Topic Archives: Workplace Injuries and Illnesses

How Are Our Older Workers Doing?

May is Older Americans Month. Who are we calling old?

  • The Bureau of Labor Statistics, for one. Next month we will celebrate our 135th birthday. Now that’s old! And we’ve been providing gold-standard information the entire time.
  • Today we are focusing on people age 65 and older.

In honor of Older Americans Month, let’s examine some fast facts about older workers. Many of these facts look over the last 30 years.

Employment

  • For workers age 65 and older, employment tripled from 1988 to 2018, while employment among younger workers grew by about a third.
  • Between 1988 and 2018, employment growth for women age 65 and older outpaced that for men.
  • Among people age 75 and older, the number of employed people nearly quadrupled, increasing from 461,000 in 1988 to 1.8 million in 2018.

Participation in the Labor Force

  • The labor force participation rate for older workers has been rising steadily since the late 1990s. Participation rates for younger age groups either declined or flattened over this period.

Chart showing labor force participation rates for people age 55 and older from 1988 to 2018

Editor’s note: Data for this chart are available in the table below.

Employment Projections

  • The total labor force is projected to increase by 6.6 percent from 2016 to 2026, while the number of workers age 65 and older is predicted to rise by 57.6 percent.
  • By 2026, workers age 65 and older are expected to account for 8.6 percent of the total labor force, up from 5.8 percent in 2016.
  • The labor force participation rate of people age 65 and older is projected to increase from 19.3 percent in 2016 to 21.8 percent in 2026. This contrasts with the overall labor force participation rate, which is expected to decrease from 62.8 percent to 61.0 percent.

Work Schedules

  • Over the past 20 years, the number of older workers on full‐time work schedules grew two and a half times faster than the number working part time.
  • Full‐timers now account for a majority among older workers—61 percent in 2018, up from 46 percent in 1998.

Earnings

  • In 1998, median weekly earnings of older full‐time employees were 77 percent of the median for workers age 16 and up. In 2018, older workers earned 7 percent more than the median for all workers.

Education

  • In 1998, 1 in 5 older workers had less than a high school education. By 2018, fewer than 1 in 10 older workers had less than a high school diploma.
  • The percentage of older workers with a college degree grew from 26 percent in 1998 to 42 percent in 2018.

Safety and Health

  • While fatal occupational injuries to all workers declined 17 percent from 1992 to 2017, workers age 65 and older incurred 66 percent more fatal work injuries in 2017 (775) than they did in 1992 (467).
  • Workers age 65 and older had a fatality rate that was nearly three times the rate for all workers in 2017.

Chart showing fatal injury rates by age from 2013 to 2017

Editor’s note: Data for this chart are available in the table below.

Want to know more? These statistical programs contributed data to this blog:

From an American worker’s first job to retirement and everything in between, BLS has a stat for that!

Labor force participation rates by age, 1988–2018 annual averages
Year 55–64 65–69 70–74 75 and older
1988 54.6 20.1 10.9 4.2
1989 55.5 20.8 11.2 4.3
1990 55.9 21.0 11.3 4.3
1991 55.5 20.6 10.9 4.4
1992 56.2 20.6 11.1 4.5
1993 56.4 20.3 10.9 4.3
1994 56.8 21.9 11.8 5.4
1995 57.2 21.8 12.5 4.7
1996 57.9 21.9 12.5 4.7
1997 58.9 22.5 12.6 4.8
1998 59.3 22.5 12.5 4.7
1999 59.3 23.0 13.1 5.1
2000 59.2 24.5 13.5 5.3
2001 60.4 24.7 14.1 5.2
2002 61.9 26.1 14.0 5.1
2003 62.4 27.4 14.6 5.8
2004 62.3 27.7 15.3 6.1
2005 62.9 28.3 16.3 6.4
2006 63.7 29.0 17.0 6.4
2007 63.8 29.7 17.2 6.8
2008 64.5 30.7 17.8 7.3
2009 64.9 31.1 18.4 7.3
2010 64.9 31.5 18.0 7.4
2011 64.3 32.1 18.8 7.5
2012 64.5 32.1 19.5 7.6
2013 64.4 32.2 19.2 7.9
2014 64.1 31.6 18.9 8.0
2015 63.9 32.1 18.6 8.2
2016 64.1 32.2 19.2 8.4
2017 64.5 32.3 19.7 8.3
2018 65.0 33.0 19.5 8.7
Rate of fatal work injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers by age
Year All workers 18 to 19 years 20 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 64 years 65 years and over
2013 3.3 2.6 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.4 4.1 9.2
2014 3.4 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.8 3.6 4.3 10.7
2015 3.4 2.1 2.7 2.3 2.7 3.5 4.3 9.4
2016 3.6 1.9 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.5 4.7 9.6
2017 3.5 2.6 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.3 4.6 10.3

Labor Day 2018 Fast Facts

About 92 percent of civilian workers with access to paid holidays receive Labor Day as a paid holiday. Before you set out for that long holiday weekend, take a moment to look at some fast facts we’ve compiled that show the current picture of our labor market.

