Overall unemployment rate dips to 4.5% but unemployment rate among construction workers hits 10%

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The Labor Department’s latest monthly report on employment, released yesterday, showed all the hallmarks of a still healthy job market in February: steadily rising wages, firm job growth and a low unemployment rate. Employers added 97,000 workers, according to the estimate, and the jobless rate ticked down to 4.5 percent from 4.6 percent.

[...]

Hispanics experienced a significant change in their employment situation last month. The unemployment rate for Hispanics dropped to 5.2 percent from 5.7 percent. The rate for blacks, 7.9 percent, and the rate for whites, 4.0 percent, each fell by a tenth of a percentage point.

[...]

Pay grew the most in February for workers in the leisure and hospitality industries, which have been adding workers rapidly in recent months. Restaurants and bars, in particular, have been growing, and last month they added 21,000 jobs.

Businesses also rushed to fill building services jobs, adding 11,300 positions for custodians, landscapers, exterminators and similar professions.

But workers in factories and on construction sites were hit hard again last month, losing a combined 76,000 jobs. Most of that, 62,000 was in construction, which economists said reflected both the cold weather and the slowdown in housing. The unemployment rate for construction workers jumped to 10.5 percent from 8.6 percent a year earlier.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/business/10econ.html

[Otto 83]

Just an FYI:

At least 6% of the general population IS UNEMPLOYABLE anyway - which means we should take away a slightly different meaning than what one might think (100% employment). They (the 6%) are those who: don't care to work, can't work, mentally unable to, etc...

The point is - when you see 4% unemployment it means there are some people working that shouldn't be (or otherwise wouldn't be). Employers are hiring virtually anyone they can. All things being equal it also may mean, qualified people aren't able to get on because slots are already filled by (potentially) less qualified people.

All In All..4% is not bad - 10% not terrible, but not as good and sliding into Not Good especially if it continues as we come into warmer weather.

Just my 2cents.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Just an FYI:

At least 6% of the general population IS UNEMPLOYABLE anyway - which means we should take away a slightly different meaning than what one might think (100% employment). They (the 6%) are those who: don't care to work, can't work, mentally unable to, etc...

The point is - when you see 4% unemployment it means there are some people working that shouldn't be (or otherwise wouldn't be). Employers are hiring virtually anyone they can. All things being equal it also may mean, qualified people aren't able to get on because slots are already filled by (potentially) less qualified people.

All In All..4% is not bad - 10% not terrible, but not as good and sliding into Not Good especially if it continues as we come into warmer weather.

Just my 2cents.

Yes, I remember being taught that too - that "full employment" is at about 94%. But then the Labor Dept metrics are (I believe) a percentage of the 'labor force'.. and the labor force excludes anyone who has spent more than 6 (or 12?) months looking for work (IOW, probably unemployable) and anyone who isn't looking at all. So if that is correct, doesn't the 4.5% refer to people who are part of the labor force (i.e. are presumably employable and actively seeking but currently unemployed)?