Other countries with strong hiring outlooks included Croatia, Taiwan, Japan and Hungary.

 

They survey included more than 59,000 employers around the world.

 

“We are seeing optimism from employers in many countries across the world as the near-term global economic outlook is increasingly positive,” said Jonas Prising, ManpowerGroup chairman and CEO.  “Sustained positive hiring intentions combined with the ongoing impact of technology across all industries mean companies will need to find new ways of upskilling the workforce to help fill vacancies.  This must happen at speed and scale.  Businesses that are able to find the right balance of technology, talent and human connection will be those that will succeed in this Skills Revolution.”

 

In the US, ManpowerGroup’s survey found 23% of the more than 11,500 US employers surveyed plan to increase staff in the 2nd quarter, but only 3% plan to decrease, yielding a seasonally adjusted net employment outlook of 18%.

 

US organizations plan to add staff across all 13 industry sectors in in the 2nd quarter.  Employers report the strongest hiring intentions in leisure and hospitality, up 28%.  The outlook for professional and business services is also strong, up 24%.  And employers in wholesale and retail trade report some of the most optimistic outlooks in more than 16 years as online retail continues to grow and the increase in distribution workers is expected to rise.  Hiring intentions were up 23% for the last group.

 

“We’re seeing solid, demand-fueled growth across the US as the economy continues to strengthen and the labor market tightens at pace,” said Becky Frankiewicz, president of ManpowerGroup North America.  “The competition for skilled talent is set to heat up and a just-in-time approach isn’t always getting employers the skills they need when they need them.  Now is the time to invest in people by upskilling America’s workers.  We should also seek untapped talent sources with adjacent skill sets that can adapt to fill in-demand positions.”

 

All regions in the US reported positive 2nd quarter hiring plans.  Hiring prospects year over year are slightly stronger in the Midwest and the Northeast, while employers in the South and the West report relatively stable hiring intentions when compared with the 2nd quarter of 2017.

 

Employers in Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Alaska, Maine and Colorado report the strongest net employment outlooks.

 

ManpowerGroup’s employment outlook survey includes responses from more than 11,500 US employers.

 

 

Millennial Bosses prefer Online Messaging over Email and Phone, Korn Ferry says

Daily News, March 12, 2018

 

As millennials increasingly move into management positions, they favor a different way of communicating with their employees, according to a survey released today by executive search firm Korn Ferry International Inc.

 

More than half of the professionals surveyed, 55%, said online messaging is the most common way for millennial bosses to communicate with their direct reports, followed by email at 28%.  Only 14% said their favored way to communicate is in person, and 3% said via phone.

 

Millennials were identified as those born between 1981 and 1996.

 

“The way bosses communicate with their staff has a huge impact on organizational culture,” said Samantha Wallace, Korn Ferry Futurestep North American market leader, technology.  “Millennials grew up using screens as their primary form of interaction, and while online messaging and email are effective, efficient tools, face-to-face communication is needed to create an inclusive culture.”

 

The survey also found that compared with Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, knowing what is coming next is critical for millennial bosses.  Nearly three quarters, 74%, said a clear advancement path (for example, the next 2 positions) is more important for millennial bosses, with 49% saying it is much more important.

 

“Millennials tend to value clear communication and feedback, and organizational leaders seeking the best and brightest from this generation must work closely with millennial managers to provide well laid-out career paths,” Wallace said.

 

The Korn Ferry survey of professionals took place in February 2018 and garnered 1,537 responses.

 

 

The new ADP/Moody’s National Employment Report:  Over 72% of all new job growth in Marcb 2018 came from Small and Medium-size Companies!

April 4, 2018

 

Private sector employment increased by 241,000 jobs from February to March (a 5,000 job decrease from February’s ‘revised’ 246,000*), according to the March ADP National Employment Report®.  *The February total of jobs added was revised up from 235,000 to 246,000.

 

This report is produced by ADP® in collaboration with Moody’s Analytics.  The matched sample used to develop the ADP National Employment Report® was derived from ADP payroll data, which represents 411,000 U.S. clients employing nearly 24,000,000 workers in the U.S.

 

By Company Size

 

Small businesses:          47,000

1-19 employees              35,000

20-49 employees            12,000

 

Medium businesses:   127,000

50-499 employees        127,000

 

Large businesses:        67,000

500-999 employees        13,000

1,000+ employees          54,000

 

By Sector

 

  1. Goods-producing:                               65,000

 

  1. Natural resources/mining                    5,000
  2. Construction                                     31,000
  3. Manufacturing                                     29,000

 

  1. Service-providing:     176,000

 

  1. Trade/transportation/utilities              40,000
  2. Information               3,000
  3. Financial activities             18,000
  4. Professional/business services   44,000
  5. Professional/technical services                              27,000
  6. Management of companies/enterprises                     3,000
  7. Administrative/support services                            13,000
  8. Education/health services                          28,000
  9. Health care/social assistance                                  29,000
  10. Education                                                              <-1,000>
  11. Leisure/hospitality                                     26,000
  12. Other services                                             17,000

 

Franchise Employment

 

Franchise Jobs                        <-100>

 

“We saw impressive momentum in the first quarter of 2018 with more jobs added per month on average than in 2017,” said Ahu Yildirmaz, vice president and co-head of the ADP Research Institute.  “Midsized businesses added nearly half of all jobs this month, the best growth this segment has seen since the fall of 2014.  The manufacturing industry also performed well, with its strongest increase in more than three years.”

 

Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, said, “The job market is rip-roaring.  Monthly job growth remains firmly over 200,000, double the pace of labor force growth.  The tight labor market continues to tighten.”

 

(The April 2018 ADP National Employment Report will be released at 8:15 a.m. ET on May 2, 2018.)

 

Due to the important contribution that small businesses make to economic growth, employment data that is specific to businesses with 49 or fewer employees is reported each month in the ADP Small Business Report®, a subset of the ADP National Employment Report.

