Average Hourly Earnings Up For Everyone 7% Since ObamaCare Passed

If ObamaCare has been cutting earnings for the workforce in sectors which have witnessed a trend toward part time work, it's not showing up overall. Average weekly earnings for all employees are up 7% since March 2010, when the bill was rammed down our throats in a completely partisan vote. The sectors impacted, like retail and fast food, simply aren't big enough to drag down the overall picture.

Since ObamaCare Passed In 2010, Involuntary Part-Time Has Slowly Declined

Since ObamaCare passed in 2010, peak levels of involuntary part-time work have slowly but actually declined from in excess of 9.2 million in 2010 to 9.1 million in 2011, to 8.6 million in 2012, to 8.2 million in 2013.

These levels remain extraordinarily high, but are an after effect of the depression of 2008-2009 and cannot be blamed on ObamaCare. You can blame Obama for not doing anything about it, but you can't really point to ObamaCare as the cause of high levels of part-time employment because those levels have actually declined about 10% since the law was passed. Things might be different had Obama not unilaterally and unlawfully delayed the employer mandate in ObamaCare, but it is what it is, and until the law takes full effect it is not possible to say much more.

There appears to be a lower bound at 7.6 million below which involuntary part-time has so far been unable to fall. If the metric doesn't break that barrier this winter, all it will tell you is that the lingering after effects of the depression are still with us, not that ObamaCare is part-timing the work force.

A real recovery in jobs would put this measure back in the 4 million range where it was before the crisis of 2008 hit, on the assumption that the roughly 4 million extra people in this category who work part-time would be the first to be elevated to full-time when employment conditions improve.

Usually Part-Time Workers No More Numerous Now Than Before ObamaCare Passed In 2010

Usually part-time ebbs in summers, flows in winters, but is not up abnormally due to ObamaCare.

Usually part-time workers are no more numerous now than before ObamaCare passed in March 2010. Claims that ObamaCare is part-timing the workforce are so far unsubstantiated for the workforce as a whole.

September Unemployment Falls To 7.2%, The Broadest Measure To 13.6%

Obama: Making this time different than all the rest

The BLS employment situation report is late, here, due to the government shutdown.

The number of unemployed remains high at 11.3 million, accounted for in the headline rate of 7.2%. The U6 measure at 13.6% includes those, plus the part-time for economic reasons and the marginally attached workers, which all together still number 21.5 million, unchanged from August.

Just 148,000 jobs are said to have been added in September, but the average number of jobs added monthly over the last year now comes in at 185,000, or 2.22 million. In August the figure was 184,000 and two months prior to that 182,000, so there has been very minor progress in job growth.

Average hours worked remains unchanged at 34.5 hours for private non-farm employment, and average hourly earnings are up 2.1% in the last year, or 49 cents, to $24.09/hour.

Don't spend it all in one place.

Obama's employment recession, already easily the very worst and deepest in the post-war, is now 1.75 years longer than Bush's at 5.67 years and counting. And unless things improve dramatically on the jobs front, it looks to me like it's going to take almost another year for Obama's red line in the graph to get back to zero.

IBD Poll Puts Unemployment At 31%: 47.9 Million Looking For Work, 2 Times Higher Than BLS U6 Level

Here:

Investor's Business Daily has been polling Americans each month on the job market for well over a decade. Unlike the numbers released each month by the Labor Department, ours haven't been crunched, tweaked, twisted, seasonally adjusted or otherwise tortured to tell a comforting story. ... In our IBD/TIPP Poll, we ask a different question: "How many members of your household are currently unemployed and are looking for employment?" Not surprisingly, the answer we get differs greatly from the government's data. This month's survey, completed Thursday night, indicated that 47.9 million Americans are looking for work. No, that's not a misprint: 47.9 million. Out of a workforce of 154 million, that yields a gross unemployment rate of 31%. Among all households, 26% have at least one member looking for work.

------------------------------------------

The U6 unemployment rate of 13.7% in August is the combination of the officially unemployed, 11.3 million, the marginally attached to the labor force, 2.3 million, and the part-time for economic reasons, 7.9 million. That comes to 21.5 million unemployed in August by the broadest official government measure. The IBD poll puts the level 2.23 times higher than that at 47.9 million.

