(Reuters) - U.S. private employers unexpectedly cut 10,000 jobs in August compared to a revised gain of 37,000 in July, a report by a payrolls processor showed on Wednesday.
The July figure was originally reported as a gain of 42,000.
The median of estimates from 34 economists surveyed by Reuters for the ADP Employer Services report, jointly developed with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC, was for a rise of 19,000 private-sector jobs in August.
The ADP figures come ahead of the government's much more comprehensive labor market report on Friday, which includes both public and private sector employment.
That report is expected to show a fall in overall nonfarm payrolls of 100,000 in August, based on a Reuters poll of analysts, but a rise in private payrolls of 41,000. [ECI/US]
Economists often refer to the ADP report to fine-tune their expectations for the payrolls numbers, though it is not always accurate in predicting the outcome.
Showing posts with label Automatic Data Processing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Automatic Data Processing. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Expected June payrolls down by almost 50,000
Companies in the U.S. expanded payrolls by 13,000 in June, according to figures from ADP Employer Services. The ADP figures were forecast to show a gain of 60,000 jobs, according to the median estimate of 36 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Projections ranged from 23,000 to 100,000.
ZeroHedge says "the number was so bad it even has Goldman's Jan Hatzius scratching his head. As the firm has lately been horrendous in predicting the NFP, we anticipate that Goldman will likely downward revise its +150,000 gains in payrolls ex-census over the next 48 hours."
ZeroHedge says "the number was so bad it even has Goldman's Jan Hatzius scratching his head. As the firm has lately been horrendous in predicting the NFP, we anticipate that Goldman will likely downward revise its +150,000 gains in payrolls ex-census over the next 48 hours."
Friday, April 2, 2010
The number of long-term unemployed is chilling
The Automatic Earth
The long and the short of numbers
OK, so the BLS Establishment Survey Data say that in March, nonfarm payroll employment rose by 162,000 (quite a bit less than the consensus among "experts"). Not a terribly reliable or important number, if you ask me, but of course people will milk it for what they can. What strikes me is a number in the Household Survey Data:
That's almost 7% in one month, and that is downright scary. Of course, we've talked about this till the cows were home, fed, bathed, and left the barn again, but it still bears repeating that discussing US employment, for instance the initial jobless claims data, has become a futile exercise, if not an outright affront to the people, if the EUC (Emergency Unemployment Compensation) numbers are not included.
It may make for a nice feel-good story to claim that less people have jumped onto the front of the wagon, but it's simply deceitful not to mention the number that have fallen off the back. Over 44% of jobless Americans are now unemployed for more than 27 weeks. Hence, the EUC component of the stats, the by now 6.5 million who largely depend on the emergency money Congress just last week refused to extend, is now probably the most important segment of the unemployment numbers, or at least should be if the fudging would end. At present, it’s exceedingly hard to figure out where they show up in the various sets of supplied data.
And this whole focus on short term versus long term is increasingly becoming an issue in the overall economy, as well as, obviously, its data sets. We’ll have to see if the 162,000 jobs the BLS Establishment Survey Data is real, and how real it is. Note, for instance, that the ADP reported a loss of 23,000 jobs in the private sector just a few days ago. The gain may therefore stem from government jobs alone, most of which would be temp Census ones.
An increase of close to 7% in long-term unemployment is far scarier than a bunch of temp jobs is reason to cheer, that much should be clear. And there are probably millions of additional people who fall outside the scope of even these numbers. After all, don’t let's forget the difference between U3 (steady at 9.7%), U6 (rose to 16.9%) or even John Williams' SGS Alternate, which presumable has stayed near 22%. + 162,000 may be the best number in three years, but what's it mean when you know that fudging is the name of the game?
Just as long term unemployment is the real story when it comes to jobs, housing has its own version of long-term trouble. The Wall street Journal has an anonymous editorial titled The Permanent Mortgage Crisis, and that pretty much sums up the core of it all. more...
The long and the short of numbers
OK, so the BLS Establishment Survey Data say that in March, nonfarm payroll employment rose by 162,000 (quite a bit less than the consensus among "experts"). Not a terribly reliable or important number, if you ask me, but of course people will milk it for what they can. What strikes me is a number in the Household Survey Data:
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) increased by 414,000 over the month to 6.5 million.
That's almost 7% in one month, and that is downright scary. Of course, we've talked about this till the cows were home, fed, bathed, and left the barn again, but it still bears repeating that discussing US employment, for instance the initial jobless claims data, has become a futile exercise, if not an outright affront to the people, if the EUC (Emergency Unemployment Compensation) numbers are not included.
It may make for a nice feel-good story to claim that less people have jumped onto the front of the wagon, but it's simply deceitful not to mention the number that have fallen off the back. Over 44% of jobless Americans are now unemployed for more than 27 weeks. Hence, the EUC component of the stats, the by now 6.5 million who largely depend on the emergency money Congress just last week refused to extend, is now probably the most important segment of the unemployment numbers, or at least should be if the fudging would end. At present, it’s exceedingly hard to figure out where they show up in the various sets of supplied data.
And this whole focus on short term versus long term is increasingly becoming an issue in the overall economy, as well as, obviously, its data sets. We’ll have to see if the 162,000 jobs the BLS Establishment Survey Data is real, and how real it is. Note, for instance, that the ADP reported a loss of 23,000 jobs in the private sector just a few days ago. The gain may therefore stem from government jobs alone, most of which would be temp Census ones.
An increase of close to 7% in long-term unemployment is far scarier than a bunch of temp jobs is reason to cheer, that much should be clear. And there are probably millions of additional people who fall outside the scope of even these numbers. After all, don’t let's forget the difference between U3 (steady at 9.7%), U6 (rose to 16.9%) or even John Williams' SGS Alternate, which presumable has stayed near 22%. + 162,000 may be the best number in three years, but what's it mean when you know that fudging is the name of the game?
Just as long term unemployment is the real story when it comes to jobs, housing has its own version of long-term trouble. The Wall street Journal has an anonymous editorial titled The Permanent Mortgage Crisis, and that pretty much sums up the core of it all. more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)