 

March 2018 Small Business Report Highlights

 

Total Small Business Employment:             47,000 (an 21,000 decrease)

 

●By Size  
►1-19 employees 35,000
►20-49 employees 12,000
   
●By Sector for 1-49 Employees  
►Goods Producing 11,000
►Service Producing 36,000
   
●By Sector for 1-19 Employees  
►Goods Producing 7,000
►Service Producing 28,000
   
●By Sector for 20-49 Employees  
►Goods Producing 4,000
►Service Producing 8,000

 

Bottom-line:  To my audience of recruiters, always remember this:  Our ‘bread and butter’, especially on the contingency side of the house, has historically been, and continues to be, small and medium-sized client companies.  Along with the large companies, these companies need to be in included in your niche!

 

 

Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey – January 2018

March 16, 2018

 

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that the number of job openings increased to 6,300,000 on the last business day of January, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.  Over the month, hires and separations were little changed at 5,600,000 and 5,400,000, respectively.  Within separations, the quits rate and the layoffs and discharges rate were little changed at 2.2% and 1.2%, respectively.  This release includes estimates of the number and rate of job openings, hires, and separations for the nonfarm sector by industry and by 4 geographic regions.  The release also includes 2017 annual estimates for hires and separations.  The annual number of hires at 65,300,000and the annual number of quits at 38,200,000 increased in 2017.  The annual number of layoffs and discharges at 20,700,000 edged up in 2017.

Job Openings On the last business day of January, the job openings level increased to a series high of 6,300,000 (+645,000).  The job openings level increased for total private (+608,000) and edged up for government.  The job openings rate increased to 4.1% in January.  The number of job openings increased in professional and business services (+215,000), transportation, warehousing, and utilities (+113,000), construction (+101,000), and several other industries.  The number of job openings increased in the South, Midwest, and West regions.______________________________________________________________ Revisions to the JOLTS Data                                  |Job openings, hires, and separations data have been revised to incorporate annual updates to the Current Employment Statistics employment estimates and the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) seasonal adjustment factors. See the revision section at the end of this release for more information.  ______________________________________________________________ Hires The number of hires was little changed at 5.6 million in January. The hires rate was little changed at 3.8 percent. The number of hires was little changed for total private and for government. Hires increased in federal government (+10,000). The number of hires was little changed in all four regions. Separations Total separations includes quits, layoffs and discharges, and other separations.  Total separations is referred to as turnover.  Quits are generally voluntary separations initiated by the employee.  Therefore, the quits rate can serve as a measure of workers’ willingness or ability to leave jobs.  Layoffs and discharges are involuntary separations initiated by the employer.  Other separations includes separations due to retirement, death, disability, and transfers to other locations of the same firm. There were 5,400,000 total separations in January, little changed from December.  The total separations rate in January was little changed at 3.7%.  The number of total separations was little changed for total private and edged down for government.  Total separations increased in health care and social assistance (+52,000) but decreased in federal government (-6,000).  The number of total separations was little changed in all four regions. The number of quits was little changed at 3,300,000 in January.  The quits rate was little changed at 2.2%. bOver the month, the number of quits was little changed for total private and for government.  Quits increased in arts, entertainment, and recreation (+13,000) but decreased in professional and business services (-71,000).  The number of quits decreased in the West region. There were 1,800,000 layoffs and discharges in January, little changed from December.  The layoffs and discharges rate was little changed at 1.2% in January.  The number of layoffs and discharges was little changed for total private and for government.  The layoffs and discharges level increased in health care and social assistance (+52,000).  Layoffs and discharges were little changed in all 4 regions. In January, the number of other separations increased for total nonfarm (+57,000) and for total private (+56,000).  The number of other separations was little changed for government.  Other separations increased in retail trade (+26,000) but decreased in federal government (-4,000). Other separations increased in the West region. Net Change in Employment Large numbers of hires and separations occur every month throughout the business cycle.  Net employment change results from the relationship between hires and separations.  When the number of hires exceeds the number of separations, employment rises, even if the hires level is steady or declining.  Conversely, when the number of hires is less than the number of separations, employment declines, even if the hires level is steady or rising.  Over the 12 months ending in January, hires totaled 65,400,000 and separations totaled 63,200,000, yielding a net employment gain of 2,100,000.  These totals include workers who may have been hired and separated more than once during the year. Annual Levels and Rates In 2017, there were 65,300,000 hires, an increase from 2016.  Total separations (the sum of quits, layoffs and discharges, and other separations) rose in 2017 to 63,000,000.  Quits rose for the eighth consecutive year reaching 38,200,000 in 2017 and comprised 61% of total separations.  Layoffs and discharges edged up in 2017 to 20,700,000 and comprised 33% of total separations. nOther separations declined in 2017 to 4,200,000 and comprised 7% of total separations. The annual hires for 2017 was 44.5% of the annual average CES employment level.  This rate has been trending upwards since 2009.  The annual total separations rate for 2017 was 43.0%.  The annual rates for the components of total separations were 26.0% for quits, 14.1% for layoffs and discharges, and 2.8% for other separations.________________________ The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey results for February 2018 are scheduled to be released on Friday, April 13, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. (EDT).

 

As we recruiters know, that 6,300,000 number only represents 20% of the jobs currently available in the marketplace.  The other 80% of job openings are unpublished and are filled through networking or word of mouth or by using a RECRUITER.   So, those 6,300,000 published job openings now become a total of 31,500,000 published AND hidden job orders.

 

In March there were 6,585,000 unemployed workers.  What was the main reason why those workers were unemployed?  Two Words:  Structural Unemployment.  If we can’t figure out how to educate and/or reeducate those 6,585,000 unemployed, then they will keep reappearing each month as a BLS unemployment statistic—as they have.  In the meantime, our recruitment marketplace flourishes!

