Tag Archives: Productivity

Looking Back on the 2020 U.S. Labor Market and Economy

February 18, 2021BLS Commissioner

I know many of us are glad to see 2020 in the rearview mirror and have higher hopes for 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused so much suffering and hardship for people in the United States and around the world. During these challenging times, it remains important to have good, reliable, timely data. Good data are essential for the public health response to the pandemic and for tracking its economic and social effects, as well as the progress toward recovery. Let’s reflect back on some of the historic measures we saw in 2020.

Throughout the pandemic, the BLS staff and our colleagues across the statistical community have remained on the job to meet the growing needs for high-quality data. We are thankful we have been able to keep working; millions of other people haven’t been so fortunate. In part this is due to the way our work life at BLS changed in 2020. Nearly the entire staff has teleworked full time since March. That means we have needed to figure out new ways to collaborate with each other to continue producing essential data about the economy. That change in work life also meant that many staff members faced the challenges of new care arrangements for young children, schooling—often online—for older children, and keeping all their loved ones safe and healthy.

When the pandemic began in March 2020, many consumers began avoiding stores, restaurants, and other public gatherings to reduce the risk of catching or spreading the virus that causes COVID-19. Many businesses and other organizations reduced their operations or closed completely. At the recommendation of public health authorities, many governors and other public leaders issued stay-at-home orders. The economic impact of COVID-19 was breathtaking in its speed and severity.

National employment data. The nation experienced steady employment growth in recent years; BLS recorded average monthly increases in nonfarm employment between about 170,000 and 200,000 from 2016 to 2019. January and February 2020 brought continued job gains before the bottom dropped out in March (down 1.7 million jobs) and especially in April (down 20.7 million). These were the two largest declines in history, dating to 1939. These declines were then followed by the 4 largest increases in history: 2.8 million, 4.8 million, 1.7 million, and 1.5 million. You have to go back to 1983 to find the next highest increase, 1,118,000. Employment in December 2020 was nearly 10 million lower than in February.

Nonfarm payroll employment, January 1970–December 2020

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

National unemployment data. The year started with some record-low unemployment rates. The 3.5-percent unemployment rate in both January and February 2020 tied for the lowest rate since December 1969 (also 3.5 percent). The unemployment rates for several demographic groups were at or near their record lows. For example, the unemployment rate for African Americans in February 2020, at 6.0 percent, was close to the all-time low of 5.2 percent in August 2019.

Then came the pandemic in March 2020. The unemployment rate that month rose 0.9 percentage point to 4.4 percent. In April, the unemployment rate increased by 10.4 percentage points to 14.8 percent, the highest rate and largest one-month increase in history (dating to January 1948). Nearly all demographic groups experienced record-high unemployment rates in April; for example, the rate for Hispanics was a record 18.9 percent, after a record low of 4.0 percent in September 2019. And for the first time since data became available for both groups in 1973, the unemployment rate for Hispanics in April 2020 exceeded the rate for African Americans.

Unemployment rates for selected groups, February, April, and December 2020

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

State unemployment data. We see a similar pattern when looking at state unemployment rates, with record-setting lows early in 2020 followed by record-setting highs. In February, state unemployment rates ranged from a low of 2.2 percent in North Dakota to a high of 5.8 percent in Alaska, with 12 states at their historic lows that month. By April, rates had increased in all states, with 40 states and the District of Columbia setting new highs in that month, and another 7 states cresting in subsequent months. (The state data began in 1976.) State unemployment rates in April ranged from 8.3 percent in Connecticut to 30.1 percent in Nevada. Check out our animated map showing the rapid transformation of state unemployment rates.

Consumer price data. Beyond the job market, the pandemic had a big effect on other aspects of everyday life, including consumers’ buying habits. Toilet paper and wipes were disappearing from store shelves, while fewer people were commuting or traveling. Those trends were reflected in rapid changes in consumer prices.

One-month changes in the Consumer Price Index are typically 0.1 or 0.2 percent; the 0.8 percent decrease in April 2020, was the largest monthly decline since December 2008. The overall change included some large movements in both directions. For example, the price of gasoline declined 20.6 percent in April, the largest one-month decline since November 2008. In contrast, prices for food at home rose by 2.6 percent, the largest monthly increase since February 1974. Looking below the surface even further, several items experienced record one-month price changes, with some records going back over 50 years.

Percent change in consumer prices for selected items in April 2020, seasonally adjusted

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

Labor Productivity data. The BLS quarterly measure of labor productivity in the nonfarm business sector compares output to hours worked. If output rises more than hours worked, productivity increases. The pandemic saw large declines in both output and hours starting in mid-March. There was a small decline in labor productivity in the first quarter of 2020, down 0.3 percent, as output declined (-6.4 percent) slightly more than hours worked (-6.1 percent). While we had not experienced declining productivity in nearly 3 years, small increases or decreases in the quarterly change are common. The second quarter saw labor productivity soar by 10.6 percent, the largest increase since 1971, when productivity increased 12.3 percent in the first quarter. The second quarter 2020 increase reflected a greater decline in hours worked (-42.9 percent) than in output (-36.8 percent).

Since its beginnings in 1884, BLS has built consistent data to allow comparisons across the decades. Maintaining this history allows data users to quickly learn “when was the last time.” We also have collected and published new data specifically about the COVID-19 pandemic. Still to come, BLS will release more 2020 data in the coming year. Those new results will add to the unique story of the extraordinary 2020 economy.