If It's A Number And It's On Rush Limbaugh, You Can't Trust It

Here is today's Rush Limbaugh basic K-8 math error, which keeps him and his audience from appreciating the fact that high gasoline prices have been pummeling the American people for one year longer than he says they have:

"The number of people losing their jobs is up. The number of jobs lost, all of this, is up. The one thing that none of these stories cover is another thing that's going on, and that is the price of gasoline has been over $3 a gallon for 20 months now.  Now, Obamacare is gonna raise everybody's health care costs.  Premiums are gonna skyrocket. The cost of food is way up.  Gasoline is over $3."

----------------------------------------------------

Actually the number of people losing their jobs is DOWN and down big in the last 2 months to a rate low enough to compete with George W. Bush, if it can be sustained. Usually part-time is not up significantly, and usually full-time is almost back to where it was on Election Day 2008. The real story there is the failure of full-time to recover to the 2006-2007 level.

But gas has been above $3 for 1000 consecutive days, according to The Wall Street Journal, not 600 days:

1000

------  = 33 months (not 20).

30

He read it, he flubbed it, boo hoo. And you people pay for that?

Government Statistics Will NEVER Capture The ObamaCare "Part-Timing" Trend

The long term trend in average weekly hours is down, down, down.

And the reason is simple and devious by design, in order to escape detection: Anyone working less than 35 hours is already part-time as far as the government statistical agency, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is concerned, so if hours are reduced from say 34 to 29 to comply with ObamaCare's new definition of part-time, that will never show up in the part-time numbers because that will not make the slightest bit of difference. People working 34 hours were already part-time as far as the BLS is concerned, so if they are cut back to 29 they will still be so. 

The BLS here defines full-time as 35 hours or more per week, and part-time as anything less than 35:

"[Part-time] Refers to those who worked 1 to 34 hours during the survey reference week and excludes employed persons who were absent from their jobs for the entire week."

This is a well known fact. But it is little appreciated that as ObamaCare deviously defines full-time as 30 hours or more, that will by definition not make a difference to the BLS' statistical presentation, which doesn't begin counting full-time until hours are 35 or more.

It's as if the 30 hour rule were designed to exploit the bureaucratic inertia behind the different definition and fly under its radar.

The only way we'll be able to observe the perverse scaling back of employee hours is in the hours statistics. Unfortunately, the long-term trend in hours is down, down, and down, and it will be difficult to detect the new downward trend within the old downward trend. Besides, average weekly hours are up since ObamaCare passed, obviously because the economy is slowly improving from a great deficit, ObamaCare notwithstanding. Average weekly hours are actually up 2% since ObamaCare passed.

The Senate healthcare bill, like the Senate itself since the passage of the 17th Amendment, is a Trojan Horse meant to destroy the country as we once knew it. It were almost better if the Senate no longer existed, and the House expanded to the proportions it had formerly before the Reapportionment Act of 1929, itself a grievous offense against the liberties of the people.

Average weekly hours are up 2% since ObamaCare passed.

The Part-Time Myth: Usually Part-Time Is Up Just 465,000 Since Obama Was Elected In 2008

Usually part-time is up barely 1.8% since Obama was elected in November 2008. The number goes up in the winter and comes down in the summer, with the school year. There are no dramatic higher highs after ObamaCare was passed in 2010, however, just higher lows, which is what you would expect from a growing population.

August Unemployment Ticks Down To 7.3% From 7.4%, Job Gains Now Averaging 184,000/month

Obama's job recession still going strong long after everyone else's ended

That's 4.75 years straight of unemployment above 7%, or 57 months.

Job gains averaging 184k/month are slightly higher on average than two months ago, despite revisions down to jobs added in June and July. Separately, not-seasonally-adjusted first time claims for unemployment in August were running 278,000 per week, the lowest yet under Obama.

The full report is here.

Two months ago the unemployment rate was 7.6% and we were adding an average 182,000 jobs a month. At that time hourly earnings were also up 2.2% year over year, and they still are in the August report.