 

 

Online Job Ads Increased 102,100 in March

April 4, 2018

 

*Most States showed small gains

*Most occupations showed gains over the month

 

Online advertised vacancies increased 102,100 to 4,819,700 in March, according to The Conference Board Help Wanted OnLine® (HWOL) Data Series,released today.  The February Supply/Demand rate stands at 1.42 unemployed for each advertised vacancy, with a total of 2,000,000 more unemployed workers than the number of advertised vacancies.  The number of unemployed was approximately 6,700,000 in February.

 

The Professional occupational category saw gains in Management (14.4) and Healthcare practitioners and technical (11.7).  The Services/Production occupational category saw changes in Sales (21.2), Transportation (14.6), and Food prep (-11.7).

 

NOTE:  Recently, the HWOL Data Series has experienced a declining trend in the number of online job ads that may not reflect broader trends in the U.S. labor market.  Based on changes in how job postings appear online, The Conference Board is reviewing its HWOL methodology to ensure accuracy and alignment with market trends.

 

OCCUPATIONAL HIGHLIGHTS

 

*In March, 9 of the largest 10 online occupational categories posted increases and 1 declined.

 

Management ads increased 14,400 to 426,800.  The supply/demand rate lies at 0.71, i.e. 1 advertised openings per unemployed job-seeker.

 

Healthcare practitioners and technical ads increased 11,700 to 529,900.  The supply/demand rate lies at 0.28, i.e. 3 advertised opening per unemployed job-seeker.

 

Education ads increased 6,900 to 174,300.  The supply/demand rate lies at 1.95, i.e. over 1 unemployed job-seekers for every advertised available opening.

 

Sales and related ads increased 21,200 to 470,500.  The supply/demand rate lies at 1.72, i.e. over 1 unemployed job-seekers for every advertised available opening.

 

Transportation ads increased 14,600 to 383,200.  The supply/demand rate lies at 1.50, i.e. over 1 unemployed job-seekers for every advertised available opening.

 

Food and prep ads decreased 11,700 to 219,500.  The supply/demand rate lies at 2.57, i.e. 2 unemployed job-seekers for every advertised available opening.

 

(The April 2018 Conference Board Help Wanted OnLine® (HWOL) Data Series will be released at 10:00 AM ET on Wednesday, May 2, 2018)

 

 

U-6 Update

 

In March 2018 the regular unemployment rate again remained at 4.1% and the broader U-6 measure dropped .2% to 8.0%.

 

The above 8.0% is referred to as the U-6 unemployment rate (found in the monthly BLS Employment Situation Summary, Table A-15; Table A-12 in 2008 and before).  It counts not only people without work seeking full-time employment (the more familiar U-3 rate), but also counts “marginally attached workers and those working part-time for economic reasons.”  Note that some of these part-time workers counted as employed by U-3 could be working as little as an hour a week.  And the “marginally attached workers” include those who have gotten discouraged and stopped looking, but still want to work.  The age considered for this calculation is 16 years and over.

 

Here is a look at the March U-6 numbers for the past 15 years:

 

March 2017                 8.9%

March 2016                 9.8%

March 2015                 10.9%

March 2014                 12.6%

March 2013                 13.8%

March 2012                 14.5%

March 2011                 15.7%

March 2010                 16.8%

March 2009                 15.6%

March 2008                 9.1%

March 2007                 8.0%

March 2006                 8.2%

March 2005                 9.1%

March 2004                 9.9%

March 2003                 10.0%

 

 

The March 2018 BLS Analysis

 

According to the March 2018 Employment Situation Summary, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a division of the US Department of Labor, the total nonfarm payroll employment edged up by 103,000 in March – a decrease of 223,000 from last month’s ‘revised’ 326,000—up from the originally reported, 313,000.

 

The unemployment rate is also published by the BLS.  That rate is found by dividing the number of unemployed by the total civilian labor force.  On April 6th, 2018, the BLS published the most recent unemployment rate for March 2018 of 4.1% (actually it is 4.071%, down by .071% from 4.142% in February 2018).  This is very close to last month’s number—the lowest unemployment rate in about 17 years!

 

The unemployment rate was determined by dividing the unemployed of 6,585,000 (–down from the month before by 121,000—since March 2017 this number has decreased by 586,000) by the total civilian labor force of 161,763,000 (down by 158,000 from February 2018).  Since March 2017, our total civilian labor force has increased by 1,528,000 workers.

 

(The continuing ‘Strange BLS Math’ saga—after a detour in December 2016 when the BLS {for the first time in years} DECREASED the total Civilian Noninstitutional Population—this month the BLS again increased this total to 257,097,000.  This is an increase of 163,000 from last month’s increase of 154,000.  In one year’s time, this population has increased by 2,683,000. The Civilian Noninstitutional Population has increased each month—except in December 2016—by…)

 

