Click image
for larger view
According
to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics’ (BLS )
establishment survey, non-farm payroll employment rose by 103,000 jobs in March
-- below expectations
of +167,000. Moreover, combined January and February employment gains were
revised down by 50,000 (January: -63,000; February: +13,000). Meanwhile, the
unemployment rate (based upon the BLS ’s
household survey) was
unchanged at 4.1% despite the shrinkage in the labor force (-158,000)
overwhelming the decline in those employed (-37,000).
Click image
for larger view
Observations
from the employment reports include:
*
The household and establishment surveys were not in sync, but as one analyst
put it, “Compared to February's employment situation, which had no bad dynamics,…it
was hard to find any rays of sunshine in this report. However, like most other
data [series], there are good months and bad months -- and the year-to-date
employment growth is nearly the same as last year.”
*
We have often been critical of the BLS’s seeming to “plump” the headline
numbers with favorable adjustment factors, and the March numbers seem to be a
case in point. Although imputed jobs from by the CES (business birth/death model) adjustment were below
average for the month of March (since 2000), the BLS also applied the smallest seasonal
adjustment for a March to the base data. Had average March adjustments been
used, employment changes might have been roughly +40,000 instead of the
reported +103,000.
*
As for industry details, Manufacturing expanded by 22,000 jobs. That result is reasonably
consistent with the Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) manufacturing
employment sub-index, which expanded in March at a slower pace than February. Wood
Products employment gained 800 jobs (ISM was unchanged); Paper and Paper
Products: -1,000 (ISM increased). Construction employment dropped by 15,000
(ISM increased).
Click image
for larger view
*
The number of employment-age persons not in the labor force (NILF) rose by
323,000 (+0.3%), to 95.3 million. Meanwhile, the employment-population ratio remained
unchanged at 60.4%; thus, for every five people being added to the population, roughly
three are employed.
Click image
for larger view
*
Unlike the unemployment rate, the labor force participation rate (LFPR) slipped
to 62.9% -- comparable to levels seen in the late-1970s. Average hourly
earnings of all private employees rose by $0.08, to $26.82, resulting in a 2.7%
year-over-year increase. For all production and nonsupervisory employees
(pictured above), hourly wages advanced by $0.04, to $22.42 (+2.4% YoY). Since the
average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at
34.5 hours, average
weekly earnings increased by $2.76, to $925.29 (+3.1% YoY). With the
consumer price index running at an annual rate of 2.2% in February, workers appear
-- officially, at least -- to be holding steady in terms of purchasing power.
Click image
for larger view
* Full-time jobs fell by 311,000. Those employed part
time for economic reasons (PTER) -- e.g., slack work or business conditions, or
could find only part-time work -- slid by 141,000. Those holding multiple jobs retreated
by 255,000. Interestingly, part-time employment for noneconomic reasons jumped
by 338,000.
Click image
for larger view
For a “sanity check” of the employment numbers, we
consult employment withholding taxes published by the U.S. Treasury. Although “noisy”
and highly seasonal, the data show the amount withheld increased in March, by $28.7
billion (+14.3% MoM; -2.3% YoY), to $229.4 billion; it is difficult to conclude anything meaningful from the data, however, because
of confounding from the number of workdays and revised withholding rates
stemming from the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act of 2017. To reduce some of the volatility and determine broader
trends, we average the most recent three months of data and estimate a
percentage change from the same months in the previous year. The average of the
three months ending March was 1.7% above the year-earlier average -- well off
the peak of +13.8% set back in September 2013.
The foregoing comments represent the
general economic views and analysis of Delphi Advisors, and are provided solely
for the purpose of information, instruction and discourse. They do not
constitute a solicitation or recommendation regarding any investment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.