<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ERE.net &#187; economic data</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ere.net/tags/economic-data/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ere.net</link>
	<description>Recruiting News, Recruiting Events, Recruiting Community, Social Recruiting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:52:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Unemployment Rate Pleases, Jobs Growth Disappoints</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2011/01/07/unemployment-rate-pleases-jobs-growth-disappoints/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ere.net/2011/01/07/unemployment-rate-pleases-jobs-growth-disappoints/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 14:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Zappe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News and Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic data]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/?p=16613</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Picking up steam or still chugging uphill? There are enough contradictory signals in the December jobs report out this morning to keep everyone wondering just what gear the American economy is in. The U.S. Labor Department reported that the national unemployment rate fell to 9.4 percent, significantly better than economists expected, but only 103,000 jobs were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Economic-Indices-Dec.jpg"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-16614" title="Economic Indices Dec" src="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Economic-Indices-Dec-250x99.jpg" alt="" width="250" height="99" /></a>Picking up steam or still chugging uphill? There are enough contradictory signals in the December jobs report out this morning to keep everyone wondering just what gear the American economy is in.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm" target="_blank">The U.S. Labor Department reported</a> that the national unemployment rate fell to 9.4 percent, significantly better than economists expected, but only 103,000 jobs were added, significantly less than predicted. The private sector added 113,000 jobs, <a href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/10966270/1/december-jobs-miss-expectations.html" target="_blank">far below the optimistic 180,000 that some surveys projected.</a><span id="more-16613"></span></p>
<p>At the same time, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which compiles the numbers, revised its October and November numbers upward by 70,000. November&#8217;s original 39,000 new job count was increased to 71,000 and October went from 172,000 to 210,000.</p>
<p>The biggest improvements in December came in leisure and hospitality (47,000 job increase) and in healthcare  (+37,000 jobs). Construction continued to shed jobs, losing 16,000 during the month, the largest loss among the industry sectors. Local government also continued to downsize, cutting 10,000 jobs.</p>
<p>Economists surveyed in the days ahead of the report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics had been expecting anywhere from about 140,000 to 175,000 new jobs in December and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 9.8 percent or decline slightly to 9.7 percent.</p>
<p>The estimates were bolstered by a mid-week report from payroll processor ADP, which said companies added 297,000 jobs during the month. The estimate was widely doubted as too optimistic, but it did fuel hope that today&#8217;s official report would show strong job growth.</p>
<p>After the report&#8217;s release, economists and analysts voiced their uncertainty about job growth. Most seemed to agree that the economy is headed in the right direction, if slowly, but companies will have to accelerate hiring substantially to cut the unemployment rate further and sustain the recovery.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/business/economy/08jobs.html?src=twrhp" target="_blank">The New York Times</a> </em>this morning quoted Steven Blitz, a senior economist for ITG Investment Research, saying, “The U.S. economy finally appears to be picking up steam and headed toward recovery.&#8221;</p>
<p>Jeffrey N. Kleintop, chief market strategist at LPL Financial, told <em>The Times</em> the report was “not terrible” and said, “But there is no real job creation here.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-07/u-s-adds-fewer-than-estimated-103-000-jobs-unemployment-declines-to-9-4-.html" target="_blank">Marketwatch talked with Julia Coronado</a>, chief economist for North America at BNP Paribas in New York, who said, “The economy is adding workers but there are no reliable signs the pace of hiring is improving.”</p>
<p>“We are staying on track,&#8221; she added, &#8220;but I’m not sure growth is set to accelerate.”</p>
<p>The BLS report shows that though the number of unemployed persons dropped by 556,000 to 14.5 million, the number of long-term unemployed and others were essentially unchanged. According to the report, 6.4 million people have been out of work more than 26 weeks. Another 8.9 million are working part-time because they have no other choice.</p>
<p>At least some part of the reason for the decline in the unemployment rate was that more people gave up looking for work in December. The government counts as unemployed only those persons who actively search for work during the survey period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ere.net/2011/01/07/unemployment-rate-pleases-jobs-growth-disappoints/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Not Hiring? Tell That to the 4.4 Million Who Found Jobs</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2009/04/23/not-hiring-tell-that-to-the-44-million-who-found-jobs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ere.net/2009/04/23/not-hiring-tell-that-to-the-44-million-who-found-jobs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:09:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Zappe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News and Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic data]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/?p=7650</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Who says no one&#8217;s hiring? Certainly not the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which earlier this month reported that 4.4 million Americans got jobs in February. That&#8217;s only slightly less (and February is a short month) than the 4.5 million new hires in January. Fortune magazine recently posted a listed of 28 companies on its Fortune [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who says no one&#8217;s hiring? Certainly not the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which earlier this month <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.htm" target="_blank">reported</a> that 4.4 million Americans got jobs in February. That&#8217;s only slightly less (and February is a short month) than the 4.5 million new hires in January.</p>