Up from February 2018 by 163,000
Up from January 2018 by 154,000
Up from December 2017 by 671,000
Up from November 2017 by 160,000
Up from October 2017 by 183,000
Up from September 2017 by 204,000
Up from August 2017 by 205,000
Up from July 2017 by 206,000
Up from June 2017 by 194,000
Up from May 2017 by 173,000
Up from April 2017 by 179,000
Up from March 2017 by 174,000
Up from February 2017 by 168,000
Up from January 2017 by 164,000
Down from December 2016 by 660,000
Up from November 2016 by 202,000
Up from October 2016 by 219,000
Up from September 2016 by 230,000
Up from August 2016 by 237,000
Up from July 2016 by 234,000
Up from June 2016 by 223,000
Up from May 2016 by 223,000
Up from April 2016 by 205,000
Up from March 2016 by 201,000
Up from February 2016 by 191,000
Up from January 2016 by 180,000
Up from December 2015 by 461,000
Up from November 2015 by 189,000
Up from October 2015 by 206,000
Up from September 2015 by 216,000
Up from August 2015 by 229,000
Up from July 2015 by 220,000
Up from June 2015 by 213,000
Up from May 2015 by 208,000
Up from April 2015 by 189,000
Up from March 2015 by 186,000
Up from February 2015 by 191,000
Up from January 2015 by 176,000
Up from December 2014 by 696,000
Up from November 2014 by 143,000
Up from October 2014 by 187,000
Up from September 2014 by 211,000
Up from August 2014 by 217,000
Up from July 2014 by 206,000
Up from June 2014 by 209,000
Up from May 2014 by 192,000
Up from April 2014 by 183,000
Up from March 2014 by 181,000
Up from February 2014 by 173,000
Up from January 2014 by 170,000
Up from December 2013 by 170,000
Up from November 2013 by 178,000
Up from October 2013 by 186,000
Up from September 2013 by 213,000
Up from August 2013 by 209,000
Up from July 2013 by 203,000
Up from June 2013 by 204,000
Up from May 2013 by 189,000
Up from April 2013 by 188,000
Up from March 2013 by 180,000
Up from February 2013 by 167,000
Up from January 2013 by 165,000
Up from December 2012 by 313,000
Up from November 2012 by 176,000
Up from October 2012 by 191,000
Up from September 2012 by 211,000
Up from August 2012 by 206,000
Up from July 2012 by 212,000
Up from June 2012 by 199,000
Up from May 2012 by 189,000
Up from April 2012 by 182,000
Up from March 2012 by 180,000
Up from February 2012 by 169,000
Up from January 2012 by 335,000
Up from December 2011 by 2,020,000

 

This month the BLS has decreased the Civilian Labor Force to 161,763,000 (down from February by 158,000).

 

Subtract the second number (‘civilian labor force’) from the first number (‘civilian noninstitutional population’) and you get 95,334,000 ‘Not in Labor Force’—up by 322,000 from last month’s 95,013,000.  In one year’s time, this NILF population has increased by 1,155,000.  The government tells us that most of these NILFs got discouraged and just gave up looking for a job.  My monthly recurring question is: “If that is the case, how do they survive when they don’t earn any money because they don’t have a job?  Are they ALL relying on the government to support them??”

 

This month, our Employment Participation Rate—the population 16 years and older working or seeking work— dropped .1% to 62.9%.  This is .5% above the historically low rate of 62.4% recorded in September 2015—and, before that, the rate recorded in October 1977—9 months into Jimmy Carter’s presidency—almost 40 years ago!

 

Final take on these numbers:  Fewer people looking for work will always bring down the unemployment rate.

 

Anyway, back to the point I am trying to make.  On the surface, these new unemployment rates are scary, but let’s look a little deeper and consider some other numbers.

 

The unemployment rate includes all types of workers—construction workers, government workers, etc.  We recruiters, on the other hand, mainly place management, professional and related types of workers.  That unemployment rate in March was 2.0% (this rate was the same as last month’s 2.0%).  Or, you can look at it another way.  We usually place people who have college degrees.  That unemployment rate in March was 2.2% (this rate was .1% lower as last month’s 2.3%).

 

Now stay with me a little longer.  This gets better.  It’s important to understand (and none of the pundits mention this) that the unemployment rate, for many reasons, will never be 0%, no matter how good the economy is.  Without boring you any more than I have already, let me add here that Milton Friedman (the renowned Nobel Prize-winning economist), is famous for the theory of the “natural rate of unemployment” (or the term he preferred, NAIRU, which is the acronym for Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment).  Basically, this theory states that full employment presupposes an ‘unavoidable and acceptable’ unemployment rate of somewhere between 4-6% with it.  Economists often settle on 5%, although the “New Normal Unemployment Rate” has been suggested to fall at 6.7%.

 

Nevertheless (if you will allow me to apply a ‘macro’ concept to a ‘micro’ issue), if this rate is applied to our main category of Management, Professional and Related types of potential recruits, and/or our other main category of College-Degreed potential recruits, we are well below the 4-6% threshold for full employment…we find no unemployment!  None!  Zilch!  A Big Goose Egg!

 

 

THE IMPORTANCE OF GDP

 

“The economic goal of any nation, as of any individual, is to get the greatest results with the least effort.  The whole economic progress of mankind has consisted in getting more production with the same labor…Translated into national terms, this first principle means that our real objective is to maximize production.  In doing this, full employment—that is, the absence of involuntary idleness—becomes a necessary by-product.  But production is the end, employment merely the means.  We cannot continuously have the fullest production without full employment.  But we can very easily have full employment without full production.”

 

Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt, Chapter X, “The Fetish of Full Employment”

On March 28th, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) announced the real gross domestic product (GDP) — the value of the goods and services produced by the nation’s economy less the value of the goods and services used up in production, adjusted for price changes — increased at an annual rate of 2.9% in the fourth quarter of 2017, according to the “third” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.  In the third quarter of 2017, real GDP increased 3.2%.

 

The GDP estimate released today is based on more complete source data than were available for the “second” estimate issued last month.  In the second estimate, the increase in real GDP was 2.5%.  With this third estimate for the fourth quarter, the general picture of economic growth remains the same; personal consumption expenditures (PCE) and private inventory investment were revised up

 

The increase in real GDP in the fourth quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from PCE, nonresidential fixed investment, exports, residential fixed investment, state and local government spending, and federal government spending that were partly offset by a negative contribution from private inventory investment.  Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased

 

The deceleration in real GDP growth in the fourth quarter reflected a downturn in private inventory investment that was partly offset by accelerations in PCE, exports, state and local government spending, nonresidential fixed investment, and federal government spending, and an upturn in residential fixed investment.  Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, turned up.

 

Updates to GDP

 

The upward revision to the percent change in real GDP reflected upward revisions to PCE and private inventory investment.

 

2017 GDP

 

Real GDP increased 2.3% in 2017 (that is, from the 2016 annual level to the 2017 annual level), compared with an increase of 1.5% in 2016.