Nonfarm payroll employment, January 1970–December 2020
Month	Employment level	Over-the-month change
Jan 1970	71,176,000	-65,000
Feb 1970	71,305,000	129,000
Mar 1970	71,451,000	146,000
Apr 1970	71,348,000	-103,000
May 1970	71,124,000	-224,000
Jun 1970	71,029,000	-95,000
Jul 1970	71,053,000	24,000
Aug 1970	70,937,000	-116,000
Sep 1970	70,944,000	7,000
Oct 1970	70,521,000	-423,000
Nov 1970	70,409,000	-112,000
Dec 1970	70,792,000	383,000
Jan 1971	70,865,000	73,000
Feb 1971	70,807,000	-58,000
Mar 1971	70,860,000	53,000
Apr 1971	71,036,000	176,000
May 1971	71,247,000	211,000
Jun 1971	71,254,000	7,000
Jul 1971	71,315,000	61,000
Aug 1971	71,373,000	58,000
Sep 1971	71,614,000	241,000
Oct 1971	71,642,000	28,000
Nov 1971	71,847,000	205,000
Dec 1971	72,109,000	262,000
Jan 1972	72,441,000	332,000
Feb 1972	72,648,000	207,000
Mar 1972	72,944,000	296,000
Apr 1972	73,162,000	218,000
May 1972	73,469,000	307,000
Jun 1972	73,758,000	289,000
Jul 1972	73,709,000	-49,000
Aug 1972	74,141,000	432,000
Sep 1972	74,264,000	123,000
Oct 1972	74,674,000	410,000
Nov 1972	74,973,000	299,000
Dec 1972	75,268,000	295,000
Jan 1973	75,617,000	349,000
Feb 1973	76,014,000	397,000
Mar 1973	76,284,000	270,000
Apr 1973	76,455,000	171,000
May 1973	76,648,000	193,000
Jun 1973	76,887,000	239,000
Jul 1973	76,913,000	26,000
Aug 1973	77,168,000	255,000
Sep 1973	77,276,000	108,000
Oct 1973	77,607,000	331,000
Nov 1973	77,920,000	313,000
Dec 1973	78,031,000	111,000
Jan 1974	78,100,000	69,000
Feb 1974	78,254,000	154,000
Mar 1974	78,296,000	42,000
Apr 1974	78,382,000	86,000
May 1974	78,549,000	167,000
Jun 1974	78,604,000	55,000
Jul 1974	78,636,000	32,000
Aug 1974	78,619,000	-17,000
Sep 1974	78,610,000	-9,000
Oct 1974	78,630,000	20,000
Nov 1974	78,265,000	-365,000
Dec 1974	77,652,000	-613,000
Jan 1975	77,293,000	-359,000
Feb 1975	76,918,000	-375,000
Mar 1975	76,648,000	-270,000
Apr 1975	76,460,000	-188,000
May 1975	76,624,000	164,000
Jun 1975	76,521,000	-103,000
Jul 1975	76,770,000	249,000
Aug 1975	77,153,000	383,000
Sep 1975	77,228,000	75,000
Oct 1975	77,540,000	312,000
Nov 1975	77,685,000	145,000
Dec 1975	78,017,000	332,000
Jan 1976	78,503,000	486,000
Feb 1976	78,816,000	313,000
Mar 1976	79,048,000	232,000
Apr 1976	79,292,000	244,000
May 1976	79,312,000	20,000
Jun 1976	79,376,000	64,000
Jul 1976	79,547,000	171,000
Aug 1976	79,704,000	157,000
Sep 1976	79,892,000	188,000
Oct 1976	79,911,000	19,000
Nov 1976	80,240,000	329,000
Dec 1976	80,448,000	208,000
Jan 1977	80,690,000	242,000
Feb 1977	80,988,000	298,000
Mar 1977	81,391,000	403,000
Apr 1977	81,728,000	337,000
May 1977	82,088,000	360,000
Jun 1977	82,488,000	400,000
Jul 1977	82,834,000	346,000
Aug 1977	83,075,000	241,000
Sep 1977	83,532,000	457,000
Oct 1977	83,800,000	268,000
Nov 1977	84,173,000	373,000
Dec 1977	84,410,000	237,000
Jan 1978	84,594,000	184,000
Feb 1978	84,948,000	354,000
Mar 1978	85,460,000	512,000
Apr 1978	86,162,000	702,000
May 1978	86,509,000	347,000
Jun 1978	86,950,000	441,000
Jul 1978	87,204,000	254,000
Aug 1978	87,483,000	279,000
Sep 1978	87,621,000	138,000
Oct 1978	87,956,000	335,000
Nov 1978	88,391,000	435,000
Dec 1978	88,671,000	280,000
Jan 1979	88,808,000	137,000
Feb 1979	89,055,000	247,000
Mar 1979	89,479,000	424,000
Apr 1979	89,417,000	-62,000
May 1979	89,789,000	372,000
Jun 1979	90,108,000	319,000
Jul 1979	90,217,000	109,000
Aug 1979	90,300,000	83,000
Sep 1979	90,327,000	27,000
Oct 1979	90,481,000	154,000
Nov 1979	90,573,000	92,000
Dec 1979	90,672,000	99,000
Jan 1980	90,800,000	128,000
Feb 1980	90,883,000	83,000
Mar 1980	90,994,000	111,000
Apr 1980	90,849,000	-145,000
May 1980	90,420,000	-429,000
Jun 1980	90,101,000	-319,000
Jul 1980	89,840,000	-261,000
Aug 1980	90,099,000	259,000
Sep 1980	90,213,000	114,000
Oct 1980	90,490,000	277,000
Nov 1980	90,747,000	257,000
Dec 1980	90,943,000	196,000
Jan 1981	91,033,000	90,000
Feb 1981	91,105,000	72,000
Mar 1981	91,210,000	105,000
Apr 1981	91,283,000	73,000
May 1981	91,296,000	13,000
Jun 1981	91,490,000	194,000
Jul 1981	91,601,000	111,000
Aug 1981	91,565,000	-36,000
Sep 1981	91,477,000	-88,000
Oct 1981	91,380,000	-97,000
Nov 1981	91,171,000	-209,000
Dec 1981	90,895,000	-276,000
Jan 1982	90,565,000	-330,000
Feb 1982	90,563,000	-2,000
Mar 1982	90,434,000	-129,000
Apr 1982	90,150,000	-284,000
May 1982	90,107,000	-43,000
Jun 1982	89,865,000	-242,000
Jul 1982	89,521,000	-344,000
Aug 1982	89,363,000	-158,000
Sep 1982	89,183,000	-180,000
Oct 1982	88,907,000	-276,000
