Showing posts with label labor participation rate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label labor participation rate. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

why i say we're not doing very well

Labor Force Participation Rate
August 2016 - 62.8%
Obama took office 1/2009 - 65.7%
Peak in January 2000 - 67.3%
Last time it was the current rate - March 1978

Labor Force; the number of people, 16 and older who are able to work, with jobs
August 2016 - 159 million
January 2009 - 154 million
January 2000 - 142 million
March 1978 - 104 million

People not in Labor force: the number of people, 16 and older who are able to work, without jobs
August 2016 - 94 million
January 2009 - 80 million
January 2000 - 68 million
March 1978 - 71 million

In last 38 years,
65 million new jobs were filled.
33 million new jobless people.

In last 16 years,
17 million new jobs were filled.
26 million new jobless people.

In last seven years,
5 million new jobs were filled.
14 million new jobless people.

source:
Labor Force Participation Rate
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Civilian Labor Force Level
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Re-Blog - "The Ugly Truth About A $15 Minimum Wage"

The Service Employees International Union spent 2015 expanding its campaign for a $15 minimum wage to other industries. In recent nationwide protests, the union focused again on its original target: Fast food companies, and McDonald's in particular.

I worked for the company for three decades, and served as its USA President for 13 years. I can assure you that a $15 minimum wage won’t spell the end of the brand. However it will mean wiping out thousands of entry-level opportunities for people without many other options.

The $15 minimum wage demand, which translates to $30,000 a year for a full-time employee, is built upon a fundamental misunderstanding of a restaurant business such as McDonald’s. “They’re making millions while millions can’t pay their bills,” argue the union groups, suggesting there’s plenty of profit left over in corporate coffers to fund a massive pay increase at the bottom.

In truth, nearly 90% of McDonald’s locations are independently-owned by franchisees who aren’t making “millions” in profit. Rather, they keep roughly six cents of each sales dollar after paying for food, staff costs, rent and other expenses.

Do the math

Let’s do the math: A typical franchisee sells about $2.6 million worth of burgers, fries, shakes and Happy Meals each year, leaving them with $156,000 in profit. If that franchisee has 15 part-time employees on staff earning minimum wage, a $15 hourly pay requirement eats up three-quarters of their profitability. (In reality, the costs will be much higher, as the company will have to fund raises further up the pay scale.) For some locations, a $15 minimum wage wipes out their entire profit.

Recouping those costs isn’t as simple as raising prices. If it were easy to add big price increases to a meal, it would have already been done without a wage hike to trigger it. In the real world, our industry customers are notoriously sensitive to price increases. (If you’re a McDonald’s regular, there’s a reason you gravitate towards an extra-value meal or the dollar menu.) Instead, franchisees can absorb the cost with a change that customers don’t mind: The substitution of a self-service computer kiosk for a a full-service employee.

In higher-cost European countries, these kiosks are already the norm. In 2011, the company ordered more than 7,000 of them to replace entry-level employees. They’ve been tested successfully in a number of markets in the U.S., and now the company is even testing self-serve McCafe kiosks where a customer can prepare and customize their own coffee beverage.

Hurting young workers

If you’re tempted to shrug your shoulders at this brave new world, don’t. Over four million people in the U.S. are employed at “limited service” restaurants, a descriptor which includes companies like McDonald’s. If even one out of every four jobs was automated, that’s one million fewer job opportunities in a country where the youth unemployment rate is more than three times the overall unemployment rate. (In urban markets such as New York City and Washington, DC, the youth unemployment rate averages 30%.)

These young adults who face long spells of unemployment now are at a long-term disadvantage relative to their employed counterparts. One study released by the Employment Policies Institute found that high-school seniors with part-time work experience earned 20% more per year on average, 6-9 years after graduating, relative to their fellow students who didn’t work. Ironically, today’s minimum wage mandate for higher pay will be condemning young adults to lower-paid and less-successful futures.

I suspect that the labor organizers behind this campaign for a $15 minimum wage are less interested in helping employees, and more interested in helping themselves to dues money from their paycheck. They’re unlikely to succeed in their goal of organizing the employees of McDonald’s franchisees, but they may well succeed in passing $15 into law in other sympathetic locales. You’ll see their legacy every time you visit the Golden Arches, where “would you like fries with that” is a button on a computer screen rather than a phrase spoken by an employee in their first job.


source:
The Ugly Truth About A $15 Minimum Wage by former president and CEO of McDonald's USA, Ed Rensi - 4/25/2016 Forbes

Friday, October 9, 2015

the only people retiring are the young

Okay, I have done the math for y'all.

between 1984 and 2014, the total population of the US increased by about 83 million... the labor force (16 and older) in that time period increased by only 48 million... of that 48 million, 19 million were 55 years old and older... we LOST 2 million workers between the ages of 16 and 24... (maybe they retired?)

as a rule, the labor force steadily increases... part of this is the increase in population, but also trends in the economy... more women are entering the work force... youth work younger... retirement age getting older.

but from 2008 until now, the labor force has plateaued... it is true that between 2008 and 2014, the Under-55 demographic has not expanded as in the past... and the Over-55 demographic has indeed increased due to the Baby-Boomers... but the plateau is dramatic by the greater scope of the population... between 1984 and 2008, the labor force increased by 41 million; that's about 1.7 million per year... were that to continue from 2008, by 2014 there would have been an extra 10 million in the labor force... but that didn't happen.

so where did they go?... did 10 million retire?... as stated earlier, we've INCREASED the number of retirement age people in the labor force... in fact, an additional 11 million Over-55 were added to the work force between 2004 to 2014, while we only gained 3 million 16-54 year olds.

so, the argument that the Baby-Boomers are retiring, causing the slump in the labor force is false.


Sources:
Labor force projections to 2014: retiring boomers
GroupLevel (thousands)Change (thousands)
19841994200420141984–941994–20042004–14 
Total, 16 years and older113,544131,056147,401162,10017,51216,34514,699
16 to 24 years23,98921,61222,26822,158–2,377656–110
25 to 54 years74,66193,898102,122105,62719,2378,2243,505
55 years and older14,89415,54623,01134,3156527,46511,304

Population, totals
1984
Population - 235,825,000
2014
Population - 318,857,056

Population 55 Years and Over by Sex and Age: 2012
Under 55 - 229,349,000
Over 55 - 79,477,000
Population 55 Years and Over by Sex and Age: 2008
Under 55 - 229,014,000
Over 55 - 70,091,000

Civilian labor force participation rate (percent of population 16 years old and older)

Jan. 1984 - 63.9%
Jan. 2000 - 67.3% (peak)
Jan. 2008 - 66.2%
Jan. 2014 - 63.0%

Civilian labor force

Jan. 1984 - 112,209,000
Jan. 2000 - 142,267,000 (peak)
Jan. 2008 - 154,063,000
Jan. 2014 - 155,486,000