 

The increase in real GDP in 2017 primarily reflected positive contributions from PCE, nonresidential fixed investment, and exports.  These contributions were partly offset by a decline in private inventory investment.  Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.

 

The acceleration in real GDP from 2016 to 2017 reflected upturns in nonresidential fixed investment and in exports and a smaller decrease in private inventory investment.  These movements were partly offset by decelerations in residential fixed investment and in state and local government spending.  Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, accelerated.

Three Update Releases to GDP BEA releases 3 vintages of the current quarterly estimate for GDP:  “Advance” estimates are released near the end of the first month following the end of the quarter and are based on source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency; “second” and “third” estimates are released near the end of the second and third months, respectively, and are based on more detailed and more comprehensive data as they become available. Annual and comprehensive updates are typically released in late July.  Annual updates generally cover at least the 3 most recent calendar years (and their associated quarters) and incorporate newly available major annual source data as well as some changes in methods and definitions to improve the accounts.  Comprehensive (or benchmark) updates are carried out at about 5-year intervals and incorporate major periodic source data, as well as major conceptual improvements.

 

 (First Quarter 2018 “Advance” Estimate will be released on April 27, 2018)

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT EVER TO BE ZERO

 

‘Unemployment’ is an emotional ‘trigger’ word…a ‘third rail’, if you will.  It conjures up negative thoughts.  But it is important to realize that, while we want everyone who wants a job to have the opportunity to work, unemployment can never be zero and, in fact, can be disruptive to an economy if it gets too close to zero.  Very low unemployment can actually hurt the economy by creating an upward pressure on wages which invariably leads to higher production costs and prices.  This can lead to inflation.  The lowest the unemployment rate has been in the US was 2.5%.  That was in May and June 1953 when the economy overheated due to the Korean War.  When this bubble burst, it kicked off the Recession of 1953.  A healthy economy will always include some percentage of unemployment.

 

There are five main sources of unemployment:

 

  1. Cyclical (or demand-deficient) unemployment – This type of unemployment fluctuates with the business cycle. It rises during a recession and falls during the subsequent recovery.  Workers who are most affected by this type of unemployment are laid off during a recession when production volumes fall, and companies use lay-offs as the easiest way to reduce costs.  These workers are usually rehired, some months later, when the economy improves.

 

  1. Frictional unemployment – This comes from the normal turnover in the labor force. This is where new workers are entering the workforce and older workers are retiring and leaving vacancies to be filled by the new workers or those re-entering the workforce.  This category includes workers who are between jobs.

 

  1. Structural unemployment – This happens when the skills possessed by the unemployed worker don’t match the requirements of the opening—whether those be in characteristics and skills or in location. This can come from new technology or foreign competition (e.g., foreign outsourcing).  This type of unemployment usually lasts longer than frictional unemployment because retraining, and sometimes relocation, is involved.  Occasionally jobs in this category can just disappear overseas.

 

  1. Seasonal unemployment – This happens when the workforce is affected by the climate or time of year. Construction workers and agricultural workers aren’t needed as much during the winter season because of the inclement weather.  On the other hand, retail workers experience an increase in hiring shortly before, and during, the holiday season, but can be laid off shortly thereafter.

 

  1. Surplus unemployment – This is caused by minimum wage laws and unions. When wages are set at a higher level, unemployment can often result.  Why?  To keep within the same payroll budget, the company must let go of some workers to pay the remaining workers a higher salary.

 

Other factors influencing the unemployment rate:

 

  1. Length of unemployment – Some studies indicate that an important factor influencing a worker’s decision to accept a new job is directly related to the length of the unemployment benefit they are receiving. Currently, in 2017, workers in most states are eligible for up to 26 weeks of benefits from the regular state-funded unemployment compensation program, although eight states provide fewer weeks and one provides more. Studies suggest that additional weeks of benefits reduce the incentive of the unemployed to seek and accept less desirable jobs.

 

  1. Changes in GDP – Since hiring workers takes time, the improvement in the unemployment rate usually lags behind the improvement in the GDP.

 

WHERE RECRUITERS PLACE

 

Now back to the issue at hand, namely the recruiting, and placing, of professionals and those with college degrees.

 

If you look at the past few years of unemployment in the March “management, professional and related” types of worker category, you will find the following rates:

 

March 2017                 2.0%

March 2016                 2.4%

March 2015                 2.4%

March 2014                 3.3%

March 2013                 3.6%

March 2012                 4.2%

March 2011                 4.3%

March 2010                 4.7%

March 2009                 4.2%

March 2008                 2.1%

March 2007                 1.8%

March 2006                 2.1%

March 2005                 2.3%

March 2004                 2.7%

March 2003                 2.9%

March 2002                 2.8%

March 2001                 2.0%

March 2000                 1.8%

 

Here are the rates, during those same time periods, for “college-degreed” workers:

 

March 2017                 2.5%

March 2016                 2.6%

March 2015                 2.5%

March 2014                 3.4%

March 2013                 3.8%

March 2012                 4.2%

March 2011                 4.4%

March 2010                 4.8%

March 2009                 4.4%

March 2008                 2.1%

March 2007                 1.8%

March 2006                 2.2%

March 2005                 2.4%

March 2004                 2.9%

March 2003                 3.1%

March 2002                 2.8%

March 2001                 1.9%

March 2000                 1.6%

 

The March 2018 rates for these two categories, 2.0% and 2.2%, respectively, are low again this month and are at, or close to, the halcyon numbers we attained in the 2006-2008 & 2000-2001 time frames.  But regardless, these unemployment numbers usually include a good number of job hoppers, job shoppers and rejects.  We, on the other hand, are engaged by our client companies to find those candidates who are happy, well-appreciated, making good money and currently working and we entice them to move for even better opportunities—especially where new technologies are expanding.  This will never change.  And that is why, no matter the overall unemployment rate, we still need to MARKET to find the best possible job orders to work and we still need to RECRUIT to find the best possible candidates for those Job Orders.

