Labor and Jobs

More stories

  • 163 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    The report will revise figures from 2023 and 2024. Here’s what to know.

    by

    The Labor Department’s latest monthly report on hiring and unemployment will include revisions for previous months. The revised figures should provide a more accurate picture of the U.S. job market, but they could also sow confusion.The monthly job figures are based on two surveys, one of employers and one of households. Those surveys are generally reliable, but they aren’t perfect. So once a year, the government reconciles the numbers with less timely but more reliable data from other sources.Figures in the employer survey will be revised sharply downward to align with data from state unemployment offices showing that employers added hundreds of thousands fewer jobs in 2023 and 2024 than initially reported. The updated figures should show slower but still healthy job growth in those years.The other change applies to the household survey. It will reflect an updated methodology that the Census Bureau considers a better reflection of recent immigration in its population estimates. That will show up as a huge, one-month jump in virtually every measure that is based on them, and preclude comparisons with previous months. But measures based on ratios — like the unemployment rate and the labor force participation rate — should be mostly unaffected. More

  • 125 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    Solid Labor Market Gives Fed Cover to Extend Rate Pause

    by

    Less than six months ago, Federal Reserve officials were wringing their hands about the state of the labor market. No major cracks had emerged, but monthly jobs growth had slowed and the unemployment rate was steadily ticking higher. In a bid to preserve the economy’s strength, the Fed took the unusual step of lowering interest rates by double the magnitude of its typical moves.Those concerns have since evaporated. Officials now exude a rare confidence that the labor market is strong and set to stay that way, providing them latitude to hold rates steady for awhile.The approach constitutes a strategic gamble, which economists by and large expect to work out. That suggests the central bank will take its time before lowering borrowing costs again and await clearer signs that price pressures are easing.“The jobs data just aren’t calling for lower rates right now,” said Jon Faust of the Center for Financial Economics at Johns Hopkins University, who was a senior adviser to the Fed chair, Jerome H. Powell. “If the labor market seriously broke, that may warrant a policy reaction, but other than that, it takes some progress on inflation.”Across a number of metrics, the labor market looks remarkably stable even as it has cooled. Monthly jobs growth has stayed solid and the unemployment rate has barely budged from its current level of 4.1 percent after rising over the summer. The number of Americans out of work and filing for weekly benefits remains low, too.“People can get jobs and employers can find workers,” said Mary C. Daly, president of the San Francisco Fed, in an interview earlier this week. “I don’t see any signs right now of weakening.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Friday’s Jobs Report Will Be Confusing. Here’s How to Make Sense of It.

    by

    The Labor Department’s January survey will include revisions making data for previous months look stronger in some cases and weaker in others.The Labor Department’s latest monthly report on hiring and unemployment will include revisions for previous months that should give a more accurate picture of the U.S. job market — but that could also sow confusion.When the data is released on Friday, one major measure of employment will be revised up. Another will be revised down. Some historical numbers will be revised, but others won’t. And the updates, though part of a routine process, will be taking place in a political environment where both sides have at times expressed skepticism of government economic statistics.“There is going to be a massive amount of confusion,” said Wendy Edelberg, director of the Hamilton Project, an economic policy arm of the Brookings Institution.Here is what economists say you will need to know about the revisions to make sense of the numbers.The revisions are part of a longstanding annual process.The monthly job figures are based on two surveys, one of employers and one of households. Those surveys are generally reliable — they involve a number of interviews far larger than a presidential election poll, for example — but they aren’t perfect. And so, once a year, the government reconciles the numbers with less timely but more reliable data from other sources. Similar processes are in place for revising other government statistics, like gross domestic product and personal income.“Revisions are how statistical agencies achieve both timeliness and accuracy,” said Jed Kolko, who oversaw economic statistics at the Commerce Department during the Biden administration. “Near-real-time data like the jobs report later get revised to match other data sources that are more accurate but take longer to collect and publish.”The revisions being released on Friday were scheduled far in advance and will use methodologies that were announced ahead of time, allowing economists, including Mr. Kolko and Ms. Edelberg, to publish detailed forecasts of what the new figures will show.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Attacks on DEI Get Approval From Some in the Left Wing