Nov 1982	88,786,000	-121,000
Dec 1982	88,771,000	-15,000
Jan 1983	88,990,000	219,000
Feb 1983	88,917,000	-73,000
Mar 1983	89,090,000	173,000
Apr 1983	89,364,000	274,000
May 1983	89,644,000	280,000
Jun 1983	90,021,000	377,000
Jul 1983	90,437,000	416,000
Aug 1983	90,129,000	-308,000
Sep 1983	91,247,000	1,118,000
Oct 1983	91,520,000	273,000
Nov 1983	91,875,000	355,000
Dec 1983	92,230,000	355,000
Jan 1984	92,673,000	443,000
Feb 1984	93,157,000	484,000
Mar 1984	93,429,000	272,000
Apr 1984	93,792,000	363,000
May 1984	94,098,000	306,000
Jun 1984	94,479,000	381,000
Jul 1984	94,789,000	310,000
Aug 1984	95,032,000	243,000
Sep 1984	95,344,000	312,000
Oct 1984	95,629,000	285,000
Nov 1984	95,982,000	353,000
Dec 1984	96,107,000	125,000
Jan 1985	96,372,000	265,000
Feb 1985	96,503,000	131,000
Mar 1985	96,842,000	339,000
Apr 1985	97,038,000	196,000
May 1985	97,312,000	274,000
Jun 1985	97,459,000	147,000
Jul 1985	97,648,000	189,000
Aug 1985	97,840,000	192,000
Sep 1985	98,045,000	205,000
Oct 1985	98,233,000	188,000
Nov 1985	98,443,000	210,000
Dec 1985	98,609,000	166,000
Jan 1986	98,732,000	123,000
Feb 1986	98,847,000	115,000
Mar 1986	98,934,000	87,000
Apr 1986	99,121,000	187,000
May 1986	99,248,000	127,000
Jun 1986	99,155,000	-93,000
Jul 1986	99,473,000	318,000
Aug 1986	99,588,000	115,000
Sep 1986	99,934,000	346,000
Oct 1986	100,121,000	187,000
Nov 1986	100,308,000	187,000
Dec 1986	100,509,000	201,000
Jan 1987	100,678,000	169,000
Feb 1987	100,919,000	241,000
Mar 1987	101,164,000	245,000
Apr 1987	101,499,000	335,000
May 1987	101,728,000	229,000
Jun 1987	101,900,000	172,000
Jul 1987	102,247,000	347,000
Aug 1987	102,420,000	173,000
Sep 1987	102,647,000	227,000
Oct 1987	103,138,000	491,000
Nov 1987	103,372,000	234,000
Dec 1987	103,661,000	289,000
Jan 1988	103,753,000	92,000
Feb 1988	104,214,000	461,000
Mar 1988	104,489,000	275,000
Apr 1988	104,732,000	243,000
May 1988	104,962,000	230,000
Jun 1988	105,326,000	364,000
Jul 1988	105,550,000	224,000
Aug 1988	105,674,000	124,000
Sep 1988	106,013,000	339,000
Oct 1988	106,276,000	263,000
Nov 1988	106,617,000	341,000
Dec 1988	106,898,000	281,000
Jan 1989	107,161,000	263,000
Feb 1989	107,427,000	266,000
Mar 1989	107,621,000	194,000
Apr 1989	107,791,000	170,000
May 1989	107,913,000	122,000
Jun 1989	108,027,000	114,000
Jul 1989	108,069,000	42,000
Aug 1989	108,120,000	51,000
Sep 1989	108,369,000	249,000
Oct 1989	108,476,000	107,000
Nov 1989	108,752,000	276,000
Dec 1989	108,836,000	84,000
Jan 1990	109,199,000	363,000
Feb 1990	109,435,000	236,000
Mar 1990	109,644,000	209,000
Apr 1990	109,686,000	42,000
May 1990	109,839,000	153,000
Jun 1990	109,856,000	17,000
Jul 1990	109,824,000	-32,000
Aug 1990	109,616,000	-208,000
Sep 1990	109,518,000	-98,000
Oct 1990	109,367,000	-151,000
Nov 1990	109,214,000	-153,000
Dec 1990	109,166,000	-48,000
Jan 1991	109,055,000	-111,000
Feb 1991	108,734,000	-321,000
Mar 1991	108,574,000	-160,000
Apr 1991	108,364,000	-210,000
May 1991	108,249,000	-115,000
Jun 1991	108,334,000	85,000
Jul 1991	108,292,000	-42,000
Aug 1991	108,310,000	18,000
Sep 1991	108,336,000	26,000
Oct 1991	108,357,000	21,000
Nov 1991	108,296,000	-61,000
Dec 1991	108,328,000	32,000
Jan 1992	108,369,000	41,000
Feb 1992	108,311,000	-58,000
Mar 1992	108,365,000	54,000
Apr 1992	108,519,000	154,000
May 1992	108,649,000	130,000
Jun 1992	108,715,000	66,000
Jul 1992	108,793,000	78,000
Aug 1992	108,925,000	132,000
Sep 1992	108,959,000	34,000
Oct 1992	109,139,000	180,000
Nov 1992	109,272,000	133,000
Dec 1992	109,495,000	223,000
Jan 1993	109,794,000	299,000
Feb 1993	110,044,000	250,000
Mar 1993	109,994,000	-50,000
Apr 1993	110,296,000	302,000
May 1993	110,568,000	272,000
Jun 1993	110,749,000	181,000
Jul 1993	111,055,000	306,000
Aug 1993	111,206,000	151,000
Sep 1993	111,448,000	242,000
Oct 1993	111,733,000	285,000
Nov 1993	111,984,000	251,000
Dec 1993	112,314,000	330,000
Jan 1994	112,595,000	281,000
Feb 1994	112,781,000	186,000
Mar 1994	113,242,000	461,000
Apr 1994	113,586,000	344,000
May 1994	113,921,000	335,000
Jun 1994	114,238,000	317,000
Jul 1994	114,610,000	372,000
Aug 1994	114,896,000	286,000
Sep 1994	115,247,000	351,000
Oct 1994	115,458,000	211,000
Nov 1994	115,869,000	411,000
Dec 1994	116,165,000	296,000
Jan 1995	116,501,000	336,000
Feb 1995	116,697,000	196,000
Mar 1995	116,907,000	210,000
Apr 1995	117,069,000	162,000
May 1995	117,049,000	-20,000
Jun 1995	117,286,000	237,000
Jul 1995	117,380,000	94,000
Aug 1995	117,634,000	254,000