 

 

 

Below are the numbers for the over 25-year old’s:

 

 

Less than H.S. diploma – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
7.7% 7.4% 8.2% 7.9% 8.4% 8.9% 8.6% 9.7% 9.8% 10.4% 10.6% 10.9%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
12.0% 12.6% 13.3% 14.8% 15.5% 15.5% 15.4% 15.6% 15.0% 15.5% 15.0% 15.3%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
15.2% 15.6% 14.5% 14.7% 15.0% 14.1% 13.8% 14.0% 15.4% 15.3% 15.7% 15.3%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
14.2% 13.9% 13.7% 14.6% 14.7% 14.3% 15.0% 14.3% 14.0% 13.8% 13.2% 13.8%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
13.1% 12.9% 12.6% 12.5% 13.0% 12.6% 12.7% 12.0% 11.3% 12.2% 12.2% 11.7%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
12.0% 11.2% 11.1% 11.6% 11.1% 10.7% 11.0% 11.3% 10.3% 10.9% 10.8% 9.8%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
9.6% 9.8% 9.6% 8.9% 9.1% 9.1% 9.6% 9.1% 8.4% 7.9% 8.5% 8.8%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
8.5% 8.4% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6% 8.2% 8.3% 7.7% 7.7% 7.3% 6.8% 6.7%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
7.4% 7.3% 7.4% 7.5% 7.1% 7.5% 6.3% 7.2% 8.5% 7.3% 7.9% 7.9%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
7.3% 7.9% 6.8% 6.5% 6.1% 6.4% 6.9% 6.0% 6.5% 5.7% 5.2% 6.3%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
5.4% 5.7% 5.5%                  

 

 

H.S. Grad; no college – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
4.6% 4.7% 5.1% 5.0% 5.2% 5.2% 5.3% 5.8% 6.3% 6.5% 6.9% 7.7%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
8.1% 8.3% 9.0% 9.3% 10.0% 9.8% 9.4% 9.7% 10.8% 11.2% 10.4% 10.5%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
10.1% 10.5% 10.8% 10.6% 10.9% 10.8% 10.1% 10.3% 10.0% 10.1% 10.0% 9.8%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
9.4% 9.5% 9.5% 9.7% 9.5% 10.0% 9.3% 9.6% 9.7% 9.6% 8.8% 8.7%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
8.4% 8.3% 8.0% 7.9% 8.1% 8.4% 8.7% 8.8% 8.7% 8.4% 8.1% 8.0%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
8.1% 7.9% 7.6% 7.4% 7.4% 7.6% 7.6% 7.6% 7.6% 7.3% 7.3% 7.1%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
6.5% 6.4% 6.3% 6.3% 6.5% 5.8% 6.1% 6.2% 5.3% 5.7% 5.6% 5.3%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
5.4% 5.4% 5.3% 5.4% 5.8% 5.4% 5.5% 5.5% 5.3% 5.3% 5.4% 5.6%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
5.3% 5.3% 5.4% 5.4% 5.1% 5.0% 5.0% 5.1% 5.2% 5.5% 4.9% 5.1%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
5.2% 5.0% 4.9% 4.6% 4.7% 4.6% 4.5% 5.1% 4.3% 4.3% 4.3% 4.2%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
4.5% 4.4% 4.3%                  

 

 

Some College; or AA/AS – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
3.7% 3.8% 3.9% 4.0% 4.3% 4.4% 4.6% 5.0% 5.1% 5.3% 5.5% 5.6%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
6.2% 7.0% 7.2% 7.4% 7.7% 8.0% 7.9% 8.2% 8.5% 9.0% 9.0% 9.0%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
8.5% 8.0% 8.2% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% 8.3% 8.7% 9.1% 8.5% 8.7% 8.1%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
8.0% 7.8% 7.4% 7.5% 8.0% 8.4% 8.3% 8.2% 8.4% 8.3% 7.6% 7.7%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
7.2% 7.3% 7.5% 7.6% 7.9% 7.5% 7.1% 6.6% 6.5% 6.9% 6.6% 6.9%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
7.0% 6.7% 6.4% 6.4% 6.5% 6.4% 6.0% 6.1% 6.0% 6.3% 6.4% 6.1%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
6.0% 6.2% 6.1% 5.7% 5.5% 5.0% 5.3% 5.4% 5.4% 4.8% 4.9% 5.0%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
5.2% 5.1% 4.8% 4.7% 4.4% 4.2% 4.4% 4.4% 4.3% 4.3% 4.4% 4.1%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
4.2% 4.2% 4.1% 4.1% 3.9% 4.2% 4.3% 4.3% 4.2% 4.2% 3.9% 3.8%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
3.8% 4.0% 3.7% 3.7% 4.0% 3.8% 3.7% 3.8% 3.6% 3.7% 3.6% 3.6%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
3.4% 3.5% 3.6%                  

 

 

BS/BS + – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.3% 2.4% 2.5% 2.7% 2.6% 3.1% 3.2% 3.7%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
3.9% 4.1% 4.3% 4.4% 4.8% 4.7% 4.7% 4.7% 4.9% 4.7% 4.9% 5.0%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
4.8% 5.0% 4.9% 4.9% 4.7% 4.4% 4.5% 4.6% 4.4% 4.7% 5.1% 4.8%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
4.2% 4.3% 4.4% 4.5% 4.5% 4.4% 4.3% 4.3% 4.2% 4.4% 4.4% 4.1%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 4.0% 3.9% 4.1% 4.1% 4.1% 4.1% 3.8% 3.8% 3.9%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.9% 3.8% 3.9% 3.8% 3.5% 3.7% 3.8% 3.4% 3.3%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
3.3% 3.4% 3.4% 3.3% 3.2% 3.3% 3.1% 3.2% 2.9% 3.1% 3.2% 2.8%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
2.8% 2.7% 2.5% 2.7% 2.7% 2.5% 2.6% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
2.5% 2.5% 2.6% 2.4% 2.4% 2.5% 2.5% 2.7% 2.5% 2.6% 2.3% 2.5%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
2.5% 2.4% 2.5% 2.4% 2.3% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% 2.3% 2.0% 2.1% 2.1%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
2.1% 2.3% 2.2%                  

