Source: Rebecca Smith, Claire McKenna, National Employment Law Project and National Staffing Workers Alliance, September, 2014
From the press release:
There are a record high 2.8 million temporary help jobs in today’s economy, making up 2 percent of total employment, according to a report released Tuesday by the National Employment Law Project.
The report, Temped Out: How The Domestic Outsourcing of Blue-Collar Jobs Harms America’s Workers, examines the employment services industry, which includes temporary help agencies (also called staffing agencies), professional employer organizations and employment placement agencies. It finds that as a whole, the industry represents 2.5 percent of all jobs, up from 1.4 percent in 1990. More than 12 million people flowed into and out of a staffing agency in 2013 alone.
America’s staffing industry has also shifted its reach to new sectors like manufacturing and warehousing. The use of third-party staffing agencies creates a layered employment structure that empowers the client-employers at the top and puts downward pressure on staffing agencies in the middle competing for contracts. Many of those agencies in turn keep costs low by cutting corners on pay and safety for workers. In fact, staffing workers’ median hourly wages are 22 percent lower than wages of all private-sector workers.
… “Temp work” is becoming a misnomer—with many workers in “temporary jobs” for months or years, doing the same work as their direct-hire counterparts, but for lower pay, few benefits, and no job security. When staffing workers lose their jobs, arcane rules keep many from receiving the benefits to which other unemployed workers are entitled. …
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing, ISBN 978-92-64-21523-8, 2014
The 2014 edition of the OECD Employment Outlook reviews recent labour market trends and short-term prospects in OECD and key emerging economies. It zooms in on how the crisis has affected earnings, provides country comparisons of job quality, examines the causes and consequences of non-regular employment, and estimates the impact of qualifications and skills on labour market outcomes.
– The labour market recovery in the OECD area remains incomplete
– Real wage growth has slowed substantially
– Better job quality should be promoted
– Overreliance on temporary work is damaging to individuals and the economy
– Both qualifications and skills matter for early labour market outcomes and beyond
∙ Executive summary
∙ Statistical annex tables (Excel)
∙ Data visualisation
∙ Press release
∙ Detailed country highlights
Source: National Employment Law Project, August 2014
From the summary:
… This report updates two NELP analyses on the decline in occupational wages since 2009 and the nature of private sector job creation in this recovery. We find that, averaged across all occupations, real median hourly wages declined by 3.4 percent from 2009 to 2013. Lower- and mid-wage occupations experienced greater declines in their real wages than did higher-wage occupations.
We further find that, despite the recent acceleration in job gains in higher-wage industries during the first half of 2014, job growth over the past year (and in the recovery overall) has been unbalanced, with especially pronounced gains at the bottom and slow growth in mid-wage industries. Specifically:
• Lower-wage industries constituted 41 percent of job growth from July 2013 to July 2014.
• Mid-wage industries constituted 26 percent of job growth from July 2013 to July 2014.
• Higher-wage industries constituted 33 percent of job growth from July 2013 to July 2014.
Today, there are approximately 1.2 million fewer jobs in mid- and higher-wage industries than there were prior to the recession, while there are 2.3 million more jobs in lower-wage industries. During the labor market downturn of January 2008 to February 2010, job losses occurred throughout the economy but were concentrated in mid- and higher-wage industries, according to NELP’s earlier analyses…
Source: Carl E. Van Horn, Cliff Zukin, Allison Kopicki, Rutgers University, John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Work Trends Reports, August 2014
From the summary:
The protracted and uneven recovery from the Great Recession has led most Americans to conclude that the U.S. economy has undergone a permanent change for the worse. Seven in ten now say the recession’s impact is permanent, up from half in 2009 when the recession officially ended. Much of this is rooted in direct experience. Fully one-quarter of the public says there has been a major decline in their quality of life owing to the recession, and 42 percent say they have less in salary and savings than when the recession began. Despite five years of recovery, sustained job growth, and reductions in the number of unemployed workers, Americans are not convinced that the economy is improving. Only one in three thinks the U.S. economy has gotten better in the last year and only one-quarter thinks it will improve next year. Moreover, just one in six Americans believe that job opportunities will be better for the next generation of workers, down from four in ten five years ago. These are some of the findings of a new survey conducted between July 24 and August 3, 2014 by the Heldrich Center with a nationally representative sample of 1,153 Americans….