Working

Working or Looking for Work

  • The civilian labor force participation rate—the share of the population working or looking for work—was 62.9 percent in July. The rate had trended down from the 2000s through the early 2010s, but it has remained fairly steady since 2014.

Not Working

  • The unemployment rate was 3.9 percent in July. After 6 months at 4.1 percent, the rate has had offsetting movements in recent months. In May, the rate hit its lowest point, 3.8 percent, since April 2000.
  • In July, there were 1.4 million long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more). This represented 22.7 percent of the unemployed, down from a peak of 45.5 percent in April 2010 but still above the 16-percent share seen in late 2006.
  • Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for teenagers was 13.1 percent in July, while the rates were 3.4 percent for adult men and 3.7 percent for adult women. The unemployment rate was 6.6 percent for Blacks or African Americans, 4.5 percent for Hispanics or Latinos, 3.1 percent for Asians, and 3.4 percent for Whites.

Job Openings

Pay and Benefits

  • Average weekly earnings rose by 3.0 percent between July 2017 and July 2018; adjusted for inflation, real average weekly earnings are up 0.1 percent during this period.
  • Civilian compensation (wage and benefit) costs increased 2.8 percent between June 2017 and June 2018; adjusted for inflation, real compensation costs decreased 0.1 percent during this period.
  • Paid leave benefits are available to most private industry workers. The access rates in March 2018 were 71 percent for sick leave, 77 percent for vacation, and 78 percent for holidays.
  • In March 2018, civilian workers paid 20 percent of the cost of medical care premiums for single coverage and 32 percent for family coverage.

Productivity

  • Labor productivity—output per hour worked—in the U.S. nonfarm business sector grew 1.1 percent in 2017, continuing the historically below-average pace seen since the Great Recession. Some industries had impressive growth, however, including wireless telecommunications carriers (11.1 percent) and electronics and appliance stores (9 percent).
  • Multifactor productivity growth in the private nonfarm business sector recovered in 2017, rising 0.9 percent after falling 0.6 percent in 2016. Labor input for multifactor productivity—measured using the combined effects of hours worked and labor composition—grew 2.0 percent in 2017, outpacing the long-term 1987–2017 growth for labor input by 0.5 percentage points.

Safety and Health

  • In 2017, 14.3 percent of all workers were exposed to hazardous contaminants. The use of personal protective equipment was required for 11.8 percent of workers.

Education

  • Occupations that typically require a bachelor’s degree for entry made up 21.5 percent of employment. This educational category includes registered nurses, teachers at the kindergarten through secondary levels, and many management, business and financial operations, computer, and engineering occupations.
  • For 18 of the 30 occupations projected to grow the fastest between 2016 and 2026, some postsecondary education is typically required for entry.

Unionization

  • The union membership rate—the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of unions—was 10.7 percent in 2017, unchanged from 2016. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent.
  • Total employer compensation costs for union workers were $47.65 and for nonunion workers $32.87 per employee hour worked. The cost of benefits accounted for 40.4 percent of total compensation or $19.23 for union workers and 29.1 percent or $9.56 for nonunion workers.

Work Stoppages

  • In the first 7 months of 2018, there were 445,000 workers involved in work stoppages that began this year. This is the largest number of workers involved in stoppages since 2000, when 394,000 workers were involved. There have been 12 stoppages beginning this year, which surpassed the 7 recorded in all of 2017.

From an American worker’s first job to retirement and everything in between, BLS has a stat for that! Want to learn more? Follow us on Twitter @BLS_gov.

How Hazardous are Summer Jobs for Our Young Workers?

During the summer months, young people (ages 16 to 24) may head to work, many for the first time. Maybe it’s babysitting or lawn mowing. Or perhaps you’re a lifeguard or working at the local fast food joint. With many students out of school and looking for opportunities in the workforce, just how safe are these new workers? In what types of jobs do workplace fatalities most commonly occur for these young workers and why?

From 2011 to 2016, 2,176 young workers were killed while on the job. One-third of these fatal injuries occurred during the summertime; 20 percent of the workers killed were ages 16–19, while the remaining 80 percent were ages 20–24.

Where do young worker fatalities occur?