Sep 1995	117,875,000	241,000
Oct 1995	118,031,000	156,000
Nov 1995	118,175,000	144,000
Dec 1995	118,320,000	145,000
Jan 1996	118,316,000	-4,000
Feb 1996	118,739,000	423,000
Mar 1996	118,993,000	254,000
Apr 1996	119,158,000	165,000
May 1996	119,486,000	328,000
Jun 1996	119,769,000	283,000
Jul 1996	120,015,000	246,000
Aug 1996	120,199,000	184,000
Sep 1996	120,410,000	211,000
Oct 1996	120,665,000	255,000
Nov 1996	120,961,000	296,000
Dec 1996	121,143,000	182,000
Jan 1997	121,363,000	220,000
Feb 1997	121,675,000	312,000
Mar 1997	121,990,000	315,000
Apr 1997	122,286,000	296,000
May 1997	122,546,000	260,000
Jun 1997	122,814,000	268,000
Jul 1997	123,111,000	297,000
Aug 1997	123,093,000	-18,000
Sep 1997	123,585,000	492,000
Oct 1997	123,929,000	344,000
Nov 1997	124,235,000	306,000
Dec 1997	124,549,000	314,000
Jan 1998	124,812,000	263,000
Feb 1998	125,016,000	204,000
Mar 1998	125,164,000	148,000
Apr 1998	125,442,000	278,000
May 1998	125,844,000	402,000
Jun 1998	126,076,000	232,000
Jul 1998	126,205,000	129,000
Aug 1998	126,544,000	339,000
Sep 1998	126,752,000	208,000
Oct 1998	126,954,000	202,000
Nov 1998	127,231,000	277,000
Dec 1998	127,596,000	365,000
Jan 1999	127,702,000	106,000
Feb 1999	128,120,000	418,000
Mar 1999	128,227,000	107,000
Apr 1999	128,597,000	370,000
May 1999	128,808,000	211,000
Jun 1999	129,089,000	281,000
Jul 1999	129,414,000	325,000
Aug 1999	129,569,000	155,000
Sep 1999	129,772,000	203,000
Oct 1999	130,177,000	405,000
Nov 1999	130,466,000	289,000
Dec 1999	130,772,000	306,000
Jan 2000	131,005,000	233,000
Feb 2000	131,124,000	119,000
Mar 2000	131,596,000	472,000
Apr 2000	131,888,000	292,000
May 2000	132,105,000	217,000
Jun 2000	132,061,000	-44,000
Jul 2000	132,236,000	175,000
Aug 2000	132,230,000	-6,000
Sep 2000	132,353,000	123,000
Oct 2000	132,351,000	-2,000
Nov 2000	132,556,000	205,000
Dec 2000	132,709,000	153,000
Jan 2001	132,698,000	-11,000
Feb 2001	132,789,000	91,000
Mar 2001	132,747,000	-42,000
Apr 2001	132,463,000	-284,000
May 2001	132,410,000	-53,000
Jun 2001	132,299,000	-111,000
Jul 2001	132,177,000	-122,000
Aug 2001	132,028,000	-149,000
Sep 2001	131,771,000	-257,000
Oct 2001	131,454,000	-317,000
Nov 2001	131,142,000	-312,000
Dec 2001	130,982,000	-160,000
Jan 2002	130,852,000	-130,000
Feb 2002	130,736,000	-116,000
Mar 2002	130,717,000	-19,000
Apr 2002	130,623,000	-94,000
May 2002	130,634,000	11,000
Jun 2002	130,684,000	50,000
Jul 2002	130,590,000	-94,000
Aug 2002	130,587,000	-3,000
Sep 2002	130,501,000	-86,000
Oct 2002	130,628,000	127,000
Nov 2002	130,615,000	-13,000
Dec 2002	130,472,000	-143,000
Jan 2003	130,580,000	108,000
Feb 2003	130,444,000	-136,000
Mar 2003	130,232,000	-212,000
Apr 2003	130,177,000	-55,000
May 2003	130,196,000	19,000
Jun 2003	130,194,000	-2,000
Jul 2003	130,191,000	-3,000
Aug 2003	130,149,000	-42,000
Sep 2003	130,254,000	105,000
Oct 2003	130,454,000	200,000
Nov 2003	130,474,000	20,000
Dec 2003	130,588,000	114,000
Jan 2004	130,769,000	181,000
Feb 2004	130,825,000	56,000
Mar 2004	131,142,000	317,000
Apr 2004	131,411,000	269,000
May 2004	131,694,000	283,000
Jun 2004	131,793,000	99,000
Jul 2004	131,848,000	55,000
Aug 2004	131,937,000	89,000
Sep 2004	132,093,000	156,000
Oct 2004	132,447,000	354,000
Nov 2004	132,503,000	56,000
Dec 2004	132,624,000	121,000
Jan 2005	132,774,000	150,000
Feb 2005	133,032,000	258,000
Mar 2005	133,156,000	124,000
Apr 2005	133,518,000	362,000
May 2005	133,690,000	172,000
Jun 2005	133,942,000	252,000
Jul 2005	134,296,000	354,000
Aug 2005	134,498,000	202,000
Sep 2005	134,566,000	68,000
Oct 2005	134,655,000	89,000
Nov 2005	134,993,000	338,000
Dec 2005	135,149,000	156,000
Jan 2006	135,429,000	280,000
Feb 2006	135,737,000	308,000
Mar 2006	136,047,000	310,000
Apr 2006	136,205,000	158,000
May 2006	136,244,000	39,000
Jun 2006	136,325,000	81,000
Jul 2006	136,520,000	195,000
Aug 2006	136,694,000	174,000
Sep 2006	136,843,000	149,000
Oct 2006	136,852,000	9,000
Nov 2006	137,063,000	211,000
Dec 2006	137,249,000	186,000
Jan 2007	137,477,000	228,000
Feb 2007	137,558,000	81,000
Mar 2007	137,793,000	235,000
Apr 2007	137,842,000	49,000
May 2007	137,993,000	151,000
Jun 2007	138,069,000	76,000
Jul 2007	138,038,000	-31,000
Aug 2007	138,015,000	-23,000
Sep 2007	138,095,000	80,000
Oct 2007	138,174,000	79,000
Nov 2007	138,284,000	110,000
Dec 2007	138,392,000	108,000
Jan 2008	138,403,000	11,000
Feb 2008	138,324,000	-79,000
Mar 2008	138,275,000	-49,000
Apr 2008	138,035,000	-240,000
May 2008	137,858,000	-177,000
