Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Jobless rate soared to 14.7% in April as U.S. shed 20.5 million jobs amid coronavirus pandemic [View all]progree
(13,045 posts)31. Unemployment rate may be almost 5% higher than the reported 14.7%, says BLS in so many words:
Excerpting from Mahatmakanejeeve's #1 post above, which is straight from the BLS:
In the household survey, individuals are classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor
force based on their answers to a series of questions about their activities during the survey
reference week (April 12th through April 18th). Workers who indicate they were not working during
the entire survey reference week and expect to be recalled to their jobs should be classified as
unemployed on temporary layoff. In April, there was an extremely large increase in the number of
persons classified as unemployed on temporary layoff.
However, there was also a large increase in the number of workers who were classified as employed
but absent from work. As was the case in March, special instructions sent to household survey
interviewers called for all employed persons absent from work due to coronavirus-related business
closures to be classified as unemployed on temporary layoff. However, it is apparent that not all
such workers were so classified.
If the workers who were recorded as employed but absent from work due to "other reasons" (over
and above the number absent for other reasons in a typical April) had been classified as unemployed
on temporary layoff, the overall unemployment rate would have been almost 5 percentage points higher
than reported (on a not seasonally adjusted basis). However, according to usual practice, the data
from the household survey are accepted as recorded. To maintain data integrity, no ad hoc actions
are taken to reclassify survey responses.
force based on their answers to a series of questions about their activities during the survey
reference week (April 12th through April 18th). Workers who indicate they were not working during
the entire survey reference week and expect to be recalled to their jobs should be classified as
unemployed on temporary layoff. In April, there was an extremely large increase in the number of
persons classified as unemployed on temporary layoff.
However, there was also a large increase in the number of workers who were classified as employed
but absent from work. As was the case in March, special instructions sent to household survey
interviewers called for all employed persons absent from work due to coronavirus-related business
closures to be classified as unemployed on temporary layoff. However, it is apparent that not all
such workers were so classified.
If the workers who were recorded as employed but absent from work due to "other reasons" (over
and above the number absent for other reasons in a typical April) had been classified as unemployed
on temporary layoff, the overall unemployment rate would have been almost 5 percentage points higher
than reported (on a not seasonally adjusted basis). However, according to usual practice, the data
from the household survey are accepted as recorded. To maintain data integrity, no ad hoc actions
are taken to reclassify survey responses.
5% on top of 14.7% puts it in round-off territory of 20%.
Remembering too that the survey week, April 12-18, is more than 3 weeks ago ... there's been a lot of layoffs since then according to the weekly unemployment claims reports.
Edited to add:
Why the unemployment rate could be 5 percentage points higher, Ethan Wolff-Mann, Yahoo Finance, May 8, 2020
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-the-unemployment-rate-could-be-5-percentage-points-higher-135352226.html
for a more "newsie" report of the same thing.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Jobless rate soared to 14.7% in April as U.S. shed 20.5 million jobs amid coronavirus pandemic [View all]
BumRushDaShow
May 2020
OP
I'm waiting for the usual crowd to start up with the "I don't trust the numbers" chant.
mahatmakanejeeves
May 2020
#6
It's fun, isn't it? I don't mean this month's numbers, but the constant hitting of
mahatmakanejeeves
May 2020
#13
"...brought employment to its lowest level since February 2011.." (?) Try June 1999, BLS.
sandensea
May 2020
#42
Looks right to me -- it's talking about the Establishment Survey's nonfarm payroll employment
progree
May 2020
#43
Which is funny, b/c they usually use the Population Survey as the metric for emp/unemp data
sandensea
May 2020
#47
The BLS always presented it this way -- the Establishment Survey data for the number of jobs, and
progree
May 2020
#48
I just gave it to you: The Statistical Abstract of the U.S. (as far back as you like)
sandensea
May 2020
#52
Then the survey size is of no importance? What the BLS reports on the sample size of the
progree
May 2020
#53
"When presidents crow about how "since taking office x million jobs have been created..."
progree
May 2020
#54
Interesting - the 2012 Statistical Abstract includes the Establishment Survey beginning
progree
May 2020
#56
And the DOW is up 300 points?!? They seeing a lot of good in 20M losing their jobs?
Bengus81
May 2020
#29
Yep....highest unemployment since the Great Depression but Wall St. says..eh,could have been worse!!
Bengus81
May 2020
#35
We've been reading all day Thursday that 33 million have filed unemployment claims, and the week
progree
May 2020
#34
Quick....tell investors that the BLS is looking at unemployment numbers of 35% in June
Bengus81
May 2020
#57
I agree, there will come a point when "horrible but not as bad as expected" no longer works n/t
progree
May 2020
#58
Coronavirus costs the U.S. 20.5 million jobs in April, unemployment soars to 14.7%
UpInArms
May 2020
#15
That will be the next data he will hide or modify to suit his reelection. They're not quite...
machoneman
May 2020
#20
Not as bad as expected, according to MarketWatch's 15 economists. S&P 500 up 1.19%, Dow up 1.36%
progree
May 2020
#28
Unemployment rate may be almost 5% higher than the reported 14.7%, says BLS in so many words:
progree
May 2020
#31
Here's the graph of the U-6 unemployment rate -- the broadest measure that BLS produces
progree
May 2020
#39
wait for Trump to accuse the BLS of being the dreaded "deep state" conspiracists and....
steve2470
May 2020
#40
"I will be the greatest jobs president that God has ever created," Trump, June 16th, 2015.
usregimechange
May 2020
#45