Hiring and job openings grew slightly in May: Analysis of JOLTS data
Below, EPI senior economist Elise Gould offers her insights on today’s release of the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) for May. Read the full thread here.
Small uptick in job openings and hires for May 2024. Otherwise, not a lot changed in the JOLTS report out this morning from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (https://t.co/dXEZgZoGFw). “Changed little” or “little changed” appears 13 times in the release. pic.twitter.com/xzal5QM1xT
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) July 2, 2024
Labor market churn continues to trend down along with the general downward trend in job openings. The quits rate is below its pre-pandemic average, a sign that workers are sitting tight. Layoffs remain low while hires are up slightly. pic.twitter.com/KUrAUVcICW
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) July 2, 2024
Half of U.S. states have passed the CROWN Act to ban hair discrimination
Black and brown people face racial discrimination based on their hair texture at work, school, and beyond, but a growing number of states are passing legislation to protect against hair discrimination. July 3 marks five years since the signing of the inaugural state CROWN (“Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair”) Act. Now, 25 states in total have passed the CROWN Act, with Vermont becoming the latest state to enact the legislation in April. Meanwhile Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear (D) signed an executive order to protect against hair-based discrimination for state government workers and job applicants, which helps build momentum for legislation that would protect everyone. The map below illustrates which states have passed the CROWN Act (D.C. has protections against hair discrimination but not through the CROWN Act).
Examining the economic impact of language proficiency on AAPI populations
As our economy and nation become increasingly more diverse and multilingual, limited language access to public services and institutions poses a growing threat to limited English proficient (LEP) workers. Although federal law mandates that federal agencies—as well as state and local programs receiving federal funds—establish language access plans for their resources, many non-federally funded state and local programs lack this level of accountability. For LEP workers, this can create significant barriers to understanding and exercising their rights across a complicated web of social, political, and economic institutions.
Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities have particularly high rates of limited English proficiency, with Asian Americans—the only racial group that is predominantly foreign-born—having the greatest need for language assistance. Approximately 32% of Asian Americans are LEP or are categorized as speaking English “less than very well.” By comparison, 29% of the Latinx community and 12.2% of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders are LEP, respectively.
The 24 million AAPI individuals residing in the United States reflect a multitude of complex and challenging histories that shape their diverse experiences in this country, including English language proficiency. Factors such as the promise of economic opportunities, the economic and political instability in their home countries, and the domestic devastation from imperial, colonial, and military expansion all contributed to reasons for AAPI groups to migrate to the United States. Between the 19th and first half of the 20th century, Asian immigrants were subjected to a plethora of immigration restrictions and racial exclusion policies, revealing deep-seated prejudices and economic anxieties. Additionally, the various Pacific Island nations that were colonized, overthrown, and annexed by the United States and other colonial powers each developed mixed relationships with U.S. political and economic systems because of their different colonial and territorial statuses.
More recent Asian immigrants have entered the United States through various immigration channels, including Diversity Visas, H-1B employment visas, and Temporary Protected Status (TPS), while many others have arrived as refugees. Despite these pathways, still more than 1.7 million Asian Americans are undocumented immigrants, further compounding the marginalization experienced by those whose primary language is not English.
More states have strengthened child labor laws than weakened them in 2024: This year, state advocates were better equipped to organize in opposition to harmful bills
Click here for the latest version of our 50-state maps showing the status of legislation to roll back or strengthen child labor protections.
Early this year, we detailed the continued state legislative attacks on child labor protections as well as bills to strengthen child labor standards. Despite the recent rise of child labor violations and several high-profile child labor cases, the industry-backed effort to roll back child labor protections state by state continued, with state bills targeting youth work permits, work hours, and protections from hazardous work. At the same time, many state legislators have recognized the urgent need to strengthen standards and have instead proposed legislation to improve state child labor laws and their enforcement.
Now that most state legislative sessions have ended for the year, here is a look back at how these child labor proposals fared.
