The ECRI has an interesting study out today that pretty much confirms what I have said about Obamacare boosting part-time employment at the expense of full time jobs.
Please consider Multiple Jobholders Boost “Full-Time” Employment.
The latest jobs report far exceeded consensus expectations as the economy added 292,000 nonfarm payroll jobs.
But a closer look at the details reveals why concerns remain about the health of the labor market.
In December, year-over-year (yoy) growth in multiple jobholders rose to an 11-month high, while yoy growth in single jobholders eased to a three-month low. Specifically, since May the number of multiple jobholders has increased by 752,000, while single jobholders have increased by 429,000. In other words, multiple jobholders have been responsible for 64% of the net job gains since last spring. The disproportionate importance of multiple jobholders – forced to cobble together a living – shows why the labor market is weaker than it seems.
Notably, as long as these multiple jobholders log 35 hours of work per week — no matter how many part-time jobs that takes — they are considered full-time.
Does the Sum of the Parts Equal the Whole?
I confirmed the ECRI’s statement about combining multiple hours from multiple part-time jobs into one allegedly full-time job with the BLS a long time ago.
Moreover, the discrepancies go far beyond what the ECRI reports to the point of double-counting in the reported payroll numbers.
I commented on this possibility on October 21, 2015 in Does the Sum of the Parts Equal the Whole?
Double Counting Part-Time Jobs?
I remain firmly convinced the BLS is double counting part-time jobs. And in a recent phone conversation, a BLS analyst admitted it was possible.
I asked a simple question: Why don’t you sort out duplicate social security numbers?
The answer I received was “we would like to but we do not have access to the data for privacy reasons“.
A decent sort-merge algorithm could hash this out easily, but only if the BLS had access to Social Security numbers.
So here we are wondering why the sum of the parts exceeds the whole overall, while we frequently see the opposite effect month over month.
The much-maligned BLS is in the spotlight, but in actuality it appears as if the BLS does not have access to the data they need to produce valid numbers.
Are major discrepancies like these better than no numbers at all?
Strong Jobs Report?
When I commented today on the “Third Strong Jobs Report“, please make a note that strength is relative to what was discussed above.
I cannot accurately measure jobs, nor apparently can the BLS.
ADP could do this easily, with a social security merge program, but ADP has not responded to multiple inquired by me.
Finally, please bear in mind that if you worked as little as 1 hour, at virtually anything, including selling trinkets on Ebay, you are considered “employed”.
I would like to see a breakdown of how many hours people are actually working in these part-time jobs, but that data is not available either.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock