General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMost Of The New Jobs Were Part-Time
As the CNN report below the initial article demonstrates, the shift from secure full-time permanent jobs to insecure part-time temporary work has been the hallmark of the Bush/Obama era - and this trend is accelerating.
http://www.businessinsider.com/part-time-jump-in-july-2013-8
Most Of The New Jobs Were Part-Time
Steven Perlberg Aug. 2, 2013, 8:36 AM
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' household survey, part-time jobs jumped by 174,000 to 28,233,000 in July.
Full-time workers climbed by 92,000.
Full-time workers are down from the May jobs report while part-time workers are up for the same time period.
Workers are generally considered to be "full time" if they work over 30 hours per week.
Some economists have speculated the shift from full time to part time [link:http://www.businessinsider.com/ubs-obamacare-delay-brings-uncertainty-2013-7derives from the employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act]. Under the legislation, employers will be required to offer health insurance or face penalties (though the White House will delay enforcement until 2015). As a result, many companies have threatened to reduce full-time staff to below the 50-employee threshold for the mandate or scale back hours.
But the effect of the employer on today's part-time figures remains unclear. In fact, some economists were more optimistic when part-time workers surged last month, arguing that the ratio of part-time to full-time was seasonal and expected.
CNN Business' report on this issue is sobering. Check out the reader comments, too:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/01/news/economy/temp-jobs/
Want a job? Good luck finding full-time work
By Tami Luhby @Luhby August 1, 2013: 12:49 PM ET
More people are landing jobs these days, but they are often part-time or temp work.
The number of Americans finding part-time jobs has surged this year, with more than four times as many getting only part-time work as opposed to full-time jobs, according to Labor Department data. That's the opposite of what happened last year, when full-time hires far outstripped part-time ones.
At the same time, the ranks of temps has exploded: A record 2.7 million people held these positions in June, up from 2.5 million a year ago. It will be very interesting to see if this continued in July. The government will report the latest figures about the job market on Friday.
While companies have been beefing up their temporary and part-time payrolls in recent years, the trend has accelerated in 2013, with an especially large jump in part-time hiring in June.
There has been much speculation -- and some anecdotal evidence -- that employers are trying to keep their headcount down so they aren't subject to Obamacare rules. But economic uncertainty and a lack of consumer demand are still the predominant reasons why employers are shying away from hiring full-time workers, experts said.
niyad
(113,860 posts)CrispyQ
(36,557 posts)for periods of time, making it difficult to commit to another part time job. I had not heard of this before.
Heartless, cruel bastards.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)If you work for Vons, you can't work at Albertsons too as an example.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)I've never heard that before.
Everyday I am just more and more amazed at what this society is willing to lie back and tolerate.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)matthews
(497 posts)Here they are (14%)
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
---
This government isn't honest about anything.
Lucky Luciano
(11,267 posts)matthews
(497 posts)Instead of trying to BS everyone
you folks just revel in doom and gloom stuff , dont'cha ! Try to look on the bright side occasionally , you will feel better and stop your eternal whining . THAT does not improve things !
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)please point out to me the bright side of this.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Its damned difficult to listen to the 1% celebrate Wall Street Records,
and the White House proclaiming a "Recovery"
when you can't find a job that pays enough to feed your kids.
Jobless Recoveries and Transfer of Wealth to the 1% don't happen by ACCIDENT.
They are the result of careful planning, Economic Policy, Massive Marketing Propaganda, and buying the right politicians.
tumtum
(438 posts)These are the govt. own figures!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
matthews
(497 posts)Eternal whining?
I hope you end up finding out what it's like. I know that you're not supposed to wish bad things on people, but in your case it's would provide a valuable lesson that you dearly need to learn.
Skittles
(153,298 posts)WTF is that supposed to mean? We the THINKING, CARING PEOPLE actually GIVE A DAMN which direction America is heading. YOU NEED TO TRY IT SOMETIME.
niyad
(113,860 posts)but, in case you really are that lacking in any sort of comprehension, empathy or sense of connectedness, may you receive everything you deserve.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)part-time employment with fluctuating hours, no security, very low pay and subsistence living?
For these people, there is just not a recovery. Last year things were getting better. This year "living wage" jobs seem to be in short supply:
And other posters are correct. Many of these part time jobs have constantly shifting hours - it is difficult to go to school or get another job with them. This is a harsh break with the past. It destroys family and social life.
niyad
(113,860 posts)neverforget
(9,437 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Probably one-in-three people who want a full-time job in America is either out of work, or working P/T, or only sporaticallly. Most self-employed "contactors" and "consultants", as well.
matthews
(497 posts)and I don't have anything (data, articles from reputable sources, etc.) with which I can back any idea of what I think it really is. And face it, that's the closest 'official' count we've got. I'm surprised that we're still privy to that kind of info, if you want the truth.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)This is just part of the problem, BTW.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002696672
David Krout
(423 posts)Because of their low income. So we can't say they have "no benefits".
tridim
(45,358 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)You try living on part-time work at very low hourly wages. Shit, you can hardly afford to get to work.
That's the type of comment I expect from a Barbara Bush, not a DUer!