Jobs report indicates a strong labor market: Unemployment has been at or below 4% for 30 months running
Below, EPI economists offer their insights on the jobs report released this morning, which showed 272,000 jobs added in May.
From EPI senior economist, Elise Gould (@eliselgould):
Jobs report comes in strong this morning with payroll employment increasing by 272,000 in May. Some notable weakness in the household survey, but most measures tell a consistent story of a strong but not hot labor market. Here, we see consistently strong job growth continuing. pic.twitter.com/g9ilEKcxGK
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) June 7, 2024
The topline household survey numbers suggest some mild weakness though it's important to remember that the payroll survey is the gold standard.
I'm not concerned by the mild uptick in the unemployment rate to 4.0%, which has remained at or below 4.0% for 30 months in a row. pic.twitter.com/Z7erPObbYm
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) June 7, 2024
Again, a more volatile series, the Black unemployment rate ticked up to 6.1% in May.
Getting to full employment is particularly important for historically disadvantaged groups (e.g. young, noncollege, Black and Hispanic workers) who always experience a tougher labor market. pic.twitter.com/bs2jSJ6skh
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) June 7, 2024
From EPI president, Heidi Shierholz (@hshierholz):
This labor market just keeps cranking out huge numbers of jobs. We’ve added almost a million jobs in the last 4 months alone, and the unemployment rate has been at 4% or less for TWO AND A HALF YEARS. It really is incredible.
— Heidi Shierholz (@hshierholz) June 7, 2024
What to watch on jobs day—revenge of the managers: Evidence of manager wage growth rising while typical workers’ wage growth slows
Over the last few months, there’s been much talk about the return to normal in the labor market. A normal rate of job openings, hires, and quits. Unemployment back to pre-pandemic levels for a sustained period and the stability of the prime-age employment-to-population ratio at an even slightly higher rate than pre-pandemic. Will a return to “normal” also mean wages for the vast majority rise slower and that those with more power exert their leverage through faster wage gains? Recent evidence shows a worrying trend emerge: Wage growth for production/nonsupervisory workers has slowed while manager wage growth has mildly accelerated.
Over much of the current economic recovery, lower-wage workers experienced faster wage growth than other groups. They lost their jobs in greater numbers during the pandemic, but a policy response that matched the scale of the problem translated into a tremendous bounceback in jobs. It also meant that workers who lost their jobs weren’t as desperate to take the first one when those jobs returned. Employers had to scramble to attract and retain workers, leading to faster wage growth for those lower-wage workers with historically less bargaining power.
A similar—though more muted—phenomenon happened for production/nonsupervisory workers (roughly the bottom 82% of the wage distribution). Hourly wages for production/nonsupervisory workers started growing faster than overall private-sector wages in mid-2021, as shown in Figure A below. By March 2022, year-over-year hourly wages grew 7.0% for production/nonsupervisory workers, compared with 5.9% overall. Over the last two years, nominal wage growth for both groups of workers has decelerated, but the deceleration is more pronounced among production/nonsupervisory workers. The latest April 2024 data show that production/nonsupervisory workers are still experiencing slightly faster year-over-year wage growth than the overall private sector, but that’s likely to reverse soon given recent trends.
