Employment Change by Industry

[Munger]

Good graphic.

[metalman]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

ok, so first fred posts a chart that shows unit labor costs rising for the past year, then another chart shows california geek jobs falling 30% and wages rising 70% since 2001 & now this.

can someone pls, pls explain why unemployment & wages are rising at the same time???

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

ok, so first fred posts a chart that shows unit labor costs rising for the past year, then another chart shows california geek jobs falling 30% and wages rising 70% since 2001 & now this.

can someone pls, pls explain why unemployment & wages are rising at the same time???

As a couple of us speculated the last time this question was raised (sorry, I can't find the post now - guess I lack mm's 1337 searching skillz), perhaps this happens because lower paid workers are laid off first because they might be more expendable, less valuable now, or because they are easier to rehire (less competitive hiring) if need be in the future or because they have less seniority or because they dominate more in more heavily impacted markets.

I see this in some of the small businesses I deal with locally. I end up dealing directly with the owner and when I ask him how things are going, he will say it's slow but ok. On further discussion he will recall that he was hiring a few underlings a couple years ago, but now has just enough work to keep himself going.

For larger firms, this may be a continuation of the global restructuring of common labor to lower cost nations. Some companies may have been marginally surviving this globalization, but are now shedding such jobs and weakening.

[GRG55]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

ok, so first fred posts a chart that shows unit labor costs rising for the past year, then another chart shows california geek jobs falling 30% and wages rising 70% since 2001 & now this.

can someone pls, pls explain why unemployment & wages are rising at the same time???

Could it be that, for those still employed, that hours of work are falling faster than compensation costs [which tend to be "stickier"]?

[flintlock]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

I see this in some of the small businesses I deal with locally. I end up dealing directly with the owner and when I ask him how things are going, he will say it's slow but ok. On further discussion he will recall that he was hiring a few underlings a couple years ago, but now has just enough work to keep himself going.

.

That's me. No more FT employees, just me and an occasional part timer.

I can also go along with the idea of lowest paid, least experienced workers first to be laid off, as well as workers putting in less hours but pay not dropping as fast.

[c1ue]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

I think the dynamic might be simpler than what's speculated thus far in this thread:

With CEO compensation so much larger than worker's, might a continuation of existing CEO packages combined with a smaller work force in the company (by definition it is almost guaranteed that everyone else makes less than the CEO) result in higher average wages?

Unless the original calculation excludes executive compensation...

[metalman]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

thx, guys. but i still don't get it. wages are rising in every single industry, even hotels, laid out flat in the recession. that implies a monetary or dollar inflation dimension. why don't employers have the power to lower wages?

[Kadriana]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

thx, guys. but i still don't get it. wages are rising in every single industry, even hotels, laid out flat in the recession. that implies a monetary or dollar inflation dimension. why don't employers have the power to lower wages?

Well, I know when I worked retail, if a store wasn't making enough money then the managers would just work more hours. They didn't get paid for any hours they worked over 45. Some days you would have a person open a store in the morning, work all day and close it at night. A lot of times they wouldn't even report the extra hours. I imagine the same thing is happening in hotels, restaurants, etc. You have the more experienced person working twice the hours for the same pay.

[snakela]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

How in god's name is real estate not decimated? I question the methods used for this chart.

[don]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

Construction, Manufacturing, Hotel Services, etc. were all heavily involved in employing undocumented workers, skewing the numbers seen above into pretzels. In 2006, the number of foreign-born wage and salary workers of every legal stripe was estimated at over 19 million. That was a 66% increase over a decade before.

On the very local scene, my two neighbors across the street both replaced their roofs in the last couple of weeks. The work was done by a 100% white roofing crew, with work going on straight through the weekend (much needed $$$) I haven't seen an all-white roofing crew in Cali for at least a decade, probably longer.

In the professional sectors, trial periods seem to be more popular than ever and free internships are getting longer.

Yes, labor is truly kicking ass.

(Question: are these graphs from USA Today? They have that look about them, and perhaps the same accuracy.)

[don]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

More info on the labor aristocracy:

Monster Meter Poll Reveals 34 Percent of U.S. Workers Surveyed Have Only One Week or Less of Savings to Cover Expenses if Laid Off from Work

Less than One-Quarter of U.S. Workers Surveyed on Monster.com Say their Savings Would Last Six Months or Longer After Job Loss

MAYNARD, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

Despite the fact that most financial advisors caution workers to save the equivalent of six months’ salary in preparation for troubled economic times, a recent Monster Meter Poll reveals more than one-third of U.S. workers surveyed on Monster.com admit they have only one week or less of savings to cover living expenses if they were to be laid off from work. Monster.com is the leading global online career and recruitment resource and flagship brand of Monster Worldwide, Inc. (NYSE: MWW).

Over a one week period beginning July 6 and running through July 13, more than 16,000 visitors to Monster.com participated in the Monster Meter Poll question “If you were laid off without severance, how long would your savings cover your living expenses?” Thirty-four percent of U.S. workers report their savings would last one week or less if they were laid off, compared to 20 percent who say their savings would last six months or longer, according to a nationwide poll conducted by Monster.com®.

“In a recent Monster.com Career Advice article, Laid Off? Six Steps to Manage Your Finances, most financial advisors suggest saving the equivalent of six months’ salary to tide you over if you lose your job,” said Norma Gaffin, director of career content, Monster.com. “However, experts also agree, workers will likely need more savings, especially if they have a family and are the primary wage earner.”

If You Were Laid Off Without Severance, How Long Would your Savings Cover Your Living Expenses?

• One Week or Less: 34%
• 2-4 Weeks: 16%
• 1-2 Months: 16%
• 3-5 Months: 14 %
• 6 Months or Longer: 20%

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/s...44&newsLang=en

[flintlock]

Re: Employment Change by Industry

How in god's name is real estate not decimated? I question the methods used for this chart.

I thought the same thing. And REAL construction unemployment is more than 19%. What construction?