| Submit your comments on this article |
| Economy |
| Temporary Hiring Shows Job Rebound Isn't Imminent: Chart of Day |
| 2009-09-09 |
| (Bloomberg) -- U.S. companies are still reducing the ranks of temporary workers, showing that any rebound in overall employment won't happen soon, according to William Hester, an analyst at Hussman Econometrics. The CHART OF THE DAY compares the number of temporary employees with nonfarm payrolls since 1990, according to data compiled by the Labor Department. Increases in the number of temporary jobs in 1991 and 2003 preceded similar recoveries in payrolls, as the chart illustrates. "Temporary hiring is a reliable leading indicator," Hester wrote yesterday in a report that featured a similar chart. Last month's decline in these jobs was "one of the most discouraging data points" in the latest employment report, he added. The number of temporary workers dropped by 65,000 in August to 1.74 million. The total has fallen each month since January 2008, a month after the current U.S. recession officially started. During the 20-month streak, temporary jobs have declined by 33 percent. Further losses "would probably push back any recovery in nonfarm payrolls," Hester wrote. "Temporary hiring will almost surely bottom prior to overall employment." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #6 See also STARS-N-STRIPES OP-ED > GROWING BUDGET ABYSS THREATENS US FUTURE. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-09-09 23:59 |
| #5 That Guy will then vote for whoever keeps him on the gravy (and you carrying him). Benefit targeting is gerrymandering. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2009-09-09 12:27 |
| #4 Now now, a negative proof is reactionary and racist. Guy I've known for a long time has decided his funemployment benefits pay for his rent and food, so why work? Another probably shows up to job interviews completely hung over, on purpose. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2009-09-09 12:04 |
| #3 Glenmore, if you are interested, the BLS does have historic tables (it doesn't go back as far as you want) fwiw, comparisons between now and decades ago suffer from the fact that the demographics are different (back in the 50s and early 60s, labor force participation for married women was pretty low) and the structural changes (manufacturing vs service vs finance) are substantial and the educational requirements are far different, etc. |
| Posted by: lord garth 2009-09-09 10:41 |
| #2 Since we have basically 'run off' several million jobs, what makes them think any of these people will be going back to work? I'm holding out for one of those 'green jobs', myself. I hear you get 200K a year, don't have to do anything, and it comes with free public option health insurance. |
| Posted by: Helmuth, Speaking for Javick8924 2009-09-09 10:32 |
| #1 It would be interesting to track employment rate (full and part time separately) rather than unemployment rate, and compare it with the rates during the Depression. Zero has a lot of room for further damage, I suspect. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-09-09 09:07 |