Higher wage growth for production/nonsupervisory workers wanes in recent months: Year-over-year change in private-sector nominal average hourly earnings, 2007–2024
date | Production/nonsupervisory workers | All private-sector employees |
---|---|---|
Jan-2019 | 3.4% | 3.2% |
Feb-2019 | 3.5% | 3.6% |
Mar-2019 | 3.6% | 3.5% |
Apr-2019 | 3.5% | 3.2% |
May-2019 | 3.5% | 3.3% |
Jun-2019 | 3.6% | 3.4% |
Jul-2019 | 3.7% | 3.4% |
Aug-2019 | 3.7% | 3.4% |
Sep-2019 | 3.6% | 3.1% |
Oct-2019 | 3.7% | 3.1% |
Nov-2019 | 3.7% | 3.3% |
Dec-2019 | 3.1% | 3.0% |
Jan-2020 | 3.3% | 3.1% |
Feb-2020 | 3.4% | 3.0% |
Mar-2020 | 3.6% | 3.5% |
Apr-2020 | 7.8% | 8.0% |
May-2020 | 6.9% | 6.7% |
Jun-2020 | 5.6% | 5.1% |
Jul-2020 | 4.8% | 4.9% |
Aug-2020 | 5.1% | 4.8% |
Sep-2020 | 4.8% | 4.8% |
Oct-2020 | 4.6% | 4.6% |
Nov-2020 | 4.6% | 4.5% |
Dec-2020 | 5.6% | 5.4% |
Jan-2021 | 5.3% | 5.2% |
Feb-2021 | 5.2% | 5.3% |
Mar-2021 | 4.9% | 4.5% |
Apr-2021 | 1.5% | 0.7% |
May-2021 | 2.8% | 2.3% |
Jun-2021 | 4.1% | 3.9% |
Jul-2021 | 5.1% | 4.3% |
Aug-2021 | 5.2% | 4.4% |
Sep-2021 | 6.0% | 4.9% |
Oct-2021 | 6.5% | 5.5% |
Nov-2021 | 6.6% | 5.4% |
Dec-2021 | 6.4% | 5.0% |
Jan-2022 | 6.9% | 5.7% |
Feb-2022 | 6.8% | 5.3% |
Mar-2022 | 7.0% | 5.9% |
Apr-2022 | 6.9% | 5.8% |
May-2022 | 6.7% | 5.6% |
Jun-2022 | 6.7% | 5.4% |
Jul-2022 | 6.5% | 5.5% |
Aug-2022 | 6.2% | 5.4% |
Sep-2022 | 5.9% | 5.1% |
Oct-2022 | 5.8% | 5.0% |
Nov-2022 | 5.9% | 5.1% |
Dec-2022 | 5.5% | 4.9% |
Jan-2023 | 5.2% | 4.6% |
Feb-2023 | 5.4% | 4.7% |
Mar-2023 | 5.4% | 4.6% |
Apr-2023 | 5.2% | 4.7% |
May-2023 | 5.1% | 4.6% |
Jun-2023 | 5.0% | 4.7% |
Jul-2023 | 5.0% | 4.7% |
Aug-2023 | 4.8% | 4.5% |
Sep-2023 | 4.7% | 4.5% |
Oct-2023 | 4.6% | 4.3% |
Nov-2023 | 4.6% | 4.3% |
Dec-2023 | 4.5% | 4.3% |
Jan-2024 | 4.7% | 4.4% |
Feb-2024 | 4.5% | 4.3% |
Mar-2024 | 4.2% | 4.1% |
Apr-2024 | 4.0% | 3.9% |
Source: EPI analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics Current Employment Statistics public data series.
Further, we can impute average hourly wages for managers using their shares of the overall private-sector workforce and the wages for overall private and production/nonsupervisory workers. When we do that, we see a mild acceleration in managerial wage growth over the last few months, though the series is notably volatile (see Figure B). This wage differential between typical workers and managers will be important to watch in Friday’s jobs report as well as future months. While the return to normal may be welcome in other metrics, it would not be welcome to see managerial pay growth exceeding growth for non-managers such that rising inequality rears its ugly head again.