 

 

Management, Professional & Related – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
2.2% 2.2% 2.1% 2.0% 2.6% 2.7% 2.9% 3.3% 2.8% 3.0% 3.2% 3.3%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
4.1% 3.9% 4.2% 4.0% 4.6% 5.0% 5.5% 5.4% 5.2% 4.7% 4.6% 4.6%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
5.0% 4.8% 4.7% 4.5% 4.5% 4.9% 5.0% 5.1% 4.4% 4.5% 4.7% 4.6%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
4.7% 4.4% 4.3% 4.0% 4.4% 4.7% 5.0% 4.9% 4.4% 4.4% 4.2% 4.2%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
4.3% 4.2% 4.2% 3.7% 4.0% 4.4% 4.8% 4.5% 3.9% 3.8% 3.6% 3.9%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
3.9% 3.8% 3.6% 3.5% 3.5% 4.2% 4.1% 3.8% 3.5% 3.4% 3.1% 2.9%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
3.1% 3.2% 3.3% 2.9% 3.1% 3.5% 3.5% 3.4% 2.8% 2.7% 2.8% 2.7%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
2.9% 2.7% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% 2.9% 3.1% 2.9% 2.4% 2.2% 2.1% 2.0%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
2.3% 2.4% 2.4% 2.1% 2.1% 2.8% 3.0% 3.1% 2.7% 2.5% 2.3% 2.2%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
2.3% 2.1% 2.0% 2.0% 1.9% 2.3% 2.7% 2.8% 2.3% 2.1% 2.0% 2.0%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
2.2% 2.0% 2.0%                  

 

 

Or employed…(,000)

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
52,165 52,498 52,681 52,819 52,544 52,735 52,655 52,626 53,104 53,485 53,274 52,548

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
52,358 52,196 52,345 52,597 52,256 51,776 51,810 51,724 52,186 52,981 52,263 52,131

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
52,159 52,324 52,163 52,355 51,839 51,414 50,974 50,879 51,757 51,818 52,263 51,704

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
51,866 52,557 53,243 53,216 52,778 52,120 51,662 51,997 52,665 52,864 52,787 52,808

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
53,152 53,208 53,771 54,055 54,156 53,846 53,165 53,696 54,655 55,223 54,951 54,635

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
54,214 54,563 54,721 54,767 54,740 54,323 54,064 54,515 55,013 55,155 55,583 54,880

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
55,096 55,501 56,036 55,896 56,202 55,714 55,381 55,646 56,365 56,759 57,110 56,888

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
57,367 57,596 57,805 57,953 58,155 57,710 57,392 57,288 58,105 58,456 58,667 59,030

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
59,014 59,583 60,080 59,690 59,613 59,181 58,434 58,526 59,599 59,766 59,707 60,069

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
59,921 61,064 61,156 61,317 61,174 60,705 59,923 59,559 60,990 61,062 61,818 62,121

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
62,123 62,908 63,067                  

 

 

And unemployed…(,000)

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
1,164 1,159 1,121 1,088 1,407 1,478 1,585 1,779 1,539 1,647 1,786 1,802

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
2,238 2,137 2,292 2,164 2,373 2,720 3,034 2,925 2,859 2,593 2,530 2,509

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
2,762 2,637 2,600 2,464 2,450 2,644 2,687 2,762 2,381 2,417 2,525 2,468

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
2,557 2,435 2,381 2,196 2,419 2,598 2,742 2,671 2,450 2,410 2,336 2,303

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
2,410 2,336 2,330 2,062 2,275 2,472 2,666 2,556 2,245 2,170 2,077 2,221

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
2,211 2,164 2,020 1,980 1,990 2,358 2,286 2,130 1,978 1,930 1,749 1,637

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
1,784 1,845 1,890 1,642 1,795 2,001 2,011 1,930 1,617 1,582 1,656 1,568

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
1,741 1,601 1,398 1,435 1,460 1,714 1,807 1,686 1,414 1,312 1,276 1,208

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
1,404 1,456 1,477 1,251 1,305 1,712 1,782 1,869 1,652 1,506 1,382 1,361

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
1,425 1,313 1,265 1,254 1,208 1,440 1,656 1,731 1,463 1,285 1,266 1,290

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
1,374 1,301 1,310                  

 

 

For a total Management, Professional & Related workforce of…(,000)

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
53,329 53,657 53,802 53,907 53,951 54,213 54,240 54,405 54,643 55,132 55,060 54,350

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
54,596 54,333 54,637 54,761 54,629 54,496 54,844 54,649 55,045 55,574 54,793 54,640

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
54,921 54,961 54,763 54,819 54,289 54,058 53,661 53,641 54,138 54,235 54,788 54,172

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
54,423 54,992 55,624 55,412 55,197 54,718 54,404 54,668 55,115 55,274 55,123 55,111

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
55,562 55,544 56,101 56,117 56,431 56,318 55,831 56,252 56,900 57,393 57,028 56,856

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
56,425 56,727 56,741 56,747 56,730 56,681 56,350 56,645 56,991 57,085 57,332 56,517

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
56,880 57,346 57,926 57,538 57,997 57,715 57,392 57,576 57,982 58,341 58,766 58,456

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
59,108 59,197 59,203 59,388 59,615 59,424 59,199 58,974 59,519 59,768 59,943 60,238

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
60,418 61,039 61,557 60,941 60,918 60,893 60,216 60,395 61,251 61,272 61,089 61,430

