Women In The Labor Force. Women In The Labor Force: Fill & Download for Free

How is the official unemployment rate 3.8% when 37% of the U.S. is unemployed?“Unemployment” has an official meaning. Here it is, as defined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics:People who do not have a job, or were temporarily laid off and waiting to be called back to work.These people must have looked for work in the past four weeks (unless waiting to be called back from temporary layoff).These people must be available for work now.This definition excludes a wide variety of people who conceivably could be counted as unemployed. The intent is to exclude people who aren’t actually available to the labor force.Employment/population ratios by age bracket and gender reveal some details that are hidden in the aggregate unemployment rate:In the 1950s and ‘60s, the employment rate of young men ages 16–19 hovered around 50%. After the year 2000, this figure plummeted as low as 25% due to higher college participation and an erosion of low-skill, entry-level jobs. Today, 30% of teen men are employed, while the official unemployment rate for this group is 3.5%. According to the BLS method, the vast majority of 16–19 men aren’t interested in, or available to, work.Employment of young women ages 16–19 has gone through gyrations in the postwar era. From 1976–2002, this group’s employment/population ratio hovered generally between 40–45%. As college participation became expected, this E/P ratio went into a tailspin, falling as low as 26% in 2010. Today, 31%. Official unemployment rate, 12.1%. This bracket is easily the most difficult employment situation among all these subgroups. Since the 2001 recession, older workers have competed successfully for what used to be entry-level jobs, leaving young women on the sidelines.Employment/population for men ages 20–24 generally stayed above 70% until the Great Recession, when it slid to 60%. The latest reading was 68% employed. The official unemployment rate for 20–24 men is 7.2% (having been as high as 20% in 2010).Employment of women ages 20–24 rose dramatically from the end of World War II (when it was in the low 40% range) until reaching a peak of 69% employment/population in 2000. After two recessions, this E/P ratio had fallen as low as 58%. Today, 66.5%. Official unemployment rate, 5.5%.The employment/population rate for prime working-age men — ages 25–54 — has been in decline since 1970. At one time, 90–95% of this group was employed. The E/P ratio for this, the core of the male labor market, fell as low as 80% after the Great Recession. Today it stands at 86.6%. Official unemployment rate for the group is a mere 2.9%. That leaves more than 10% of the 25–54 male population unavailable or unwilling to work. In 2000, that number was about 8%. Why the increase? Rising rates of disability and incarceration (ex-cons struggle to re-enter the workforce) could explain the difference.Women ages 25–54 were a major engine of economic growth in the postwar expansion years. Their employment increased from 33% in 1948 to as high as 75% in 2000, a move that brought dramatic changes to society as well as the economy. The recessions of 2001 and 2008–09 brought the employment rate of 25–54 women down as low as 69%. Recently, it has pushed back above 74% and is threatening to reach new highs. Official unemployment for this group stands at 3.1%. Considering that many women are funneled into occupations that are overpopulated by women, this is a remarkably low number.The employment/population ratio for men 55 and over fell sharply from the end of World War II (70%) until 1993 (35%) as more people reached the age to qualify for social security benefits. Ever since 1994, the E/P ratio for elder men has been on the rise. Now, more than 45% of men 55 and over are employed. The official unemployment rate, 2.2%.No more than 25% of women 55 and over were employed until the late 1990s. Since then, the figure has soared, lately reaching 34%. Let me underscore — this group has taken jobs that once were available to young men and women. Official unemployment for women 55 and older is 2.6%.If the U.S. economy has hidden pockets of “shadow” unemployed who aren’t counted in the official numbers, they are concentrated in the 16–24 age bracket. The appropriate employment rate of prime working-age men also remains something of a mystery. In my view, though, our leaders should focus on ways to help young people enter the labor force. It makes no sense that our economy struggles to employ young workers while at the same time we have thousands of people aging out of the labor force every day.

