The Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) is a statistic calculated by the U.S. government, specifically through the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which measures the proportion of the civilian non-institutional population that is either employed or actively seeking employment. Here's how it is defined and calculated:
Civilian Non-institutional Population: This includes all people in the civilian population, aged 16 and over, excluding those in institutions like prisons, long-term care facilities, or the military.
Labor Force: This encompasses all individuals who are either employed or unemployed but actively seeking work.
Employed: People who did any work for pay or profit during the survey reference week, including part-time workers.
Unemployed: People who did not have a job, were available for work, and had made specific efforts to find employment within the past four weeks.
The LFPR does not differentiate between full-time and part-time workers; all are counted as employed if they meet the criteria.
People who are not looking for work (e.g., retirees, students, those not interested in working) are not counted in the labor force, thus not affecting the participation rate.
The rate gives insight into how engaged the population is in the labor market, which can be influenced by demographic trends (like aging population), economic conditions, social policy changes, or shifts in societal norms regarding work.
Significance:
It's a critical indicator of the health of the economy and labor market dynamics. A declining LFPR might indicate more people are leaving the workforce, possibly due to retirement, discouragement from job searching, or other reasons. Conversely, an increase might suggest more people are entering or re-entering the job market.
The U.S. government collects this data through surveys like the Current Population Survey (CPS), providing monthly updates on this statistic. It helps policymakers, economists, and the public understand labor market participation trends, which in turn can influence economic policy, social programs, and workforce development strategies.
This is an interesting chart. Biden killed white labor and raised up asian and hispanic labor. The white job participation curve does not rebound post COVID. Thanks for this link. I didn't realize it reflected demographics. A black friend of mine says "white people got on government services or got crypto rich or got on onlyfans". Not sure I agree there but how much of this chart is impacted by the gig economy?
I've been arguing for years that not nearly enough attention is being paid to the Labor Force Participation Rate.
When you look at those not in the labor force, nearly half the workers sidelined during the COVID Pandemic Panic never returned to the workforce.
When Biden finally ends his Reign of Error, the size of the Not In The Labor Force cohort will be higher than whan he came into office. Meanwhile overall employment in this country has trended down in recent months, and the employment population ratio has been doing the same thing for longer.
The corporate media reporting on the jobs outlook in this country is definitely propagandistic. The Employment Situation Summary itself is merely a product of a bureaucracy.
There are clear biases in the report—that’s obvious from the skewing of the seasonal chart to the top of the seasonal range. However, as a purely analytical exercise, we can’t automatically conclude that the optimistic skewing within the BLS reporting is inherently less reliable than the more conservative and pessimistic skewing within the ADP report. Both are examples of reporting bias within the seasonal adjustments.
While the Employment Situation Summary has a number of structural defects—not for nothing do I accuse the BLS of engaging in Lou Costello Labor Math—the broad shape of the various labor trends, particularly as we drill down into the various employment sectors, are considerably more difficult to fudge or obscure. Even when it appears probable that the numbers in a particular month are the result of goal-seeking by the BLS, that overall trend is simply no easy thing to obscure. This is why I incorporate longer term trending in my analyses—that’s where I see the true value of the report.
There is a lot of propaganda and BS surrounding the jobs report, and a fair bit of BS within the jobs report. But there is also useful and valuable information to be found, if one is willing to peel back the layers.
Corporate media does not like to peel back the layers. I do—but that’s what makes me a nerd! ;)
I prefer the labor participation rate numbers. Ain’t pretty.
https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
The Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) is a statistic calculated by the U.S. government, specifically through the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which measures the proportion of the civilian non-institutional population that is either employed or actively seeking employment. Here's how it is defined and calculated:
Civilian Non-institutional Population: This includes all people in the civilian population, aged 16 and over, excluding those in institutions like prisons, long-term care facilities, or the military.
Labor Force: This encompasses all individuals who are either employed or unemployed but actively seeking work.
Employed: People who did any work for pay or profit during the survey reference week, including part-time workers.
Unemployed: People who did not have a job, were available for work, and had made specific efforts to find employment within the past four weeks.
Formula:
\text{Labor Force Participation Rate} = \left( \frac{\text{Labor Force}}{\text{Civilian Non-institutional Population}} \right) \times 100
Key Points:
The LFPR does not differentiate between full-time and part-time workers; all are counted as employed if they meet the criteria.
People who are not looking for work (e.g., retirees, students, those not interested in working) are not counted in the labor force, thus not affecting the participation rate.
The rate gives insight into how engaged the population is in the labor market, which can be influenced by demographic trends (like aging population), economic conditions, social policy changes, or shifts in societal norms regarding work.
Significance:
It's a critical indicator of the health of the economy and labor market dynamics. A declining LFPR might indicate more people are leaving the workforce, possibly due to retirement, discouragement from job searching, or other reasons. Conversely, an increase might suggest more people are entering or re-entering the job market.
The U.S. government collects this data through surveys like the Current Population Survey (CPS), providing monthly updates on this statistic. It helps policymakers, economists, and the public understand labor market participation trends, which in turn can influence economic policy, social programs, and workforce development strategies.
This is an interesting chart. Biden killed white labor and raised up asian and hispanic labor. The white job participation curve does not rebound post COVID. Thanks for this link. I didn't realize it reflected demographics. A black friend of mine says "white people got on government services or got crypto rich or got on onlyfans". Not sure I agree there but how much of this chart is impacted by the gig economy?
I've been arguing for years that not nearly enough attention is being paid to the Labor Force Participation Rate.
When you look at those not in the labor force, nearly half the workers sidelined during the COVID Pandemic Panic never returned to the workforce.
When Biden finally ends his Reign of Error, the size of the Not In The Labor Force cohort will be higher than whan he came into office. Meanwhile overall employment in this country has trended down in recent months, and the employment population ratio has been doing the same thing for longer.
https://newsletter.allfactsmatter.us/p/idle-hands
When you peel back the top layers of the jobs data, it is clear the US is losing jobs. Employment itself is on the decline in this country.
https://newsletter.allfactsmatter.us/p/the-jobs-recession-is-here
And no, that is not a pretty picture.
Excellent interpretation of a propaganda report.
Thanks!
The corporate media reporting on the jobs outlook in this country is definitely propagandistic. The Employment Situation Summary itself is merely a product of a bureaucracy.
There are clear biases in the report—that’s obvious from the skewing of the seasonal chart to the top of the seasonal range. However, as a purely analytical exercise, we can’t automatically conclude that the optimistic skewing within the BLS reporting is inherently less reliable than the more conservative and pessimistic skewing within the ADP report. Both are examples of reporting bias within the seasonal adjustments.
While the Employment Situation Summary has a number of structural defects—not for nothing do I accuse the BLS of engaging in Lou Costello Labor Math—the broad shape of the various labor trends, particularly as we drill down into the various employment sectors, are considerably more difficult to fudge or obscure. Even when it appears probable that the numbers in a particular month are the result of goal-seeking by the BLS, that overall trend is simply no easy thing to obscure. This is why I incorporate longer term trending in my analyses—that’s where I see the true value of the report.
There is a lot of propaganda and BS surrounding the jobs report, and a fair bit of BS within the jobs report. But there is also useful and valuable information to be found, if one is willing to peel back the layers.
Corporate media does not like to peel back the layers. I do—but that’s what makes me a nerd! ;)
A very valuable nerd, very valuable indeed!
And also, thanks for the restack, Peter.