America’s unemployment has not abated, with many still losing their jobs. In February alone, 130,818 workers filed for unemployment benefits.
The February U.S. unemployment rate still hovered around 8.9 percent, with a total number of 13.7 million people off the payroll, although a decrease of .9 percent since November 2010 was noted in a March Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) press release.
However, people were hired in the manufacturing, construction, health care, transportation, and a few other sectors.
Those who lost their jobs about one year ago make up 43.9 percent or 6 million people of the total unemployment numbers.
“Although the U.S. economy is recovering from the 2007–09 recession, the labor market remains weak,” said researchers at the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank in a March Economic Letter.
Economists suggest that the consistently high unemployment numbers are cyclical and not a result of structural imbalances, such as workers lacking the appropriate skills to perform in the job market.
However, others disagree. “Some economists have concluded that this persistently high unemployment rate is due largely to structural frictions in the U.S. labor market rather than to weak demand for workers associated with the severe recession,” according to the researchers.
After researching unemployment among recent college graduates who usually have the necessary skills, the researchers concluded that although one may have an excellent education and no problem relocating, it is still difficult to garner employment in today’s job market.
“The current unemployment rate trends are reminiscent of the 2001 recession and the subsequent jobless recovery that continued through 2004,” according to Bart Hobijin, senior research advisor, and Colin Gardiner and Theodore Wiles, research associates, in the Economic Letter.
Today’s trend mirrors that of the 2001 recession. They are similar with regard to the total unemployment rate, as well as the experience of recent college graduates, which is symptomatic of a cyclical trend instead of structural factors.
Many of the trends in today’s recession and the 2001 recession, such as garnering a part-time instead of a full-time job by both the unemployed through job loss and recent college graduates, are much too similar to be thought of as being circumstantial.
Compared to the BLS statistics, “Gallup’s unemployment and underemployment measures have not shown the same gains in early 2011,” according to a Gallup survey reported on Gallup’s website.
Based on interviews with 30,000 adults, the mid-March unemployment rate was reported to be 10.2 percent, up from 9.8 percent at the end of January. Unemployment figures have remained about the same as one year ago.
Gallup qualifies its disagreement by saying the difference may be in part the result of the government adjusting its numbers for seasonality. Another reason could be that the Gallup survey is a continuous measurement that is adjusted during the month.
Gallup conducts its survey continuously and sees slight up-and-down movements during the month. The lowest unemployment numbers were reported in December, reaching 8.8 percent, and peaked at 10.8 percent around March 2010.
The main reason that the BLS numbers are lower than Gallup’s “has to do with the so-called participation rate: the percentage of Americans who are counted as being in the workforce,” according to Gallup.
In essence, the BLS unemployment rate is skewed, not because the workers have found a job, but because they are no longer actively hunting for a job. They have turned into the discouraged former workforce. This trend most likely accounts for the decrease in the BLS participation rate.
The unemployment numbers don’t spell good news for the U.S. economy, no matter if one looks at the BLS, Gallup, or any other statistical unemployment numbers.
“It is equally bad news if people are out of work and looking for a job or just too discouraged to say they continue to do so. Either way, a lack of sufficient job creation to increase employment among those who want to work remains a major obstacle to U.S. economic growth in the months ahead,” according to Gallup.
Read More...Good news for some employees
“Despite high unemployment rates, signs of economic recovery are surfacing,” stated Grant Thornton LLP and others in their 7th Annual Retirement Plan Survey, according to a March press release.
Company matching retirement contributions are generally the first to be reduced or eliminated and the last to be reinstated during and after economic meltdowns respectively.
Employers are feeling more confident about the economy, and 30 percent of those that stopped retirement contributions will reinstate them during 2011.
Barbara Whelehan asked Grant Thornton about the reinstatement of the matching retirement contribution in an article on the Retirement Blog of the Bankrate website. Grant Thornton responded, “Clearly, many employers have restored the match because of a more favorable outlook on their business. However, reinstating the match also does great things for retention, retirement readiness and nondiscrimination testing results.”
Forty-two percent of employers have not made plans to either increase or reinstate retirement contributions. But it’s good news when compared to last year around the same time, as more than half had not thought about reinstating past benefits, and 33 percent were not going to reinstate them.
Even one-fifth of the Fortune 1,000 companies have either eliminated or reduced their retirement contributions, saving the companies around $2 billion in 2009, according to a Watson Wyatt Insider website article.
Employers that keep matching retirements on the short stick are those that have liquidity problems, given the funding requirements for retirement accounts and shareholder revolt, as such funding cuts into the dividend payout rate.
“Companies place shareholder concerns above the retirement planning of their employees,” said Whelehan in the Retirement Blog article.
What astounded more than 80 percent of employers in the Grant Thornton 7th Annual Retirement Plan Survey was that barely anyone had brought up the subject of retirement and the need to understand what the future holds.
“Considering the issues facing participants, including reduced employer contributions, decreased plan balances, economic uncertainty and regulatory/administrative updates such as Roth conversions, participants may not be aware that they need to be concerned,” stated Jennifer Flodin, chief operation officer at Planned Sponsor Advisors LLC, in the Grant Thornton press release.