Not-seasonally-adjusted, part-time for economic reasons is down 152,000 year over year while usually full-time (+35hrs/wk) is up 1,654,000. Usually part-time (-35hrs/wk) is up only 297,000 year over year, not-seasonally-adjusted.

If ObamaCare is supposed to be part-timing us all, I still don't see evidence of it. What it's really doing is helping to retard employment generally. We need to start viewing persistent, long-term employment deficits as a response by business to Obama administration policies. Otherwise full-time jobs would not have continued to decline throughout 2009 and 2010 the way they did. As late as February 2011 full-time was still at the 110 million level, only slightly off the low just under 109 million a year earlier in January 2010.

At just under 118 million now, full-time remains 5.35 million off the 2007 peak above 123 million. Factor in population growth and full-time should be trending close to 130 million by this time. We're 12 million full-time jobs behind where we should be.

The Bush jobs recession ended after 47 months, but the Obama jobs recession is still going strong at 67 months.

That's the real scandal of this so-called recovery.

The Kookiest Jobs Story In Months: Republican House Ways And Means Tallies Just 270k Full-Time Since 1-09

Story here.

What's next, 911 really was an inside job? Paul McCartney did die?

To believe this number you have to believe all the numbers reported all the time by the Bureau of Labor Statistics have been wrong for 4.5 years and that everyone who works there is content to keep a secret, and can, but I'll bet you those are precisely the numbers House Ways and Means have been "crunching" to arrive at the "truth". 

I realize John Crudele at The New York Post is fond of that skeptical pose now that a former BLS official has been talking to him about his skepticism about the numbers, but really, have we all gone off the deep end in order to drive home a political point about what ObamaCare is going to do to the nature of work in America when it's not really yet self-evident? For example, average hourly earnings should be plummeting if Ways and Means is right, but they are not. Wages are up nearly 1.9% in the last year. Nothing to write home about, but completely dispositive of the thesis.

As usual the devil is in the details, which in this case means the word "net", as in net total. Well, net from what benchmark? The all-time high of full-time at 123.219 million under George Bush? Full-time isn't anywhere near recovering to that level, so it's impossible that for the Republicans net means net above the all-time high by the paltry sum of 270,000, as in 123.489 million full-time jobs. Would that the Republicans were right!

Alas, they are not. Usually full-time is presently 117.688 million, 3.873 million above the January 2009 level when Obama took office, not 0.270 million above the January 2009 level. That's the nominal number. Doug Short at Advisor Perspectives could run the population-adjusted figures for us to show us just how far behind we really are in recovering to trendline at the Bush peak. Population has continued to grow causing employment-population ratios to plummet and labor participation rates to tank under truly dismal GDP conditions, so there is value in looking at it from that perspective. It's true. Obama is a total failure at job creation. When he turns his gaze to them, they seem to vaporize. Rush Limbaugh thinks this is on purpose.

Meanwhile the numbers continue to improve because this is a giant capitalist ship with tremendous inertia whose communist captain can't turn her on a dime for another go at the iceberg. He wishes we were China, but we aren't.

God bless the Republican House, but get off the number-of-angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin stuff. It's August, and we have gin to drink.

The Trend To Part Time Jobs Is A Myth, Otherwise Average Hourly Earnings Would Be Down

Earnings are up 1.87% in the last year

So says Jim O'Sullivan, here:

Jim O'Sullivan, chief U.S. economist of High Frequency Economics . . . is not convinced that part-time, low wage jobs are driving the nation's employment growth. Average hourly earnings most of this year have been rising about 2% at an annual rate, notwithstanding a slight dip in July. That's consistent with the rest of the four-year-old recovery. If low-wage jobs were growing much faster than other positions, they should be pulling down average wage growth, O'Sullivan says.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not only are earnings up modestly year over year, the not-seasonally-adjusted figures for usually full time workers show a year over year increase of 1.55 million jobs, or 1.34%. Usually part time is up more, 1.59%, but that's only a net 430,000 workers.

Usually Part Time Is Up Only 1.25 Million Since Obama Elected In 2008

That's a less than 5% increase in the size of this group over the period, and a less than 1% increase in usually part time compared to the total size of usually part and usually full time taken together in November 2008.