While there are restrictions on the types of work that certain younger workers can do and the number of hours they can work, young workers still often have hazardous jobs. Construction and extraction occupations accounted for 22 percent of fatalities to young workers during the summer months, followed by transportation and material moving (17 percent) and farming, fishing, and forestry (11 percent). Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations accounted for 25 percent of all fatalities for workers ages 16–19, compared with only 8 percent for workers ages 20–24.

Chart showing percent distribution of fatal work injuries during the summer months by occupation and age, 2011–16

Editor’s note: Data for this chart are available in the table below.

Over the 6-year period, construction laborers experienced the most fatal injuries of any individual occupation for both 16–19 year-old workers (36 fatal injuries) and 20–24 year-old workers (126 fatal injuries).

Are young workers more or less likely to have workplace fatalities?

Young workers have lower fatality rates than middle age and older workers. In 2016, workers ages 16–17, 18–19, and 20–24 all had lower fatal injury rates than the total fatality rate of 3.6 workers per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers.

Chart showing rate of fatal work injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers by age, 2016

Editor’s note: Data for this chart are available in the table below.

What kinds of fatal incidents occur to young workers?

Transportation incidents accounted for the greatest proportion of workplace fatalities to both 16–19 year-old and 20–24 year-old workers. Transportation incidents include those involving airplanes, trains, water vehicles, or pedestrians struck by vehicles. The most prevalent are “roadway” incidents, where the person killed was in a vehicle. Typical roadway incidents include collisions between vehicles, collisions between a vehicle and something other than a vehicle, and noncollision incidents, such as a vehicle that jackknifes or overturns.

Roadway incidents alone accounted for more than one-quarter of fatal injuries to workers ages 16–19 and 20–24, which is similar to all workers.

Fatal occupational injuries to young workers in the summer months by event or exposure and age, 2011–16
Event or exposure Ages 16–19 Ages 20–24
Violence and other injuries by persons or animals 9% 18%

Homicides

6 8

Suicides

3 9
Transportation incidents 51 42

Roadway incidents

27 26
Fall, slip, trip 6 7

Fall to lower level

6 7
Exposure to harmful substances or environments 13 17

Exposure to electricity

5 8
Contact with objects and equipment 19 11

Struck by object or equipment

13 8
Note: Totals do not add to 100 percent because some fatal injuries did not fall into any of these categories.

Workers ages 16–19 experienced a higher proportion of fatalities due to contact with objects and equipment, such as being struck by an object or equipment. Workers ages 20–24 experienced a higher proportion of fatal injuries due to workplace violence—both homicides and suicides.

What resources are available to increase young worker safety?

Before you apply for that next summer job, or before you tell your kids to get out from behind the video games and get a job, you might want to learn more about hazards in the workplace. Both the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have online resources to help prevent workplace injuries and fatalities to young workers.

Want to know more about fatalities in the workplace?

Percent distribution of fatal work injuries during the summer months by occupation and age, 2011–16
Occupation Ages 16–19 Ages 20–24 Age 25 and older
Farming, fishing, and forestry 25% 8% 5%
Construction and extraction 21 22 20
Transportation and material moving 16 18 26
Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance 10 6 7
Military occupations 6 6 1
Sales and related 4 6 4
Installation, maintenance, and repair 4 8 8
Production 3 4 4
Protective service 3 8 5
All other 8 14 20
Rate of fatal work injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers by age, 2016
Age Fatal work injury rate
16 to 17 2.1
18 to 19 1.9
20 to 24 2.4
25 to 34 2.5
35 to 44 3.1
45 to 54 3.5
55 to 64 4.7
65 and older 9.6

A Clearer Look at Response Rates in BLS Surveys

Hands holding a tablet computer and completing a surveyPeople know BLS for our high-quality data on employment, unemployment, price trends, pay and benefits, workplace safety, productivity, and other topics. We strive to be transparent in how we produce those data. We provide detailed information on our methods for collecting and publishing the data. This allows businesses, policymakers, workers, jobseekers, students, investors, and others to make informed decisions about how to use and interpret the data.

We couldn’t produce any of these statistics without the generous cooperation of the people and businesses who voluntarily respond to our surveys. We are so grateful for the public service they provide.

To improve transparency about the quality of our data, we recently added a new webpage on response rates to our surveys and programs. We previously published response rates for many of our surveys in different places on our website. Until now there hasn’t been a way to view those response rates together in one location.

What is a response rate, and why should I care?

A response rate is the percent of potential respondents who completed the survey. We account for the total number of people, households, or businesses we tried to survey (the sample) and the number that weren’t eligible (for example, houses that were vacant or businesses that had closed). Response rates are an important measure for survey data. High response rates mean most of the sample completed the survey, and we can be confident the statistics represent the target population. Low response rates mean the opposite, and data users may want to consider other sources of information.