Manager wage growth rises as wage growth for production/nonsupervisory workers slows in recent months: Year-over-year change in private-sector nominal average hourly earnings, 2007–2024
date | Production/nonsupervisory workers | Managers |
---|---|---|
Jan-2019 | 3.4% | 2.9% |
Feb-2019 | 3.5% | 3.7% |
Mar-2019 | 3.6% | 3.4% |
Apr-2019 | 3.5% | 2.5% |
May-2019 | 3.5% | 2.4% |
Jun-2019 | 3.6% | 2.5% |
Jul-2019 | 3.7% | 2.2% |
Aug-2019 | 3.7% | 2.3% |
Sep-2019 | 3.6% | 1.4% |
Oct-2019 | 3.7% | 1.4% |
Nov-2019 | 3.7% | 2.1% |
Dec-2019 | 3.1% | 2.2% |
Jan-2020 | 3.3% | 2.2% |
Feb-2020 | 3.4% | 1.9% |
Mar-2020 | 3.6% | 2.5% |
Apr-2020 | 7.8% | 3.2% |
May-2020 | 6.9% | 1.5% |
Jun-2020 | 5.6% | 0.5% |
Jul-2020 | 4.8% | 1.8% |
Aug-2020 | 5.1% | 1.5% |
Sep-2020 | 4.8% | 2.2% |
Oct-2020 | 4.6% | 2.2% |
Nov-2020 | 4.6% | 2.4% |
Dec-2020 | 5.6% | 2.9% |
Jan-2021 | 5.3% | 3.0% |
Feb-2021 | 5.2% | 3.3% |
Mar-2021 | 4.9% | 1.7% |
Apr-2021 | 1.5% | 1.5% |
May-2021 | 2.8% | 3.3% |
Jun-2021 | 4.1% | 4.6% |
Jul-2021 | 5.1% | 3.0% |
Aug-2021 | 5.2% | 2.7% |
Sep-2021 | 6.0% | 2.7% |
Oct-2021 | 6.5% | 3.3% |
Nov-2021 | 6.6% | 2.8% |
Dec-2021 | 6.4% | 2.2% |
Jan-2022 | 6.9% | 3.0% |
Feb-2022 | 6.8% | 2.2% |
Mar-2022 | 7.0% | 3.8% |
Apr-2022 | 6.9% | 3.6% |
May-2022 | 6.7% | 3.4% |
Jun-2022 | 6.7% | 2.9% |
Jul-2022 | 6.5% | 3.2% |
Aug-2022 | 6.2% | 3.7% |
Sep-2022 | 5.9% | 3.2% |
Oct-2022 | 5.8% | 3.1% |
Nov-2022 | 5.9% | 3.1% |
Dec-2022 | 5.5% | 3.2% |
Jan-2023 | 5.2% | 2.9% |
Feb-2023 | 5.4% | 2.8% |
Mar-2023 | 5.4% | 2.3% |
Apr-2023 | 5.2% | 3.0% |
May-2023 | 5.1% | 3.0% |
Jun-2023 | 5.0% | 3.6% |
Jul-2023 | 5.0% | 3.8% |
Aug-2023 | 4.8% | 3.6% |
Sep-2023 | 4.7% | 3.8% |
Oct-2023 | 4.6% | 3.3% |
Nov-2023 | 4.6% | 3.4% |
Dec-2023 | 4.5% | 3.5% |
Jan-2024 | 4.7% | 3.5% |
Feb-2024 | 4.5% | 3.7% |
Mar-2024 | 4.2% | 4.0% |
Apr-2024 | 4.0% | 3.8% |
Note: Manager wages are constructed using their shares of the overall private-sector workforce and the wages for overall private-sector and production/nonsupervisory workers.
Source: EPI analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics Current Employment Statistics public data series.
Nursing home owners are pushing Congress to block a new minimum staffing rule
Opposition to a new nursing home staffing standard has come to a boil with owners seeking to overturn the rule via a Congressional Review Act resolution, a “salted earth” strategy that would prevent the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from ever issuing an amended rule. Given the life-saving implications of implementing a minimum staffing rule—which would require nursing homes to provide a minimum of 3.48 hours of care per resident—here’s a summary of comments EPI submitted in support of the rule, pushing back against unfounded industry claims of a worker shortage that would prevent nursing homes from meeting the new standard.
