Missouri's job-losses report was inaccurate, U.S. finds

STLtoday.com ^ | 9-01-04 | Eric Heisler

[FairWitness]

A report that set off alarms nationwide when it said Missouri lost 51,800 jobs from June to July is being revised by the U.S. Labor Department because of inaccuracies.

The statewide report, released last month, said Missouri lost more than twice as many jobs as any other state.

< snip >

The day the report was released, a Labor Department economist said it was misleading. Now, the agency says Missouri made an error when it failed to include teachers on summer vacation among the employed, as Labor Department policy states.

< snip >

The report seemed especially odd, given the St. Louis area's recent economic successes. A separate report ranked the region No. 2 among the 39 largest U.S. metro areas in annual job growth as measured in July.

< snip >

Labor analysts often pay closer attention to 12-month employment fluctuations, because they give a broader picture of job-growth trends - - - - -. But in election years, the political campaigns - both Democratic and Republican - tend to scrutinize month-to-month changes. That can be done only through seasonally adjusted figures, which "sometimes behave in inexplicable ways," - -

< snip >

Clark expects Missouri still will be down in employment between June and July when the final numbers are released. But the state has about 67,000 more jobs than in July 2003.

[FairWitness]

I, like many others here, are anxiously awaiting the next set of employment/jobless figures. How accurate will they be, and how many "approximations, assumptions and adjustments" will go into the making of such an important (for the election) set of statistics?

[sionnsar]

Pinging Willie Green...

[nuconvert]

"Missouri made an error when it failed to include teachers on summer vacation among the employed,"

Yeah, that will skew the results.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Teachers get paid on a 12 month basis.

[Brilliant]

Like I've been saying all along, the numbers have been jimmied by the economists to make Bush look bad: Clark said the Missouri error was made by an analyst who did not count teachers as employed over the summer. The analyst has been reporting figures that way for several years, so that is likely to cause further revisions of past employment data, he said.

[FairWitness]

Labor analysts often pay closer attention to 12-month employment fluctuations, because they give a broader picture of job-growth trends - - - - -.

Too bad that our "professional" pundits don't try to look at the big picture, instead of breathlessly focusing on today versus yesterday.

[citizen]

The Bush WH team needs to stress the household survey jobs report instead of the big business survey report the media harps on.

The household survey jobs report has consistently been indicating that huge numbers of jobs are being created every month.

Why doesn't the WH emphasize this good news?

[KJacob]

Teachers get paid on a 12 month basis.

They can choose to be paid on a 10-month basis. Those that have part-time jobs in the summer usually take this option.

[citizen]

The analyst has been reporting figures that way for several years, so that is likely to cause further revisions of past employment data, he said.

Since the 4th qtr. 2000 I'd say.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Didn't know that. I can't imagine why--taxes would be the same.

[Brilliant]

I would like to know EXACTLY when he started doing it. My guess is that it coincides with Bush's swearing in ceremony.