Jun 2008	137,687,000	-171,000
Jul 2008	137,491,000	-196,000
Aug 2008	137,213,000	-278,000
Sep 2008	136,753,000	-460,000
Oct 2008	136,272,000	-481,000
Nov 2008	135,545,000	-727,000
Dec 2008	134,839,000	-706,000
Jan 2009	134,055,000	-784,000
Feb 2009	133,312,000	-743,000
Mar 2009	132,512,000	-800,000
Apr 2009	131,817,000	-695,000
May 2009	131,475,000	-342,000
Jun 2009	131,008,000	-467,000
Jul 2009	130,668,000	-340,000
Aug 2009	130,485,000	-183,000
Sep 2009	130,244,000	-241,000
Oct 2009	130,045,000	-199,000
Nov 2009	130,057,000	12,000
Dec 2009	129,788,000	-269,000
Jan 2010	129,790,000	2,000
Feb 2010	129,698,000	-92,000
Mar 2010	129,879,000	181,000
Apr 2010	130,110,000	231,000
May 2010	130,650,000	540,000
Jun 2010	130,511,000	-139,000
Jul 2010	130,427,000	-84,000
Aug 2010	130,422,000	-5,000
Sep 2010	130,357,000	-65,000
Oct 2010	130,625,000	268,000
Nov 2010	130,750,000	125,000
Dec 2010	130,822,000	72,000
Jan 2011	130,841,000	19,000
Feb 2011	131,053,000	212,000
Mar 2011	131,288,000	235,000
Apr 2011	131,602,000	314,000
May 2011	131,703,000	101,000
Jun 2011	131,939,000	236,000
Jul 2011	131,999,000	60,000
Aug 2011	132,125,000	126,000
Sep 2011	132,358,000	233,000
Oct 2011	132,562,000	204,000
Nov 2011	132,694,000	132,000
Dec 2011	132,896,000	202,000
Jan 2012	133,250,000	354,000
Feb 2012	133,512,000	262,000
Mar 2012	133,752,000	240,000
Apr 2012	133,834,000	82,000
May 2012	133,934,000	100,000
Jun 2012	134,007,000	73,000
Jul 2012	134,159,000	152,000
Aug 2012	134,331,000	172,000
Sep 2012	134,518,000	187,000
Oct 2012	134,677,000	159,000
Nov 2012	134,833,000	156,000
Dec 2012	135,072,000	239,000
Jan 2013	135,263,000	191,000
Feb 2013	135,541,000	278,000
Mar 2013	135,680,000	139,000
Apr 2013	135,871,000	191,000
May 2013	136,093,000	222,000
Jun 2013	136,274,000	181,000
Jul 2013	136,386,000	112,000
Aug 2013	136,628,000	242,000
Sep 2013	136,815,000	187,000
Oct 2013	137,040,000	225,000
Nov 2013	137,304,000	264,000
Dec 2013	137,373,000	69,000
Jan 2014	137,548,000	175,000
Feb 2014	137,714,000	166,000
Mar 2014	137,968,000	254,000
Apr 2014	138,293,000	325,000
May 2014	138,511,000	218,000
Jun 2014	138,837,000	326,000
Jul 2014	139,069,000	232,000
Aug 2014	139,257,000	188,000
Sep 2014	139,566,000	309,000
Oct 2014	139,818,000	252,000
Nov 2014	140,109,000	291,000
Dec 2014	140,377,000	268,000
Jan 2015	140,568,000	191,000
Feb 2015	140,839,000	271,000
Mar 2015	140,910,000	71,000
Apr 2015	141,194,000	284,000
May 2015	141,525,000	331,000
Jun 2015	141,699,000	174,000
Jul 2015	142,001,000	302,000
Aug 2015	142,126,000	125,000
Sep 2015	142,281,000	155,000
Oct 2015	142,587,000	306,000
Nov 2015	142,824,000	237,000
Dec 2015	143,097,000	273,000
Jan 2016	143,205,000	108,000
Feb 2016	143,417,000	212,000
Mar 2016	143,654,000	237,000
Apr 2016	143,851,000	197,000
May 2016	143,892,000	41,000
Jun 2016	144,150,000	258,000
Jul 2016	144,521,000	371,000
Aug 2016	144,664,000	143,000
Sep 2016	144,953,000	289,000
Oct 2016	145,071,000	118,000
Nov 2016	145,201,000	130,000
Dec 2016	145,415,000	214,000
Jan 2017	145,612,000	197,000
Feb 2017	145,795,000	183,000
Mar 2017	145,934,000	139,000
Apr 2017	146,154,000	220,000
May 2017	146,295,000	141,000
Jun 2017	146,506,000	211,000
Jul 2017	146,734,000	228,000
Aug 2017	146,924,000	190,000
Sep 2017	146,966,000	42,000
Oct 2017	147,215,000	249,000
Nov 2017	147,411,000	196,000
Dec 2017	147,590,000	179,000
Jan 2018	147,671,000	81,000
Feb 2018	148,049,000	378,000
Mar 2018	148,244,000	195,000
Apr 2018	148,397,000	153,000
May 2018	148,667,000	270,000
Jun 2018	148,881,000	214,000
Jul 2018	149,030,000	149,000
Aug 2018	149,259,000	229,000
Sep 2018	149,364,000	105,000
Oct 2018	149,576,000	212,000
Nov 2018	149,668,000	92,000
Dec 2018	149,908,000	240,000
Jan 2019	150,145,000	237,000
Feb 2019	150,095,000	-50,000
Mar 2019	150,263,000	168,000
Apr 2019	150,482,000	219,000
May 2019	150,545,000	63,000
Jun 2019	150,720,000	175,000
Jul 2019	150,913,000	193,000
Aug 2019	151,108,000	195,000
Sep 2019	151,329,000	221,000
Oct 2019	151,524,000	195,000
Nov 2019	151,758,000	234,000
Dec 2019	151,919,000	161,000
Jan 2020	152,234,000	315,000
Feb 2020	152,523,000	289,000
Mar 2020	150,840,000	-1,683,000
Apr 2020	130,161,000	-20,679,000
May 2020	132,994,000	2,833,000
Jun 2020	137,840,000	4,846,000
Jul 2020	139,566,000	1,726,000
Aug 2020	141,149,000	1,583,000
Sep 2020	141,865,000	716,000
Oct 2020	142,545,000	680,000
Nov 2020	142,809,000	264,000
Dec 2020	142,582,000	-227,000