    by

    Many Democrats and activists are rallying to defend diversity programs, but others say they distract from deeper efforts to address inequality.A few days after President Trump issued an order urging the private sector to end “Illegal D.E.I. Discrimination and Preferences,” the Rev. Al Sharpton led about 100 people into a Costco in East Harlem for a so-called buy-cott. The idea was to shop and support the company for maintaining its diversity, equity and inclusion policies amid pressure from the new administration.But the gesture by the civil rights activist did not win universal acclaim on the political left. In interviews, self-identified socialists and other leftists worried that Mr. Sharpton’s action helped bolster the company at a moment when it faced pressure from unionized workers, who had threatened to strike beginning Feb. 1.“Al Sharpton making Costco into a titan of progress that needs mass support days before a potential strike,” Bhaskar Sunkara, the president of the progressive magazine The Nation, grumbled on the platform X.The episode at Costco, which did not respond to a request for comment, illustrates an underappreciated tension on the left at a time when Mr. Trump has targeted diversity initiatives: Some on the left have expressed skepticism of such programs, portraying them as a diversion from attacking economic inequality — and even an obstacle to doing so.“I am definitely happy this stuff is buried for now,” Mr. Sunkara said in an interview. “I hope it doesn’t come back.”Corporate-backed initiatives promoting diversity can take various forms. Starbucks, for instance, pledges to “work hard to ensure our hiring practices are competitive, fair and inclusive” and says it is “committed to consistently achieving 100 percent gender and race pay equity.” It also offers anti-bias training.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Moves to Invalidate Recent Labor Agreements With Federal Workers

    by

    In the latest effort to put his stamp on the federal work force, President Trump on Friday issued a memorandum invalidating government labor contracts finalized in the last 30 days before a presidential inauguration.The policy applies to certain contracts negotiated toward the end of the Biden administration, the memo says. Such “last-minute, lame-duck” agreements, it states, “are purposefully designed to circumvent the will of the people” and “inhibit the President’s authority to manage the executive branch.”Unions at several agencies rushed to negotiate collective bargaining agreements ahead of Mr. Trump’s inauguration to preserve some practices of the previous administration, like remote work, and insulate them from changes that could make it easier to fire civil servants.The memo appears to allude to such practices, which it calls “inefficient and ineffective,” and cites an agreement with the Education Department that attempts to preserve remote work arrangements. The memo says the agreements could be undone if they have not yet been approved by an “applicable” agency head.Other agencies, like the Social Security Administration, approved new collective bargaining agreements outside the 30-day window, presumably leaving them unaffected by the memo.It was unclear if the memo would survive legal pushback initiated by federal employee unions, though it appeared to anticipate legal challenges, noting that it should remain in force if a portion alluding to prohibited bargaining agreements from the Biden administration is found to be invalid.“Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the president does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” Everett Kelley, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in a statement. “Members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.” More

  • 113 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Amazon’s Fight With Unions Heads to Whole Foods Market

    by

    Whole Foods workers in Philadelphia are voting on whether to form the first union in the Amazon-owned chain. The company is pushing back.At a sprawling Whole Foods Market in Philadelphia, a battle is brewing. The roughly 300 workers are set to vote on Monday on whether to form the first union in Amazon’s grocery business.Several store employees said they hoped a union could negotiate higher starting wages, above the current rate of $16 an hour. They’re also aiming to secure health insurance for part-time workers and protections against at-will firing.There is a broader goal, too: to inspire a wave of organizing across the grocery chain, adding to union drives among warehouse workers and delivery drivers that Amazon is already combating.“If all the different sectors that make it work can demand a little bit more, have more control, have more of a voice in the workplace — that could be a start of chipping away at the power that Amazon has, or at least putting it in check,” said Ed Dupree, an employee in the produce department. Mr. Dupree has worked at Whole Foods since 2016 and previously worked at an Amazon warehouse.Management sees things differently. “A union is not needed at Whole Foods Market,” the company said in a statement, adding that it recognized employees’ right to “make an informed decision.”Workers said that since they went public with their union drive last fall, store managers had ramped up their monitoring of employees, hung up posters with anti-union messaging in break rooms and held meetings that cast unions in a negative light.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Stellantis Will Restart Illinois Factory That U.A.W. Pushed to Revive