The nursing home industry has attempted to equate a staffing decline with a worker shortage. But this decline mirrored a decline in occupancy, and, if anything, suggests that there’s a pool of sidelined workers who could be lured back if pay and working conditions improved. This is true in both urban and rural areas.
The industry trade organization issued a report that described the 13.3% decline in nursing home jobs during the pandemic as a “workforce shortage” causing “wage increase pressures and reliance on contracted or agency nursing.” But this was a decline in jobs, not in available workers, as 168,579 residents died and would-be residents opted for alternative care arrangements due to the rapid spread of COVID-19 in facilities. It’s misleading to characterize reduced demand as a workforce shortage when staffing ratios actually improved somewhat during this period.
Job openings continue to trend toward pre-pandemic levels
Below, EPI senior economist Elise Gould offers her insights on today’s release of the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) for April. Read the full thread here.
Job openings continue to trend toward pre-pandemic levels, down nearly 300k between March and April, and down 1.8 million over the year. High levels of job openings at the height of the pandemic recovery were driven by faster churn. The job openings rate is nearly back to normal. pic.twitter.com/TA9uoNaCC6
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) June 4, 2024
Since the peak in March 2022 when churn was high as employers scrambled to find workers after massive layoffs and many workers quit in search of better opportunities, job openings are now more than 80% of the way back to “normal” (and the job openings rate is 90% back to normal). pic.twitter.com/mgsfS9gffO
— Elise Gould (@eliselgould) June 4, 2024
Alabama’s and Maryland’s similar Black unemployment rates mask major differences in labor market conditions
Nationally, the Black unemployment rate remains below historic norms, averaging 6% in the first quarter of 2024. Since 2019, two states—Maryland and Alabama—stand out as consistently having Black unemployment rates below the national average. Among states where Black workers comprise at least 5% of the labor force, the state with the lowest Black unemployment rate has been either Maryland or Alabama for the last 13 quarters (back to 2021 Q1). In fact, these two states have had the lowest and second lowest Black unemployment rates (not always in the same order) for eight of the last nine quarters (from 2022 Q1 to 2023 Q4).
Black unemployment rates in Maryland and Alabama have been consistently lower than the national average in recent years: Black quarterly unemployment rates, 2018 Q4–2024 Q1
Alabama | Maryland | United States | |
---|---|---|---|
2018 Q4 | 6.70% | 5.70% | 6.40% |
2019 Q1 | 6.30% | 5.70% | 6.50% |
2019 Q2 | 5.80% | 5.10% | 6.20% |
2019 Q3 | 5.30% | 4.40% | 6.00% |
2019 Q4 | 4.80% | 4.20% | 6.00% |
2020 Q1 | 4.70% | 4.70% | 6.30% |
2020 Q2 | 15.00% | 11.80% | 18.40% |
2020 Q3 | 9.90% | 10.30% | 12.50% |
2020 Q4 | 7.20% | 8.60% | 9.60% |
2021 Q1 | 5.90% | 7.80% | 8.80% |
2021 Q2 | 5.30% | 7.80% | 9.00% |
2021 Q3 | 4.30% | 6.60% | 7.90% |
2021 Q4 | 4.20% | 5.20% | 6.70% |
2022 Q1 | 4.10% | 4.20% | 6.30% |
2022 Q2 | 4.20% | 3.40% | 6.10% |
2022 Q3 | 4.00% | 3.70% | 6.00% |
2022 Q4 | 3.60% | 3.70% | 6.00% |
2023 Q1 | 3.20% | 3.20% | 5.70% |
2023 Q2 | 2.70% | 2.90% | 5.80% |
2023 Q3 | 3.10% | 3.00% | 5.90% |
2023 Q4 | 3.70% | 3.30% | 5.80% |
2024 Q1 | 4.30% | 3.30% | 6.00% |
Source: EPI analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) data and Current Population Survey (CPS) data.