Unemployment rates for selected groups, February, April, and December 2020
Race and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity	February 2020	April 2020	December 2020
Total, 16 years and older	3.5	14.8	6.7
White	3.0	14.1	6.0
Black or African American	6.0	16.7	9.9
Asian	2.4	14.5	5.9
Hispanic or Latino	4.4	18.9	9.3

Percent change in consumer prices for selected items in April 2020, seasonally adjusted
Expenditure category	Percent change
Car and truck rental (1998)	-16.6
Airline fares (1989)	-15.2
Hotel and motel lodging (1967)	-8.1
Women’s footwear (1978)	-5.2
Full service meals and snacks (1998)	-0.3
Carbonated drinks (1978)	4.5
Household paper products (1997)	4.5
Cookies (1978)	5.1
Chicken (2004)	5.8

Tags: Consumer Price Index, COVID-19, Employment Situation, Pandemic, Productivity, Statistics awareness, Unemployment

State Productivity: A BLS Production

March 3, 2020BLS Commissioner

We have a guest blogger for this edition of Commissioner’s Corner. Jennifer Price is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. She enjoys watching theatrical performances when she’s not working.

I recently had the pleasure of attending a high school play. The cast was composed of a male and female lead and at least a dozen supporting actors. The program listed the performers and acknowledged many other students, parents, teachers, and administrators. They all played some important role to bring the play to life—lighting, sound, painting props, sewing costumes, creating promotional materials, selling tickets, working concessions. All of these pieces came together harmoniously to make the performance a success.

Setting the Stage: New Measures of State Productivity

We can view the health of the nation’s economy through the same lens. Our diversified economy is made up of lead performers and supporting roles in the form of industries. Some industries contribute more heavily to growth in output or productivity, playing the star role. Other industries are supporting characters, contributing to a smaller, but necessary, share of growth. Our productivity program recently published a webpage that examines how industries contribute to the nation’s private business output and productivity growth.

We also can examine these roles geographically. Until recently, BLS productivity measures were only produced at the national level. Last June, BLS published experimental measures of state labor productivity for the private nonfarm business sector. These measures, which cover the period from 2007 to 2017, will help us learn more about productivity growth in each state and how each state contributes to national productivity trends.

Measuring productivity for all states allows us to credit the role played by each state, not just the total performance of the national economy or region. Just as each person, no matter how small their role, was necessary for the success of the school play, each state contributes to how we evaluate national or regional productivity. When we examine the contribution of each state to total productivity trends, we find that, like actors, no two states perform identically. Similar individual growth rates may have different impacts on the productivity of the nation or region. By analyzing state productivity trends over the long term, we learn more about regional business cycles, regional income inequality, and the role of local regulations and taxes on growth.

From 2007 to 2017, labor productivity changes ranged from a gain of 3.1 percent per year in North Dakota to a loss of 0.7 percent per year in Louisiana.

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

We estimate each state’s annual contribution to national or regional productivity growth by multiplying the state’s productivity growth rate by its average share of total current dollar national or regional output. The economic size of each state influences its contribution to national and regional estimates. From 2007 to 2017, California was our lead performer, with the largest contribution to national productivity growth. The state’s productivity grew 1.7 percent per year on average, and its large economy means it contributed more than one-fifth of the 1.0-percent growth in national labor productivity.

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

Supporting actors included Texas and New York. Making a cameo appearance was North Dakota; despite having the largest productivity growth rate, it ranked 28th in terms of its contribution to national productivity growth. Stars in each region included Illinois (Midwest), New York (Northeast), Texas (South), and California (West). Understudies—those states with the largest growth rates—were North Dakota (Midwest), Pennsylvania (Northeast), and Oklahoma (South). Oregon and Washington shared this role out West.

Second Act

For now, our new measures cover the private nonfarm sector for all 50 states and the District of Columbia from 2007 to 2017. These measures include output per hour, output, hours, unit labor costs, hourly compensation, and real hourly compensation. Our measures of labor productivity for states are experimental, meaning we’re still assessing them and considering ways to improve them. In the second act, we will be looking into producing state-level measures for more detailed sectors and industries.

For an encore performance, check out our state labor productivity page. We’d love to hear your feedback! Email comments to productivity@bls.gov.