Do response rates tell the whole story?

A low response rate may mean the data don’t represent the target population well, but not necessarily. How much a low response rate affects how well the estimates represent the population is called nonresponse bias. Some important research by Robert M. Groves and Emilia Peytcheva published in the January 2008 issue of Public Opinion Quarterly looked at the connection between response rates and nonresponse bias in 59 studies. The authors found that high response rates can reduce the risk of bias, but there is not a strong correlation between response rate and nonresponse bias. Some surveys had a very low response rate but did not have evidence of high nonresponse bias. Other surveys had high nonresponse bias despite high response rates.

This means we should look at response rates with other measures of data quality and bias. BLS has studied nonresponse bias for many years. We have links to many of those studies in our library of statistical working papers.

What should I be looking for on the new page?

With response rates from multiple surveys in a single place, you can look for patterns across surveys and across time. For example, across every graph we see that response rates are declining over time. This is happening for nearly all surveys, government and private, on economic and other topics. It is simply getting harder to persuade respondents to answer our surveys.

Individual survey response rates are also interesting compared with other BLS surveys. We see that some surveys have higher response rates than others. To understand why this might be, we’ll want to look at the differences between the surveys. Each survey has specific collection procedures that affect response rates. For example, the high response rate for the Annual Refiling Survey (shown as ARS in the second chart) may catch your eye. When you see that it has a 12-month collection period and is mandatory in 26 states, the rate makes more sense.

We also can see how survey-specific changes have affected a survey’s response rate. For example, we see a drop in the response rate for the Telephone Point of Purchase Survey around 2012. This drop likely resulted from a change in sample design, as the survey moved from a sample of landline telephones to a dual-frame sample with both landlines and cell phones. Because the response rate for this survey continues to decline, we are developing a different approach for collecting the needed data.

What should I know before jumping into the new page?

There’s a lot of information! We’ve tried to make it as user friendly as possible, including a glossary page with definitions of terms and a page to show how each survey calculates their response rates. On the graphs, you can isolate a single survey by hovering over each of the lines. You can also download the data shown in each graph to examine it more closely.

We hope you will find this page helpful for understanding the quality of BLS data. Please let us know how you like it!

Reaching out to Stakeholders—and Steakholders—in Philadelphia

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has staff around the country who serve several critical roles:

  • Contacting employers and households to collect the vital economic information published by BLS
  • Working with partners in the states who also collect and review economic data
  • Analyzing and publishing regional, state, and local data and providing information to a wide variety of stakeholders

To expand the network of local stakeholders who are familiar with and use BLS data to help make good decisions, the BLS regional offices sponsor periodic Data User Conferences. The BLS office in Philadelphia recently held such an event, hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

These Data User Conferences typically bring together experts from several broad topic areas. In Philadelphia, participants heard about trends in productivity measures; a mash-up of information on a single occupation—truck drivers—that shows the range of data available (pay and benefits, occupational requirements, and workplace safety); and an analysis of declines in labor force participation.

Typically, these events provide a mix of national and local data and try to include some timely local information. The Philadelphia conference included references to the recent Super Bowl victory by the Philadelphia Eagles and showed how to use the Consumer Price Index inflation calculator to compare buying power between 1960 (the last time the Eagles won the NFL Championship) and today.

We also tried to develop a cheesesteak index, a Philadelphia staple. Using data from the February 2018 Consumer Price Index, we can find the change in the price of cheesesteak ingredients over the past year.

Ingredient Change in Consumer Price Index, February 2017 to February 2018
White bread 2.5 percent decrease
Beef and veal 2.1 percent increase
Fresh vegetables 2.1 percent increase
Cheese and related products 0.8 percent decrease

Image of a Philadelphia cheesesteak

These data are for the nation as a whole and are available monthly. Consumer price data are also available for many metropolitan areas, including Philadelphia. These local data are typically available every other month and do not provide as much detail as the national data.

While the Data User Conferences focus on providing information, we also remind attendees the information is only available thanks to the voluntary cooperation of employers and households. The people who attend the conferences can help us produce gold standard data by cooperating with our data-collection efforts. In return we remind them we always have “live” economists available in their local BLS information office to answer questions by phone or email or help them find data quickly.

Although yet another Nor’easter storm was approaching, the recent Philadelphia Data User Conference included an enthusiastic audience who asked good questions and left with a greater understanding of BLS statistics. The next stop on the Data User Conference tour is Atlanta, later this year. Keep an eye on the BLS Southeast Regional Office webpage for more information.