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
61,346 62,377 62,421 62,571 62,382 62,145 61,579 61,290 62,453 62,347 63,084 63,411

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
63,497 64,209 64,377                  

 

 

Management, Business and Financial Operations – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
2.3% 2.3% 2.2% 2.1% 2.7% 2.5% 2.6% 2.8% 2.8% 3.0% 3.6% 3.9%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
4.6% 4.5% 4.5% 4.4% 4.6% 4.8% 4.9% 5.0% 5.2% 5.4% 5.4% 5.2%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
5.2% 5.1% 5.4% 5.1% 4.9% 4.8% 4.7% 4.9% 4.3% 5.0% 5.5% 5.7%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
5.3% 4.9% 4.8% 4.6% 4.9% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.6% 4.7% 4.6% 4.4%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
4.5% 4.4% 4.4% 4.0% 4.1% 3.8% 3.8% 3.7% 3.5% 3.6% 3.8% 4.1%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
4.0% 3.9% 3.5% 3.5% 3.8% 3.5% 3.1% 3.4% 3.3% 3.7% 3.2% 3.1%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
3.4% 3.6% 3.5% 3.2% 3.3% 2.8% 2.7% 2.6% 2.4% 2.7% 2.7% 2.5%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
3.0% 2.8% 2.6% 2.6% 2.9% 2.4% 2.3% 2.2% 2.4% 2.2% 2.1% 1.9%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
2.3% 2.6% 2.5% 2.4% 2.4% 2.5% 2.4% 2.5% 2.8% 2.5% 2.3% 2.4%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
2.5% 2.4% 2.4% 2.2% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9% 2.4% 2.5% 1.9% 1.9% 2.0%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
2.0% 2.0% 2.0%                  

 

 

Professional & Related – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
2.1% 2.1% 2.0% 2.0% 2.5% 2.9% 3.2% 3.6% 2.8% 3.0% 3.0% 2.9%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
4.9% 4.6% 4.3% 4.1% 4.3% 5.0% 5.2% 5.3% 4.4% 4.1% 4.1% 3.8%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
4.3% 4.1% 3.9% 3.5% 4.0% 4.9% 5.3% 5.1% 4.4% 4.1% 4.0% 4.0%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
4.2% 4.1% 4.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.8% 5.5% 5.2% 4.3% 3.9% 3.5% 3.8%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
3.8% 3.8% 3.6% 3.4% 3.3% 4.6% 4.7% 4.0% 3.6% 3.1% 2.9% 2.7%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
2.9% 3.0% 3.1% 2.6% 2.9% 4.0% 4.1% 3.9% 3.1% 2.7% 2.9% 2.8%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
2.9% 2.7% 2.2% 2.3% 2.1% 3.2% 3.6% 3.3% 2.4% 2.2% 2.2% 2.1%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
2.4% 2.2% 2.3% 1.8% 2.0% 3.1% 3.4% 3.5% 2.6% 2.4% 2.2% 2.1%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
2.2% 1.9% 1.8% 1.8% 2.0% 2.6% 3.3% 3.1% 2.3% 2.2% 2.0% 2.1%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
2.3% 2.0% 2.1%                  

 

 

Sales & Related – Unemployment Rate

 

1/08 2/08 3/08 4/08 5/08 6/08 7/08 8/08 9/08 10/08 11/08 12/08
5.2% 5.2% 4.8% 4.3% 5.1% 5.6% 6.2% 6.3% 5.7% 6.1% 6.5% 7.0%

 

1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/09 7/09 8/09 9/09 10/09 11/09 12/09
7.7% 8.4% 8.9% 8.6% 8.9% 9.1% 8.3% 8.7% 8.9% 9.5% 9.1% 8.9%

 

1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 5/10 6/10 7/10 8/10 9/10 10/10 11/10 12/10
10.1% 10.2% 9.7% 9.2% 9.6% 9.4% 10.1% 9.0% 9.4% 9.1% 8.8% 8.3%

 

1/11 2/11 3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11
9.3% 9.0% 8.5% 8.5% 9.4% 9.7% 9.4% 8.6% 9.4% 8.2% 7.8% 7.7%

 

1/12 2/12 3/12 4/12 5/12 6/12 7/12 8/12 9/12 10/12 11/12 12/12
8.2% 7.9% 8.1% 7.6% 7.9% 8.4% 8.3% 8.6% 7.9% 7.0% 7.3% 7.0%

 

1/13 2/13 3/13 4/13 5/13 6/13 7/13 8/13 9/13 10/13 11/13 12/13
8.5% 8.2% 7.7% 6.9% 7.1% 6.7% 6.9% 7.2% 7.5% 7.3% 7.0% 6.3%

 

1/14 2/14 3/14 4/14 5/14 6/14 7/14 8/14 9/14 10/14 11/14 12/14
7.1% 7.7% 6.8% 5.8% 6.8% 6.1% 6.2% 5.6% 5.4% 5.2% 5.3% 5.0%

 

1/15 2/15 3/15 4/15 5/15 6/15 7/15 8/15 9/15 10/15 11/15 12/15
5.8% 5.2% 5.8% 5.5% 5.8% 5.6% 5.8% 5.4% 5.6% 5.3% 5.1% 4.3%

 

1/16 2/16 3/16 4/16 5/16 6/16 7/16 8/16 9/16 10/16 11/16 12/16
5.0% 4.4% 4.4% 5.2% 5.1% 4.9% 4.9% 4.8% 5.2% 4.4% 4.6% 4.6%

 

1/17 2/17 3/17 4/17 5/17 6/17 7/17 8/17 9/17 10/17 11/17 12/17
5.2% 4.3% 3.9% 4.2% 4.5% 4.8% 4.2% 4.2% 3.7% 4.0% 4.1% 3.8%

 

1/18 2/18 3/18 4/18 5/18 6/18 7/18 8/18 9/18 10/18 11/18 12/18
4.6% 4.5% 4.5%