<p><em>Fortune</em> magazine recently <a href="http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0904/gallery.F500_hiring.fortune/index.html" target="_blank">posted a listed of 28 companies</a> on its Fortune 100 list that have openings for at least 150 jobs. Topping the list is Wal-Mart, which, Fortune says, has &#8220;thousands&#8221; of jobs ranging from clerk to store manager. Bank of America, which has had layoffs and drooping revenue, is looking for 1,860 workers in all areas.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/prudential-jobs-times-square-2.jpg"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-7653" title="prudential-jobs-times-square-2" src="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/prudential-jobs-times-square-2.jpg" alt="" width="180" height="240" /></a><a href="http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0904/gallery.F500_hiring.fortune/25.html" target="_blank">Prudential, which made the list</a>, is seeking 235 new employees in a variety of corporate positions including  actuarial, market research and analysis, operations,  and administrative.</p>
<p>We happened to catch a careers pitch for Prudential flashing on the company&#8217;s digital billboard in Times Square, of all places. (The company is headquartered across the Hudson River in Newark, NJ.)</p>
<p>Company spokesman Peter Price tells us recruitment shares billboard time with other company units and messages. So it&#8217;s not exclusive, but it is part of the &#8220;broad net&#8221; the company casts.</p>
<p>To be sure, the number of hires nationally is well off the recent high, which came in July 2006. Then, 5.63 million workers were hired. And the new hire rate has declined over the last year, especially in the Midwest, South, and West. Some industries have been hit harder than others. As you might expect, hiring dropped most sharply in retail, hospitality, finance and insurance, recreation and entertainment, and (this may be a surprise) in government.<span id="more-7650"></span></p>
<p>The government says the &#8220;quits rate,&#8221; which it calls &#8220;a barometer of workers’ willingness or ability to change jobs,&#8221; is at its lowest point in eight years. According to the BLS, only 1.5 percent of the working population of the U.S. voluntarily left their jobs during February. That translates into 2 million workers.</p>
<p>So, much as recruiters treasure <a href="http://www.ere.net/tags/passivecandidates">passive</a> hires, those 4.4 million new hires in February included a substantial number of workers coming from the ranks of the unemployed and underemployed.</p>
<p>Is it any wonder, therefore, that companies are still hiring recruiters? A quick of check of <a href="http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/list/qo-recruiter+sourcer" target="_blank">SimplyHired</a> and <a href="http://www.indeed.com/jobs?as_and=&amp;as_phr=&amp;as_any=recruiter+sourcer&amp;as_not=%22media+recruiter%22+%2C+%22admissions+recruiter%22+%2C+%22no+recruiter%22&amp;as_ttl=&amp;as_cmp=&amp;jt=all&amp;st=&amp;salary=&amp;radius=25&amp;l=&amp;fromage=any&amp;limit=10&amp;sort=" target="_blank">Indeed</a> shows tens of thousands of jobs with the keyword &#8220;recruiter&#8221; or &#8220;sourcer.&#8221; A quick check of those listings show that a fair number are in healthcare, one of the few still-growing sectors. But there are also plenty of recruiter positions in IT, finance, a few in retail, and, of course, with staffing firms.</p>
<p>Incidentally, everyone is getting into the recruiting act. NBCPhiladelphia.com, the city portal of the local NBC TV station in Philly, is <a href="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/business/100K_Jobs.html" target="_blank">featuring companies with jobs paying in six-figures</a>. Check out the comments that some users have posted, including the one where a job-seeker makes a pitch.</p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ere.net/2009/04/23/not-hiring-tell-that-to-the-44-million-who-found-jobs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>February Job Losses Are Bad, But No Worse Than Expected</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2009/03/06/february-job-losses-are-bad-but-no-worse-than-expected/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ere.net/2009/03/06/february-job-losses-are-bad-but-no-worse-than-expected/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:35:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Zappe</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News and Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic data]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/?p=6747</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wall Street reacted tepidly this morning to news that job losses in February were in line with expectations and were smaller than the losses in December or January. At the opening, the Dow Jones jumped 130 points, but gave back most of the gain by late morning. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 651,000 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/bls-logo.jpg"><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-6756" title="bls-logo" src="http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/bls-logo-249x37.jpg" alt="" width="249" height="37" /></a>Wall Street reacted tepidly this morning to news that job losses in February were in line with expectations and were smaller than the losses in December or January. At the opening, the Dow Jones jumped 130 points, but gave back most of the gain by late morning.</p>
<p>The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 651,000 jobs were lost during the 28-day month. The government also revised its initial reports on December and January job losses and now says 681,000 jobs were lost in December, up from the initial report of 577,000 losses. In January, 655,000 jobs were lost.</p>
<p>Unemployment increased to 8.1 percent from January&#8217;s 7.6 percent; the additional 851,000 unemployed workers swelled the total to 12.5 million. Another 8.6 million Americans were working part time for economic reasons, a number that includes people who work part time because they can&#8217;t find full-time jobs.The unemployment rate is now the highest since December 1983. However, when the discouraged workers (those who did not search for a job in the last month) and the involuntary parttimers are added, the rate of un- and under-employed workers is 14.8 percent.</p>
<p>The BLS report says, &#8220;Since the recession began in December 2007, about 4.4 million jobs have been lost, with more than half (2.6 million) of the decrease occurring in the last four months.&#8221;</p>
<p>Economists had been <a href="http://www.ere.net/2009/03/05/worst-expected-in-tomorrows-us-jobs-report/" target="_blank">expecting a February job loss of 652,000, though some reports predicted a far worse scenario.</a> Even so, the monthly job losses are among the worst in half a century in raw numbers. But the workforce in the 1960s and 1970s was significantly smaller so the impact was worse then.</p>
<p>Job losses in professional and business services and manufacturing amounted to a combined 342,000 jobs. Construction losses added another 104,000 jobs to the total. Finance, retail, trucking, and hospitality accounted for another 117,000 of the losses.</p>
<p>Only government (9,000 jobs) and healthcare (27,000 jobs) saw any growth.</p>
<p> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ere.net/2009/03/06/february-job-losses-are-bad-but-no-worse-than-expected/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