The February U.S. unemployment rate still hovered around 8.9 percent, with a total number of 13.7 million people off the payroll, although a decrease of .9 percent since November 2010 was noted in a March Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) press release.
However, people were hired in the manufacturing, construction, health care, transportation, and a few other sectors.
Those who lost their jobs about one year ago make up 43.9 percent or 6 million people of the total unemployment numbers.
“Although the U.S. economy is recovering from the 2007–09 recession, the labor market remains weak,” said researchers at the San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank in a March Economic Letter.
Economists suggest that the consistently high unemployment numbers are cyclical and not a result of structural imbalances, such as workers lacking the appropriate skills to perform in the job market.
However, others disagree. “Some economists have concluded that this persistently high unemployment rate is due largely to structural frictions in the U.S. labor market rather than to weak demand for workers associated with the severe recession,” according to the researchers.
After researching unemployment among recent college graduates who usually have the necessary skills, the researchers concluded that although one may have an excellent education and no problem relocating, it is still difficult to garner employment in today’s job market.
“The current unemployment rate trends are reminiscent of the 2001 recession and the subsequent jobless recovery that continued through 2004,” according to Bart Hobijin, senior research advisor, and Colin Gardiner and Theodore Wiles, research associates, in the Economic Letter.
Today’s trend mirrors that of the 2001 recession. They are similar with regard to the total unemployment rate, as well as the experience of recent college graduates, which is symptomatic of a cyclical trend instead of structural factors.
Many of the trends in today’s recession and the 2001 recession, such as garnering a part-time instead of a full-time job by both the unemployed through job loss and recent college graduates, are much too similar to be thought of as being circumstantial.
BLS Unemployment Statistics Questioned
Compared to the BLS statistics, “Gallup’s unemployment and underemployment measures have not shown the same gains in early 2011,” according to a Gallup survey reported on Gallup’s website.
Based on interviews with 30,000 adults, the mid-March unemployment rate was reported to be 10.2 percent, up from 9.8 percent at the end of January. Unemployment figures have remained about the same as one year ago.
Gallup qualifies its disagreement by saying the difference may be in part the result of the government adjusting its numbers for seasonality. Another reason could be that the Gallup survey is a continuous measurement that is adjusted during the month.
Gallup conducts its survey continuously and sees slight up-and-down movements during the month. The lowest unemployment numbers were reported in December, reaching 8.8 percent, and peaked at 10.8 percent around March 2010.
The main reason that the BLS numbers are lower than Gallup’s “has to do with the so-called participation rate: the percentage of Americans who are counted as being in the workforce,” according to Gallup.
In essence, the BLS unemployment rate is skewed, not because the workers have found a job, but because they are no longer actively hunting for a job. They have turned into the discouraged former workforce. This trend most likely accounts for the decrease in the BLS participation rate.
The unemployment numbers don’t spell good news for the U.S. economy, no matter if one looks at the BLS, Gallup, or any other statistical unemployment numbers.
“It is equally bad news if people are out of work and looking for a job or just too discouraged to say they continue to do so. Either way, a lack of sufficient job creation to increase employment among those who want to work remains a major obstacle to U.S. economic growth in the months ahead,” according to Gallup.
Read More...Good news for some employees
Good News for Some Employees
“Despite high unemployment rates, signs of economic recovery are surfacing,” stated Grant Thornton LLP and others in their 7th Annual Retirement Plan Survey, according to a March press release.
Company matching retirement contributions are generally the first to be reduced or eliminated and the last to be reinstated during and after economic meltdowns respectively.
Employers are feeling more confident about the economy, and 30 percent of those that stopped retirement contributions will reinstate them during 2011.
Barbara Whelehan asked Grant Thornton about the reinstatement of the matching retirement contribution in an article on the Retirement Blog of the Bankrate website. Grant Thornton responded, “Clearly, many employers have restored the match because of a more favorable outlook on their business. However, reinstating the match also does great things for retention, retirement readiness and nondiscrimination testing results.”
Forty-two percent of employers have not made plans to either increase or reinstate retirement contributions. But it’s good news when compared to last year around the same time, as more than half had not thought about reinstating past benefits, and 33 percent were not going to reinstate them.
Even one-fifth of the Fortune 1,000 companies have either eliminated or reduced their retirement contributions, saving the companies around $2 billion in 2009, according to a Watson Wyatt Insider website article.
Employers that keep matching retirements on the short stick are those that have liquidity problems, given the funding requirements for retirement accounts and shareholder revolt, as such funding cuts into the dividend payout rate.
“Companies place shareholder concerns above the retirement planning of their employees,” said Whelehan in the Retirement Blog article.
What astounded more than 80 percent of employers in the Grant Thornton 7th Annual Retirement Plan Survey was that barely anyone had brought up the subject of retirement and the need to understand what the future holds.
“Considering the issues facing participants, including reduced employer contributions, decreased plan balances, economic uncertainty and regulatory/administrative updates such as Roth conversions, participants may not be aware that they need to be concerned,” stated Jennifer Flodin, chief operation officer at Planned Sponsor Advisors LLC, in the Grant Thornton press release.
Friends Read Free