Despite the remarkable similarity in unemployment rates shown in Figure A, Black workers in Maryland and Alabama may not be as equally well off as they appear to be. Figure B reveals that between 2018 and 2023, a much larger share of Maryland’s Black population was employed than Alabama’s. In 2023, the employment-to-population ratio (EPOP) in Maryland was 64.6%, compared with just 55.5% in Alabama and 59.6% for the United States as a whole.
Employment-to-population ratios reveal Maryland employs a much larger share of Black residents than Alabama: Black employment-to-population ratios, 2018–2023
Year | United States | Maryland | Alabama |
---|---|---|---|
2018 | 58.30% | 61.10% | 52.00% |
2019 | 58.80% | 66.20% | 53.60% |
2020 | 53.70% | 62.40% | 52.10% |
2021 | 55.70% | 62.20% | 52.70% |
2022 | 58.50% | 62.50% | 54.70% |
2023 | 59.60% | 64.60% | 55.50% |
Source: EPI analysis of Current Population Survey microdata from the U.S. Census Bureau
If Black unemployment rates are so similar in both states, why are employment-to-population ratios so different? Because of fundamental differences in each state’s approach to social and economic policy. While Alabama adopts the Southern economic development strategy, for example, Maryland does not. This strategy seeks to disempower workers—especially Black and brown workers—to ensure employers can extract their labor for as little compensation as possible. In practice, this translates to higher rates of incarceration in Alabama than in Maryland, especially for Black men. Alabama has no minimum wage, compared with Maryland’s $15 per hour wage floor. Alabama lacks pro-worker, family-supportive labor policies like Maryland’s paid sick days and paid family and medical leave laws. And Alabama underinvests in public services.
Class of 2024: Young high school graduates have seen strong wage growth over the pandemic recovery
Key findings:
- In the pandemic recovery, young high school graduates have experienced a much faster rebound in job prospects and stronger wage growth than any recovery in recent history.
- The unemployment rate for young high school graduates—defined as workers ages 18 to 21—recovered in two years in the pandemic recovery compared with almost 9.5 years following the Great Recession of 2008–09. Meanwhile, the underemployment rate recovered more than five times faster in the pandemic recovery than the aftermath of the Great Recession.
- Young high school graduates experienced 9.4% real (inflation-adjusted) wage growth between February 2020 and March 2024.
- Gaps in labor market outcomes across race and ethnicity and gender persist even among high school graduates who have the same basic level of education and little variation in professional experience.
- The unemployment and underemployment rates of Black, Hispanic, and AAPI young high school graduates are much higher than their white counterparts.
- On average, Black workers are paid 93.2% of what white workers are paid per hour, while women are paid 87.6% compared with their male counterparts.
As with young college graduates, young high school graduates are experiencing a much stronger labor market today than before the pandemic and at any point since 2000. The fast economic recovery from the pandemic shock is a direct result of the aggressive fiscal policy response that matched the scale of the problem—in stark contrast to policy responses following previous recessions.
In this blog post, we start by examining employment and enrollment outcomes for young high school graduates, defined as workers ages 18 to 21. We then analyze their short- and long-run trends in unemployment, underemployment, and wages, looking at those with only a high school degree and who are not enrolled in further schooling.1
To most accurately capture the choices that young high school graduates are making, we include all young people between the ages of 18 and 21 who have less than a bachelor’s degree (including those with some college) in our initial sample. We group this population into four categories: “employed only” and not enrolled in further schooling, “enrolled only” and not employed, employed and enrolled, or “idled” (not enrolled and not employed, which includes the unemployed). Among these young high school graduates, most are either “employed only” and not enrolled in further schooling (32.7%) or “enrolled only” and not employed (31.1%). Since 1989, the share of young high school graduates who are “employed only” has fallen 11.8 percentage points, while the share of those who are “enrolled only” has risen 10.1 percentage points. As of March 2024, the share of young high school graduates who are employed and enrolled (21.5%) and idled (14.7%) remains roughly similar from 1989 (21.0% and 13.5%, respectively).