Original Question:The widely repeated concern over the recent decline in the Labor Force Participation (LFP) rate based on actual resulting economic or social problems, or is it just a partisan talking point?Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR)There are several things going on here. Let's explore the basics, and look a little closer. What determines the LFPR?Unemployment rate, not surprisingly. In the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) there are several categories of "work". Among them is U-6 or not employed but not looking for work. This includes retired people, those who want work but have given up looking. Either their job was eliminated and no longer in demand, say those who made buggy whips after the car became wide spread. Now, there are people who can't get a counter job at fast food place because the computer took their place and they don't have the skill set to go work at the computer manufacturer- which may be in China or Mexico. This is fodder for another discussion on corporate tax rates and outsourcing jobs for that reason and non-competitive Union wage demands. That's another piece for another discussion.Some U-6 data is necessary hereTotal unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force.http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htmhttp://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp?fromYear=1994&toYear=2015The number of workers over age 65 in work force has declined steadily since 401K tax deferred pensions and Social Security have allowed workers to exit the labor pool.More seniors are also leaving their jobs early due to companies downsizing to remain competitive. They are taking part time jobs since their skill sets are no longer in demand. They are keeping the younger workers out of the labor market because many companies report they prefer older reliable trained adults over younger less enthusiastic teens with no work experience and who demand a higher minimum wage.Women have entered the labor market in increasing numbers since couples are starting their child bearing years later in life and need a large savings built up for these children. There are women entering the work force later in life as well due to their husbands who were the primary earner were down sized and or laid off.Millions of individuals are not in the work force because of massive increases in Social Security Disability Income payments. (SSDI).Source: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/09/not-looking-for-work-why-labor-force-participation-has-fallen-during-the-recoveryPart time workers have dramatically increased since the passage of the PPACA.http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-contribution-of-obamacare-to.html?m=1 What we observe is that the number of Americans employed part time peaks in March 2010, just as the law was passed. After that time, employers began reducing the number of people on their part time payrolls pretty much across the board, but most significantly for those working "near full time" - between 30 and 34 hours per week.That level is particularly significant because the ACA redefined the number of hours that an employee could work before being classified as a full time employee for the purpose of enforcing the law's employer mandate, which requires employers with more than 30 full time equivalent employees to either pay a large tax of $2,000 for each uninsured employee above that number or to provide costly health insurance coverage for all their employees at a cost of 3 to 7 times the amount of the tax per uninsured employee.The labor force participation rate requires the reader to dig deeper into the economic data than most people care to study. It does not get discussed beyond the financial reporting that is graph-heavy and a "dismal science" anyway. The fact is LFPR is declining. The reasons are policy based and societal based. Kids that used to work are now incentivized to stay home until age 26 and have insurance. College lasts longer because more competition for educated workers makes some students continue after 4 years with advanced degrees. Employers are allowed to avoid penalties under PPACA and reducing employees hours below 30 hours.Some of the policies are political, some are societal, demographics. There is cause for concern as our economy and our country grows more dependent on taxes to support a larger poor sector of the population; our total interest payments on our debt increases because our social programs are increasingly not being funded but are being borrowed for. As I have shown, there are many reasons the LFPR is high and politics plays a significant role.

Surveys, census, and federal economic data are where the statistics for the wage gap are produced. Studies interpret that data and/or experiment using it and other factors to produce explanatory models or test hypothesis about that data.The wage gap is diagnosed at a national level, not at the level of a study, which usually either uses the national or state data and then a data set the researchers collected via some means, typically via survey or interview in some large group.If you are in the US, almost all the federal agencies that deal with analyzing economy and commerce have statistics and reports you may access for this. Congress does as well.Most of the links you will get when you google “wage gap” will lead you to people interpreting the statistics and reports below to suit their political agenda, and aren’t worth reading as authoritative sources. They’re interpreting, for the most part, BLS, Congressional, and federal statistics and reports. You should read the originals for yourself rather than reading what everyone thinks of them: the BLS statistics, in particular, are considered definitive on the topic, since those are the federal statistics and analytics for economic data across the entire US.I’ve included Pew Research Center below as well, because they are considered to be a fairly trustworthy source and perform their own analytics.I’m also including the OECD report on it for 2017, since they do world-wide tracking of various economic statistics, including the gender wage gap.Federal and International Statistics and Reports:“Highlights of women’s earnings in 2017” (Bureau of Labor Statistics)“Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey” (Bureau of Labor Statistics)“Gender Pay Inequality: Consequences for Women, Families and the Economy” (Joint Economic Committee, US Congress)“Women’s Earnings Lower in Most Occupations” (US Department of the Census)“Earnings” (US Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau)“Breaking Down the Gender Wage Gap” (US Department of Labor)“The narrowing but persistent, gender gap in pay” (Pew Research Center)“Gender wage gap” (OECD)Studies using the Census or Federal Statistics:“Salary Differences Between Male and Female Registered Nurses in the United States” (JAMA)“STEM Training and Early Career Outcomes of Female and Male Graduate Students: Evidence from UMETRICS Data linked to the 2010 Census” (National Institute of Health)“Aggregate Effects of Gender Gaps in the Labor Market: A Quantitative Estimate” (Journal of Human Capital)“The Evolution of Gender Gaps in Industrialized Countries” (National Bureau of Economic Research)“Why Do Women Leave Science and Engineering?” (National Bureau of Economic Research)