Our country is being hollowed out, slowly but surely.
niyad
(113,860 posts)David Krout
(423 posts)Dont add to the original comment. He implied no health insurance as opposed to full time.
niyad
(113,860 posts)mine, not the OP (which stands for original poster, as in, the person who started the thread). a BENEFIT, as referenced in MY post, refers to something actually connected with the job. but, again, enjoy your stay. you have given me the best laugh I have had all night.
Vanje
(9,766 posts)The lucky bums!
raccoon
(31,131 posts)knows this.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)So many of the jobs...my guess is about three quarters
were temporary....and not even temp to hire. I was helping her and was
amazed. She's in the Minneapolis area.
shanti
(21,675 posts)STILL require drug tests for their two bit jobs! Unbelievable...
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)Some of this may be attributable to Obamacare ... but probably not much.
Most of this trend was happening before the ACA.
This is the mostly result of corporate greed and globalization.
And this 'you should be happy to get even these scraps from the table' attitude from the tea party Repuglicans and corporate elites is going to wreck this country.
I find little to be happy about these 'employment' numbers ... I just don't think they reflect the real state of the economy. So, sorry, I don't think a two-tenths of a drop in a statistic is some kind of proof that Obamanomics is a success or that we are in a 'recovery'.
I know way too many people who are earning much less than they did ten years ago, if they even have a full-time job.
SharonAnn
(13,781 posts)The worker can be terminated at any time.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The labor market is too weak to give labor any leverage... which is exactly the way that people like Larry Summers wants it.
dicksmc3
(262 posts)You are dead on with your comment. And, if others find it hard to see the reason, they need to look no farther than the administration of the FAIR-HAIRED CLOWN RONNIE RAYGUN!!! His policies are still hurting after 30+ years.
Skittles
(153,298 posts)America has never truly recovered from his insanity
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Companies will ALWAYS have some kind of reason why they can't hire permanent, full-time employees. I don't know who they think they're bullshitting, though, because their true reason is so damned transparent.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)leftstreet
(36,119 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)"Well, you are going to have to go part-time or contract."
Moment of realization.
millennialmax
(331 posts)Good job, Mr. President.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)you newly arrive at a Dem site to slam the President? Do you have a few choice words for Congress too perhpas?
millennialmax
(331 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)welcome to D.U.!
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...saw the largest drop in wages since records have been kept.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/07/2121581/first-quarter-of-2013-saw-largest-wage-drop-ever/
Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)to avoid giving benefits are shooting themselves in the foot.
This forces people to buy insurance independently, from an exchange, and without the benefits to tie people to their shitty jobs, why would anybody stay at these jobs? I know people who say, all the time, I'd leave my job to go do this or that but I need the insurance for my family.
TheKentuckian
(25,035 posts)There are plenty more drones chomping at the bit to replace such folks and they probably can be had at a fair discount over the established person.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)to go from one shitty job to another shitty job.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Long-term consequences don't seem to be a factor anymore. It's all about pinching pennies in the here and now to up your bonus.
alp227
(32,075 posts)Enabled by ObamaCare too. SINGLE PAYER NOW.
Also I wonder if "letting the free market decide" caused this rise in part time hiring.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Catherina
(35,568 posts)and claim the unemployment numbers are going up while workers sink even deeper into poverty and corporate profits go up.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Quality means as much as quantity, at least to me.
I am a temporary, full-time employee who is currently "on vacation" until October. My freelance work, which I considered a nice security blanket, has evaporated because the publishing house I work for has now outsourced all that work, so I don't know where exactly that leaves me. (I guess freelancers don't deserve the same courtesy of explanation that any other "real" employee would get).
This is scary. I can rationalize it and think as positively as I want, but that does not mask the reality that I am not working full time permanently, and have to pay my own health insurance expenses.
And it's only going to get worse....
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Skeeter Barnes
(994 posts)limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)shanti
(21,675 posts)about part time jobs as opposed to full time, is than now EVERYONE is competing for the part time jobs. By everyone, I'm referring not just to the general adult population, but also the teens and the seniors, the age groups that typically only want a part time job. These two groups often are already covered by Medicare or their parents' ( in the teens case) insurance.
We're all fighting over the scraps!
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)like the 85 year old at Home Depot and the other over 60 people, or the huge amount of people that my buddy sees at his phone center job that are over 60.
But no matter...
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)duffyduff
(3,251 posts)and you wouldn't believe how competitive even the part-time, no benefits jobs are. The district COULD make fewer jobs and have them full-time, but with classified staff they've decided they don't want to pay for benefits--especially PERS. There could be a couple of dozen people inside the district as subs competing for these lousy-paid jobs because they want to be able to have a shot at the few full-time jobs.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)Discriminating against older people in there 50's they seem to want to hire young kids
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"As the CNN report below the initial article demonstrates, the shift from secure full-time permanent jobs to insecure part-time temporary work has been the hallmark of the Bush/Obama era - and this trend is accelerating. "
...but what the hell does this have to do with Bush, who created zero jobs in his two terms? The Clinton boom was also based on a lot of part-time jobs and low-wage jobs.
Still, you're comparing apples and oranges related to the jobs numbers. From the OP.
Full-time workers climbed by 92,000.
That's a total of 266,000 full- and part-time jobs. There were only 162,000 jobs created. The reason is that information you cite is from the Household Survey, which determines the unemployment rate. The Establishment Survey determines the number of jobs created.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
DCBob
(24,689 posts)That does give some hope.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Sign of the times we live in.