Back to work for less

CNN/Money ^ | July 30, 2004 | N/A

[Archangelsk]

Survey: 57% who lost full-time jobs 2001-2003 and found full-time work again are earning less.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Judging from the latest government data, more than 50 percent of workers who lost or left full-time work between 2001 and 2003 and were lucky enough to have found another full-time job by this year were earning less than they used to.

From January 2001 through December 2003, 5.3 million long-tenured workers were displaced from full-time or part-time jobs they had held at least three years, according to a new report released Friday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Displacement in this context is defined as a job that was lost or left because a plant or company closed or moved, there wasn't enough work to do or a position or shift was eliminated.

Among the long-tenured workers who were displaced, 65 percent had found either full-time or part-time work by January of this year, when the BLS survey was conducted.Another 20 percent were still unemployed and 15 percent were not in the labor force, meaning they said they had not looked for work in the four weeks prior to the survey.

But 57 percent of the group who had lost full-time jobs and found new full-time work reported that they were now earning less than what they earned in their old jobs. Indeed, about one-third of those with smaller paychecks were being paid at least 20 percent less.

In unpublished data, the BLS found that among all workers displaced from 2001 through 2003 -- a total of 11.4 million people -- 52 percent of those who lost full-time work and regained it by this year were earning less than they used to. Reasons for job displacement

Among the long-tenured workers surveyed, 43 percent said plant or company closings or moves accounted for their displacement.

Another 29 percent cited elimination of their position or shift.

And 28 percent said there wasn't enough work to do. Other highlights

[Archangelsk]

In my case, this is true, however, it was my choice to retrain into a new industry. An industry that - although it pays 2/3 less than what I used to earn - leaves me completely and totally fulfilled. (However, I do feel sorry for the poor bastards who can't say the same).

[anniegetyourgun]

Good for you. And, of course, 2/3 is better than 0.

[Congressman Billybob]

The "long-time" employees obviously includes some people who are at or near retirement, and some of them did not seek further employment, or equally rigorous employment at the same rate of pay. Further in the article, it gives the statistics on "all" employees, which obviously include the "long-term" ones.

In the latter category, the lower salary ones are 52%. Eliminate the end-of-career bias, and this story shows that the Bush Administration is correct, that people are dominantly getting higher paying jobs. The "burger-flipping" complaint is therefore false.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "The Wussification of America: Fallout from Arnold, John and Sandy"

If you haven't already joined the anti-CFR effort, please click here.

[Archangelsk]

Eliminate the end-of-career bias, and this story shows that the Bush Administration is correct, that people are dominantly getting higher paying jobs.

Not me, but I'm not complaining since I have the greatest office view in the world from one of these:

[jeffc]

From January 2001 through December 2003, 5.3 million long-tenured workers were displaced from full-time or part-time jobs they had held at least three years . . .

Yup. That's me. Worked 14 years at a company, worked my way up to Telecomm Manager. New top management comes in to stir up sales and I'm out so the new people can put their own guy in my place (I wasn't the only one. Almost all mid-management people were replaced).
Have only had short-term contract work since.

[sarcasm]

Eliminate the end-of-career bias, and this story shows that the Bush Administration is correct, that people are dominantly getting higher paying jobs

Prove it.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

According to the IRS, wages have plummeted by almost 10%. Yet we're told the economy is booming...I guess it is at the top. They're up 10-22%. Group by group, job by job, industry by industry, our lives are being destroyed. In the meantime our politicians do everything in their power to aid in the jobs exportation and cheap labor importation that is causing average Americans so much strife.

This will cost Bush the election, imho. His Administration continuously shows it's contempt for the American worker. Not that Kerry will do better. Until we throw them all out of office, entropy will stay the course.

[Congressman Billybob]

Long-time employees obviously include more of the older and end-of-career employees than short-term employees. Is this difficult to comprehend?

John / Billybob

[Farnham]

Hang in there.
I was Director of Support at a software house, knocking down 75+.

I was out of work for 18 months. Painted houses (had never done it before, except mine),laid tile(never done it before), did tax returns, did plumbing repairs, finished cabinets and furniture (never done it before). Was barely able to keep my house.

One year ago this Thursday I took a job at 24k. Today I'm up to 37 at the same company, and have 3 interviews in the next 3 weeks (one internal, two external).

Never, ever, give up.

[sarcasm]

I asked for proof, you failed to supply it - you lose.

[Tall_Texan]

...more than 50 percent of workers who lost or left full-time work between 2001 and 2003 and were lucky enough to have found another full-time job...

Lucky? Lucky???

No bias here....

I guess finding a job is like hitting the lottery. You're just lucky. No, you didn't work at finding a new job. No, you didn't put together a resume and sent it out to several potential employers. You didn't make follow-up calls or go to interviews.

You were just lucky. Or so says the Clinton News Network.

[sarcasm]

Real wages are down again - how wonderful:

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)

Series Catalog:

Series ID : CES0500000051

Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector : Total private
Industry : Total private
NAICS Code : N/A
Data Type : AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS, 1982 DOLLARS

Data:

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Ann
2003	279.00	278.16	277.49	276.67	279.19	279.29	279.24	278.08	277.33	278.96	281.09	278.80
2004	279.68	279.48	278.53	277.98	277.61(p)	275.45(p)

[OldFriend]

If all this economic doom and gloom were true we wouldn't have the extraordiary auto sales, the ever increasing number of home sales.....etc.

The mall parking lots are jammed.

[OldFriend]

Good Luck to you!!!

[sarcasm]

we wouldn't have the extraordiary auto sales, the ever increasing number of home sales

At interest rates below the rate of inflation. Can you say phony recovery?

[DugwayDuke]

"Never, ever, give up."

Absolutely correct. Lost my job in 94 that paid 58K. Out of work for 7 months. Had to move my family from Alabama to Utah to take a job that paid 48K. Two promotions later, I'm making 98K, back in Alabama. Best of all, I got a really great dane while I was in Utah.

[OldFriend]

So all the houses and cars are illusions? Wow, I'll get me some! Might as well go for a Porche.

[sarcasm]

So all the houses and cars are illusions?

Nope - theft from savers by your idol, Alan Greenspan.

[Jagman]

I never realized there were a lot of danes in Utah.

[primeval patriot]

Lost my job in 94 that paid 58K. Out of work for 7 months. Had to move my family from Alabama to Utah to take a job that paid 48K.

Wow, what a sacrifice.