    by

    The United Automobile Workers union has been pressing the automaker, which owns Chrysler and Jeep, to revive the plant in Belvidere, Ill.Stellantis, the company that owns Chrysler and Jeep, said on Wednesday it planned to reopen a factory in Illinois and increase production elsewhere in the United States, a move that is likely to resolve several simmering disputes with the United Automobile Workers union.The reopening is also likely to help the company in its relations with the Trump administration, and is among the first big changes made by an interim management team that has been running the company since its chief executive, Carlos Tavares, resigned in December.“These actions are part of our commitment to invest in our U.S. operations to grow our auto production and manufacturing here,” Antonio Filosa, the company’s chief operating officer in North America, said in a statement.The announcement follows a recent meeting between Stellantis’s chairman, John Elkann, and President Trump, the company said. Mr. Elkann told the president that Stellantis, whose headquarters are in Amsterdam, aimed to strengthen its U.S. manufacturing base and was committed to safeguarding American jobs and to the broader U.S. economy.Stellantis, which also owns Fiat, Dodge, Ram and Peugeot, idled the Illinois plant, in Belvidere, in early 2023. Later that year, it agreed in a new contract with the U.A.W. to reopen it. In August 2024, the company said it was delaying the reopening after its sales and profit tumbled.The U.A.W. responded by filing grievances with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging that Stellantis was not abiding by the 2023 contract.Stellantis said on Wednesday that it planned to make a medium-size pickup truck in Belvedere, and that it would rehire some 1,500 union workers.The company also said it would move forward with plans to produce a new Dodge Durango sport-utility vehicle at a plant in Detroit. The U.A.W. had feared Stellantis was preparing to move production of the vehicle to Mexico, and the union had filed grievances on that issue as well.“This victory is a testament to the power of workers standing together and holding a billion-dollar corporation accountable,” the U.A.W. president, Shawn Fain, said in a statement on Wednesday. “We’ve shown that we will do what it takes to protect the good union jobs that are the lifeblood of places like Belvidere, Detroit, Kokomo and beyond.”The White House press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.In its statement, Stellantis also said it would make investments in its plants in Toledo, Ohio, where it makes the Jeep Wrangler and Gladiator models. Additional investments will also come to an engine plant in Kokomo, Ind., the company said. More

  • 150 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    The Federal Work Force Grew Briskly Under Biden. It’s Still Historically Low.

    by

    Government agencies that shrank in President-elect Trump’s first term have mostly bounced back, and some have become even larger.When it comes to the federal payroll, two seemingly contradictory things are true.One, the Biden administration went on a hiring spree that expanded the government work force at the fastest pace since the 1980s. And two, it remains near a record low as a share of overall employment.In the four years separating President-elect Donald J. Trump’s two terms, the federal civilian head count has risen by about 4.4 percent, according to the Labor Department, to just over three million, including the Postal Service.But that’s a much slower pace than private payrolls have grown over the past four years. And it leaves the federal government at 1.9 percent of total employment, down from more than 3 percent in the 1980s.The incoming administration promises to erase whole sections of the federal bureaucracy: Vivek Ramaswamy, co-chair of what Mr. Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency, has said 75 percent of the work force could go, in pursuit of $2 trillion in cuts. But it will be a challenge to find cuts without depleting services.“When we’re looking at the numbers of the federal work force, it’s still about the same size as it was in the 1960s,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a think tank. “The narrative out there is the federal government work force is growing topsy-turvy, and the reality is that it’s actually shrinking,”Compared with the overall work force, the federal employee base has been shrinking for decadesNot including the armed forces, federal government employees as a share of all nonfarm workers are near an all-time low.

    Federal employment includes the Postal Service.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesHow Big Are Agencies, and Have They Grown or Shrunk? The number of people who work in the federal government’s largest departments, and how they’ve changed in size since 2020.

    Note: Total work force numbers are as of March 2024.Source: Office of Personnel ManagementBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More