Annual percent change in labor productivity in the private nonfarm sector, 2007–17
State	Annual percent change
North Dakota	3.1
California	1.7
Oregon	1.7
Washington	1.7
Colorado	1.6
Oklahoma	1.6
Maryland	1.5
Montana	1.5
Pennsylvania	1.5
Massachusetts	1.4
New Mexico	1.4
Vermont	1.4
Idaho	1.3
Kansas	1.3
Nebraska	1.1
New Hampshire	1.1
South Carolina	1.1
Tennessee	1.1
Texas	1.1
West Virginia	1.1
Alabama	1.0
Hawaii	1.0
Kentucky	1.0
Minnesota	1.0
New York	1.0
Rhode Island	1.0
South Dakota	1.0
Virginia	1.0
Georgia	0.9
Arkansas	0.8
Missouri	0.8
Ohio	0.8
Utah	0.8
Illinois	0.7
North Carolina	0.7
Delaware	0.6
Florida	0.6
Iowa	0.6
Indiana	0.5
Mississippi	0.5
New Jersey	0.5
Wisconsin	0.5
Alaska	0.4
Arizona	0.4
District of Columbia	0.4
Michigan	0.4
Maine	0.3
Nevada	0.3
Wyoming	0.1
Connecticut	-0.5
Louisiana	-0.7

States with the largest contributions to national labor productivity, average annual percent change, 2007–17
State	State contribution to U.S. labor productivity
California	0.22
Texas	0.10
New York	0.08
Pennsylvania	0.06
Washington	0.04
Massachusetts	0.04
Illinois	0.03

Topics: Geographic Information | Productivity | U.S. Statistical System | Why This Counts

Tags: Innovation, Jennifer Price, Productivity, Regions and states, Statistics awareness

Let’s Celebrate the Productive U.S. Workforce

September 11, 2019BLS Commissioner

Earlier this month our nation celebrated Labor Day. We celebrate Labor Day for many good reasons, but one of the best is to appreciate, even for just one day, how amazingly productive our nation’s workforce is. As we shop online or in stores, we rarely stop to think about the skills and effort it takes to produce our goods and services. Let’s take a moment to celebrate that productivity and the progress we have seen in the last few years.

Indeed, productivity of labor is at the heart of the American economy. How much workers produce for each hour they labor and how efficiently they use resources determines the pace of economic growth and the volume of goods that supply everyone (workers included) with the products and services that shape our daily lives. Growing productivity means that our standard of living very likely is improving.

Our workers are very productive. On average, each U.S. worker produced goods and services worth $129,755 last year. That’s compared with the next largest world economies: Germany at $99,377; the United Kingdom at $93,226; Japan at $78,615; China at $32,553; and India at $19,555.

Despite our great reliance on rising productivity to attain the good things of life, academics and researchers still marvel at the mysteries that surround the subject. What drives productivity change? What are the key factors behind these international differences in output per worker?

For example, does the quality of labor alone determine the rate of productivity growth? It is certainly a component of what drives labor productivity, although some countries have high educational and training levels but low productivity per worker. Labor quality has been steadily rising in the United States, but we don’t know the impact on productivity as the baby boomers retire and are replaced.

What is the right mix of labor and technology needed for changing the productivity growth rate? How can we measure the value of the dignity of work, or the personal and social value that work yields? And, what is the role of technical knowledge and product design in determining the productivity of labor?

Then there’s the mysterious role of innovation. Economists think they know that invention and scientific breakthroughs can make massive changes to productivity. However, which innovations transform productivity, and have all the low-lying fruits of productivity enhancement already been harvested?

Despite our strong international showing, analysts who watch these data may be a tad bit concerned with the sluggishness in U.S. productivity growth over the past 10 years. Since 2011, the rate of growth in labor productivity has slowed to one-third of the pace shown between 2000 and 2008, despite acceleration in the past 2 years. Even when we broaden the concept of productivity to include the output attributable to the combination of labor and other productive factors (also known as multifactor productivity), the rate of growth is still one-third of the pace it was in the first decade of this century.

Even with a subsidence in the growth rate, it is worth noting that both labor input and output are on the rise. Since the start of the current business cycle expansion in 2009, the rate of growth in labor input has been five times what it was prior to the Great Recession during the previous expansion.

Output has also grown steadily, but at a slower rate than hours. Because labor productivity is the quotient of output divided by hours, productivity can slow even when both components are rising. The relationship between the relative growth of output and hours is one of the many features that makes productivity both challenging and fascinating to study.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics engages with an extensive network of researchers in and out of the academic community whose mission is, like ours, to better understand and measure the productivity of the U.S. labor force. Labor productivity is an amazing subject because it incorporates so many facets of the nation’s economy into one statistic. By peeling back layers and looking at the details behind the summary number, we can gain valuable insight on the hours and output of our nation’s workforce. We will continue to produce and provide context for these valuable statistics that help tell the story of America’s workers.

That said, we should never lose sight of the big picture. America’s workers lead the world in their capacity to create the goods and services that define our economy and improve our lives. And that, certainly, is something great to celebrate!

Topics: Educational Attainment | Productivity

Tags: Baby boomers, International, Labor market trends, Productivity, Recession, Statistics awareness

Labor Day 2019 Fast Facts

August 29, 2019BLS Commissioner

I have been Commissioner of Labor Statistics for 5 months now, and I continue to be amazed by the range and quality of data we publish about the U.S. labor market and the well-being of American workers. As we like to say at BLS, we really do have a stat for that! We won’t rest on what we have done, however. We continue to strive for more data and better data to help workers, jobseekers, students, businesses, and policymakers make informed decisions. Labor Day is a good time to reflect on where we are. This year is the 125th anniversary of celebrating Labor Day as a national holiday. Before you set out to enjoy the long holiday weekend, take a moment to look at some fast facts we’ve compiled on the current picture of our labor market.

Working

Our monthly payroll survey shows that employment continues to expand—now 13.0 million jobs above the January 2008 peak reached as the 2007–09 recession began.
Employment growth has averaged 165,000 per month so far in 2019. That compares with an average monthly gain of 223,000 jobs in 2018.