The Part-Timing Trend Still Hasn't Materialized In The Unemployment Report

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' employment situation report for July is here, where we learn that the unemployment rate has fallen two tenths of a point to 7.4%, and that jobs added monthly has fallen to 189,000 per month, or 2.268 million jobs added in the last year.

Since everyone is making a big deal of part-timing because of ObamaCare and generally moribund economic conditions, it is noteworthily absent in today's numbers.

The not-seasonally-adjusted numbers show those classified as part-time for economic reasons in all industries down 116,000 from June to July. Year over year the number is up only 8,000. In other words, there is no trend up to be seen there. For those part-time for noneconomic reasons the decline is much more dramatic month over month: 428,000. But year over year the number is up, but only 303,000 or less than 2% of the category.

Those classified as usually part-time are down 17,000 from June to July while those classified as usually full-time are up 288,000 from June to July in the not-seasonally-adjusted columns. Usually full-time also is up 1.557 million year over year. Usually part-time is up only 430,000 year over year or less than one half of 1% of all the workers in those categories combined, and just 1.6% of usually part-time workers from a year ago.

I don't call any of that "the part-timing of America."

Not yet.

Did We Really Lose 240,000 Full Time Jobs Between May and June Due To ObamaCare?

That's what all the organs of political opposition to Obama and ObamaCare are saying in the wake of Friday's unemployment report.

Investors Business Daily is an example, here:

"It's even worse when you consider all of the net addition to June jobs - repeat, all - were part time. Compared with the 360,000 part-time positions created, full-time employment shrank by 240,000. Year to date, only 130,000 full-time jobs have been added to our economy. The rest of the jobs - 557,000 - have been part time. ... The No. 1 culprit, though, is ObamaCare. The added costs this monstrous piece of legislation has imposed on employers of full-time workers encourages them to hire only part-timers, who get few benefits and no health care."

That is a very one-sided presentation of the "facts", cherry-picked from the seasonally-adjusted numbers from the government's models of what's happening. The seasonally-adjusted chart of full-time for 2013 to date, for example, clearly shows a sudden 240,000 decline in full-time jobs. But the chart of the government's own raw full-time data for 2013 to date, clearly shows that full-time is up well over 3 million jobs for the first half of the year, not "130,000" as Investors Business Daily says. This chart also shows that the current level of full-time is over 1.2 million higher than the seasonally-adjusted model says it is, and that instead of a month over month decline in full-time of 240,000 jobs, we've just experienced an increase of 757,000 full-time jobs in June.

Why the discrepancy? The model anticipates events based on past history which may or may not occur. A case in point is modeling auto manufacturing jobs in the summer, which I think is what the 240,000 drop in the chart is all about. This is anticipatory, an expectation of plant shut downs this summer for retooling, which may or may not occur. The model tries to anticipate these events based on past history. But given strong demand for autos recently I'm guessing the shut downs may not materialize to the extent the model expects them to, introducing more noise into the seasonally-adjusted chart as the summer unfolds. At any rate, I say the chart is already noisy for this reason and should be taken with a grain of salt.

I say stick with the raw data, and chill out with political rhetoric.

Wall Street Journal Falsely Blames Part-Time For Economic Reasons On ObamaCare

"Imagine how much better [the US labor market] might do if ObamaCare weren't encouraging employers to hire so many part-time workers", crows The Wall Street Journal here in "Part-Time America" by Steve Moore, the lead story at Real Clear Markets this morning.

Too bad it's all a lie. I say "too bad" because I'd like to blame ObamaCare for everything that's wrong with the labor market, too, but it just isn't so. Employers aren't hiring "so many part-time workers" any more now than they were before ObamaCare was passed in March 2010, but you wouldn't know that from the charts presented in The Wall Street Journal because they don't go back before the recession began. The Journal is cherry-picking the data to show that the swings in the metric have been wild since ObamaCare passed. There's a reason for that. The long term charts show that the high level of part-time for economic reasons is an artifact of the recession, and has been trending lower ever so slowly since it ended. Equally disturbing is the Journal's attribution of a recent relatively small surge in the metric to ObamaCare when we've had much larger drops in the measure after the bill's passage. ObamaCare has had nothing to do with either, and it's transparently political to carp in this way. And it's embarrassing.