Source: Daron Acemoglu, David Autor, David Dorn, Gordon H. Hanson, Brendan Price, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), NBER Working Paper No. w20395, August 2014
From the abstract:
Even before the Great Recession, U.S. employment growth was unimpressive. Between 2000 and 2007, the economy gave back the considerable gains in employment rates it had achieved during the 1990s, with major contractions in manufacturing employment being a prime contributor to the slump. The U.S. employment “sag” of the 2000s is widely recognized but poorly understood. In this paper, we explore the contribution of the swift rise of import competition from China to sluggish U.S. employment growth. We find that the increase in U.S. imports from China, which accelerated after 2000, was a major force behind recent reductions in U.S. manufacturing employment and that, through input-output linkages and other general equilibrium effects, it appears to have significantly suppressed overall U.S. job growth. We apply industry-level and local labor market-level approaches to estimate the size of (a) employment losses in directly exposed manufacturing industries, (b) employment effects in indirectly exposed upstream and downstream industries inside and outside manufacturing, and (c) the net effects of conventional labor reallocation, which should raise employment in non-exposed sectors, and Keynesian multipliers, which should reduce employment in non-exposed sectors. Our central estimates suggest net job losses of 2.0 to 2.4 million stemming from the rise in import competition from China over the period 1999 to 2011. The estimated employment effects are larger in magnitude at the local labor market level, consistent with local general equilibrium effects that amplify the impact of import competition.
Source: Sarah Ayres, Center for American Progress, August 26, 2014
From the summary:
…Apprenticeships may not solve all of our nation’s workforce challenges, but they have the potential to play a much bigger role in our education and training system. This issue brief discusses the benefits of apprenticeship before explaining why registered apprenticeships do not currently offer a truly portable credential and how industry-recognized apprenticeship programs can help both workers and employers. It then suggests some policies the federal government can enact to incentivize employers to write national guideline standards for apprenticeships. ….
Source: Mike Maciag, Governing, August 26, 2014
See charts and a few key takeaways on new data measuring how recently laid-off workers are faring across regions and industries.
Source: Stephen A. Wandner, Randall W. Eberts, Monthly Labor Review, July 2014
This article uses data from the recently compiled Public Workforce System Dataset to assess the response of selected federal workforce programs to the 2007–2009 recession. The analysis indicates that these programs responded quickly to the economic downturn, providing timely relief for a large number of unemployed workers. Supplemental funding secured through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also enabled federal workforce programs and state agencies to pay benefits for longer durations and to offer expanded training and reemployment services to program participants.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, BLS Reports, Report 1050, August 2014
In 2013, the overall unemployment rate for the United States was 7.4 percent; however, the rate varied across race and ethnicity groups. The rates were highest for Blacks (13.1 percent) and for American Indians and Alaska Natives (12.8 percent) and lowest for Asians (5.2 percent) and for Whites (6.5 percent). The jobless rate was 9.1 percent for Hispanics, 10.2 percent for Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders, and 11.0 percent for people of Two or More Races. Labor market differences among the race and ethnicity groups are associated with many factors, not all of which are measurable. These factors include variations across the groups in educational attainment; the occupations and industries in which the groups work; the geographic areas of the country in which the groups are concentrated, including whether they tend to reside in urban or rural settings; and the degree of discrimination encountered in the workplace. This report describes the labor force characteristics and earnings patterns among the largest race and ethnicity groups living in the United States—Whites, Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics—and provides detailed data through a set of supporting tables. The report also includes a limited amount of data for American Indians and Alaska Natives and for Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders, people who are of Two or More Races, detailed Hispanic ethnicity and, for the first time, detailed Asian groups. Due to their relatively small sample size, estimates for these additional groups are not included in all tables. …
Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), 2014
Tremendous forces are radically reshaping the world of work as we know it. Disruptive innovations are creating new industries and business models and destroying old ones. New technologies, data analytics and social networks are having a huge impact on how we communicate, collaborate and work. Many of the roles and job titles of tomorrow will be ones we’ve not even thought of yet. This report takes you on a journey to 2022 and explores how the changing business landscape will impact your people management strategy. What path will you take? … …In this report, we look to 2022 and consider how the characteristics of these three worlds of work are likely to be shaped by the changes coming up over the next eight years. This includes setting out the recruitment, reward and employee engagement strategies that are likely to be most relevant as these worlds evolve, and what this means for businesses, workforces and HR. This report draws on a specially commissioned survey of 10,000 people in China, India, Germany, the UK and the US, who told us how they think the workplace will evolve and how this will affect their employment prospects and future working lives. Further input comes from a survey of almost 500 HR professionals across the world, who share their insights on how they’re preparing for the changes ahead…