Working or Looking for Work

The civilian labor force participation rate—the share of the population working or looking for work—was 63.0 percent in July 2019. 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 3.7 percent in July. In April and May, the rate hit its lowest point, 3.6 percent, since 1969.
In July, there were 1.2 million long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more). This represented 19.2 percent of the unemployed, down from a peak of 45.5 percent in April 2010 but still above the 16-percent share in late 2006.
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for teenagers was 12.8 percent in July 2019, while the rates were 3.4 percent for both adult women and adult men. The unemployment rate was 6.0 percent for Blacks or African Americans, 4.5 percent for Hispanics or Latinos, 2.8 percent for Asians, and 3.3 percent for Whites.

Job Openings

On the last business day of June 2019, the number of nonfarm job openings was 7.3 million. That was just below the 7.6 million job openings in late 2018 and early 2019, which was the highest level recorded since the series began in December 2000.
There were 3.4 million quits in June 2019. That’s near the historic high of 3.5 million quits in several months earlier in 2019.
The ratio of unemployed people per job opening was 0.8 on the last business day in June 2019. This ratio has been below 1.0 each month since March 2018.

Pay and Benefits

Average weekly earnings rose by 2.6 percent from July 2018 to July 2019. After adjusting for inflation in consumer prices, real average weekly earnings were up 0.8 percent during this period.

Civilian compensation (wage and benefit) costs increased 2.7 percent in June 2019 from a year earlier. After adjusting for inflation, real compensation costs rose 1.1 percent over the year.
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.
About 91 percent of civilian workers with access to paid holidays receive Labor Day as a paid holiday.
In March 2018, civilian workers with employer-provided medical plans 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 1.8 percent from the second quarter of 2018 to the second quarter of 2019.
Some industries had much faster growth in 2018, including electronic shopping and mail-order houses (10.6 percent) and wireless telecommunications carriers (10.1 percent).
Multifactor productivity in the private nonfarm business sector rose 1.0 percent in 2018. That growth is 0.2 percentage point higher than the average annual rate of 0.8 percent from 1987 to 2018.

Safety and Health

In 2017, there were 5,147 fatal workplace injuries. While this represents a 1-percent decrease from 2016, the 2017 total was the second highest count of fatal work injuries since 2008. It was, however, below the numbers of workplace deaths in the 1990s, when over 6,000 fatalities occurred per year.
There were about 2.8 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses reported in 2017 by private industry employers. That was nearly 45,800 fewer cases than a year earlier. This resulted in an incidence rate of 2.8 cases per 100 full-time workers in 2017. The rate is down from 9.2 cases per 100 full-time workers in 1976.

In 2018, 8.6 percent of all workers were exposed to hazardous contaminants. The use of personal protective equipment was required for 7.3 percent of workers.

Unionization

The union membership rate—the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of unions—was 10.5 percent in 2018, down by 0.2 percentage point from 2017. 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 private-industry union workers were $47.27 and for nonunion workers $33.26 per employee hour worked in March 2019. The cost of benefits accounted for 41.0 percent of total compensation (or $19.37) for union workers and 28.4 percent (or $9.46) for nonunion workers.

Work Stoppages

In the first 7 months of 2019, there have been 307,500 workers involved in major work stoppages that began this year. (Major work stoppages are strikes or lockouts that involve 1,000 or more workers and last one full shift or longer.) For all of 2018, there were 485,200 workers involved in major work stoppages, the largest number since 1986, when about 533,100 workers were involved.
There have been 15 work stoppages beginning in 2019. For all of 2018, 20 work stoppages began during the year.

Education

Occupations that typically require a bachelor’s degree for entry made up 22 percent of employment in 2018. 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. Be sure to check out our updated employment projections, covering 2018 to 2028, that we will publish September 4!

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.

Tags: Benefits, BLS products and services, CPI, Employment Situation, Labor force participation, Labor market trends, Productivity, Recession, Statistics awareness, Unemployment, Workplace safety and health

Wage Information Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow

May 6, 2019BLS Commissioner

On April 16, BLS reported that median weekly earnings for full-time wage and salary workers rose 2.7 percent over the year.

On April 30, BLS reported that the Employment Cost Index for wages of private industry workers rose 3.0 percent over the year.

On May 2, BLS reported that hourly compensation in the nonfarm business sector rose 2.5 percent over the year.

On May 3, BLS reported that average hourly earnings for private industry workers rose 3.2 percent over the year.

What’s going on here? Why so much wage information? And which one is RIGHT?

At BLS, we get questions like this all the time, and the answer is usually “it depends.” There is no one answer that fits every question on wages; there are just different answers depending on what you want to measure. People come to BLS looking for all kinds of answers, and we want to provide as much information as we can. Thus, we have many measures of wages (and other forms of compensation) — a dozen, to be exact.

Do you want to know about wages for an industry? An occupation? By location? For men and women? Based on education? Adjusted for inflation? Including benefits? How wages relate to spending patterns? How wages relate to worker productivity? BLS has it all, and more.

We have so much wage information that even we get confused. So we developed a tool to make the dozen wage series a little easier to understand. It’s an interactive guide that lists all 12 data sources and 32 key details about each of those sources, like how often it is available.

I can hear you now — that’s 384 pieces of information (12 x 32). I’m just looking for one piece of information, not almost 400. And how do you fit all that information on one page, anyway?

The interactive guide limits the display to 3 sources at a time — you pick the sources you want to see.

A table showing 3 BLS sources of compensation information and data characteristics available from those sources.

Or you can pick one characteristic, like “measures available by occupation” and get an answer for all 12 data sources.

A table showing the occupational information available from several BLS data sources on compensation.

This tool is on the BLS beta site. We want you to give it a try and provide feedback. Check it out and leave us a comment. Want to know even more? Watch this video that helps make sense of BLS wage information.

Tags: Benefits, BLS products and services, New tools, Occupational profiles, Productivity, Statistics awareness, Videos