Print your story, Steve Moore, when part-time for economic reasons hits 9.5 or 10 million, and we'll talk then.

Mish Is Crazy For Saying "Massive Increase In Part Time" Due To ObamaCare

Mish says it here:

Digging under the surface, much of the drop in the unemployment rate over the past two years is nothing but a statistical mirage coupled with a massive increase in part-time jobs starting in October 2012 as a result of Obamacare legislation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

But there has been no massive increase in part-time, whether due to ObamaCare or something else, which, by the way, passed in March 2010, not October 2012. The raw numbers are actually down from the beginning of 2010 before ObamaCare was passed. Is part-time down due to ObamaCare?

Part time not-seasonally-adjusted is lower than it was before ObamaCare

Measured with the government "model", part time is up since 2010, but you can't say massively so, as Mish does. The 300,000 to 400,000 increase in part time since the beginning of 2010 using this measure is a relatively modest variation given the wild swings in this category of a million or more.

What made this measure of part time decline for most of 2012? ObamaCare?

Frankly, I think Mish has a meme in his head which is not supported by the data and is just phoning it in. Well, he did just get re-married.

Sorry Zero Hedge, Full-Time Is Up 0.65% From May To June, Not Down

full-time government model is down a smidge

If you use the seasonally-adjusted government "model", you'll get a different result: full-time jobs down 0.21%. Big whoop, I weigh less too after I poop. That may be politically expedient to Zero Hedge, here, but the raw numbers paint a different picture of full-time employment increasing a little bit in the last month. Yeah, full-time employment remains in depression. That's obvious from either measure, but no one wants to say the truth because the truth is politically incorrect and saying it gets you marginalized as an extremist kook, a racist, or a political partisan. People who deny the truth are the kooks. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

full-time raw measure is up a little

Sorry Zero Hedge, Part Time Isn't Unequivocally At An All Time High

The high not-seasonally-adjusted was in early 2010

It's an axe to grind at Zero Hedge, here, that usually part-time is at an all time high. In the seasonally-adjusted category, it is. But not according to the raw not-seasonally-adjusted numbers.

What are you going to believe, the government's "model", or the raw numbers? 

Clearly it is politically expedient for Zero Hedge to follow the government model because it gives them something to say against the government today.

We don't need a number to say Obama sucks, who has sucked from the beginning when Zero Hedge voted for him and then kept on sucking.

The seasonally-adjusted high from early 2012 is now barely beaten

Immigration Bill To Give Employers Cheap Labor Not Covered By ObamaCare

We don't get no stinkin' ObamaCare

So Philip Klein, here:

[I]f the immigration bill becomes law, some employers could effectively face incentives of hundreds of thousands of dollars to hire newly legalized immigrants over American citizens, because the immigrant workers would not qualify for Obamacare benefits.

As the implementation of Obamacare approaches, there have been many news reports about companies considering cutting back full-time workers to part-time, or taking other actions to get around the mandate penalties. The immigration bill would offer employers another way out – hiring fewer American citizens and more immigrants with provisional legal status.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Naw, that's not intentional. Just an unfortunate unintended consequence.

Mish Is Wrong About Full Time Employment Being Down. It's Up.

seasonally-adjusted full-time, 2007 peak to now

Mish is wrong about full time employment being down. It's up.

Here's Mish:

"Voluntary plus involuntary part-time employment rose by a whopping 441,000 jobs. Take away part-time jobs and there is not all that much to brag about. Indeed, full-time employment fell once again, this month by 148,000."

In the seasonally-adjusted category, full-time is up 150,000 in April from March. In the not-seasonally-adjusted category, full-time is up 878,000 between March and April! Usually-part-time is flirting with its highs again but is not yet at a new high above the March 2010 level of 28.106 million.

That said, what really counts is that despite some improvement in the figures, the fact is full-time employment remains either 7.5 million off the 2007 peak in not-seasonally-adjusted terms, or 5.8 million off the peak in seasonally-adjusted terms. But part-time is not yet meaningfully above its peak levels to be able to say ObamaCare is part-timing the country at the expense of full-time jobs. The trend up in full-time has been in fits and starts and has been wholly inadequate, but it is up since 2010.