Payrolls rose by 209,000 in June, less than expected, as jobs growth wobbles

[Joe Cool]

Source: CNBC

Nonfarm payrolls were expected to increase by 240,000 and the unemployment rate to fall to 3.6% in June, according to a Dow Jones consensus estimate.

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/07/jobs-report-june-2023-.html

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Oh, stop it! You're falling into the same line we're hearing too...

much of: "We're doing great, just not good enough."

[Probatim]

2. Yesterday's job news was off the charts - we need to balance it with more tepid job numbers...

Yes, this is sarcasm.

[Joe Cool]

30. It's the title of the article

Did you not read the article before commenting?

[TreasonousBastard]

31. Yes, but while article was largely positive, most people just see...

headlines and this one sounded too much like Trumpian bullshit.

[OnlinePoker]

3. Seems to be a real disparity between ADP figures and official BLS data

Yesterday, ADP was saying 497,000 private sector jobs created whereas, taking out the 60k government hires, BLS is saying only 149,000 were created. A 350,000 overage by ADP is a pretty big miss.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143097196

[PSPS]

18. ADP is not a reliable source for this data. It's just a private payroll service.

[House of Roberts]

4. So, where are all the cheerleaders from yesterday's

Private sector companies added 497,000 jobs in June, more than double expectations, ADP says?

ADP is usually higher than Labor Department numbers, but 497k vs 209k?

There's a skunk in this woodpile somewhere...

[underpants]

8. I was thinking the same thing.

[mpcamb]

9. Maybe they added the jobs but don't plan to pay them...great business plan

and probably fits a republican models for new hires.

[BumRushDaShow]

10. It's 2 different data sets

ADP is "private sector" employment with data gathered from their own member payroll surveys.

Methodology noted from their release (PDF) - https://adp-ri-nrip-static.adp.com/artifacts/us_ner/20230706/ADP_NATIONAL_EMPLOYMENT_REPORT_Press_Release_2023_06%20FINAL.pdf

About the ADP® National Employment ReportTM
The ADP National Employment Report is an independent estimate of the change in U.S. private
employment and pay derived from actual, anonymized payroll data of client companies served by ADP, a
leading provider of human capital management solutions. The report is produced by ADP Research Institute
in collaboration with the Stanford Digital Economy Lab.

Alternately, BLS has surveys that are returned monthly that are aggregated for the releases -

Economic News Release
PRINT : Print
CPS CPS Program Links
CES CES Program Links
Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this news release is embargoed until USDL-23-1498
8:30 a.m. (ET) Friday, July 7, 2023

Technical information:
Household data: [phone] * [email protected] * www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: [phone] * [email protected] * www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact: [phone] * [email protected]


THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- JUNE 2023


Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 209,000 in June, and the unemployment
rate changed little at 3.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Employment continued to trend up in government, health care, social assistance, and
construction.

This news release presents statistics from two monthly surveys. The household survey
measures labor force status, including unemployment, by demographic characteristics.
The establishment survey measures nonfarm employment, hours, and earnings by industry.
For more information about the concepts and statistical methodology used in these two
surveys, see the Technical Note.

(snip)

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

In some cases, the data to be factored in may be delayed by senders for various reasons (holidays, etc), requiring revisions to account for that at the next release.

So ADP is strictly "establishment" and counting "payroll" where BLS is looking at both "people" (and their reported "status" ) and a set of establishments (and their hiring/layoff decisions).

[progree]

13. And the ADP only does 20% of the nation's payroll. The other 80% is an estimate based on

a lot less data than what the BLS gathers.

The ADP numbers cover only about 20% of the nation's private workforce.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/powell20191008a.htm

the ADP National Employment Report and ADP Small Business Report are derived from ADP payroll data representing 460,000 U.S. clients and nearly 26 million workers
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/september-2021-adp-national-employment-121500533.html

Google: ADP vs. Bureau of labor statistics job numbers

As for the BLS, there are 2 surveys -- Establishment (that produces the headline payroll jobs numbers, 209,000 in today's report),
and Household (a survey of 60,000 households) that produces the unemployoment rate, the labor force participation rate, and numerous other statistics including its own Employment number that is a lot more volatile than the Establishment Survey.

BTW for a bit of good news, the unemployment rate fell from 3.7% in May to 3.6% in June (according to the Household Survey)

[BumRushDaShow]

20. Thank you!

(am hoping this means your internet has held )

One would think anyone who is a "client of" means they are the fraction of establishments actually paying ADP for services... so basically they are "customers" (and their data is available for stats purposes once anonymized).

Haven't had chance to check the labor force participation rate but I know you have been monitoring that and some of the oddities about it.

[progree]

25. Payroll jobs growth (Establishment Survey) vs. Employed (Household Survey)

This was of interest to me today:

# Nonfarm Employment (Establishment Survey) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
Monthly changes (in thousands): https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
YEAR JAN FEB MAR etc.
2021 494 575 784 286 482 693 769 663 557 781 614 569
2022 364 904 414 254 364 370 568 352 350 324 290 239
2023 472 248 217 217 306 209
Last 2 months are preliminary

Last 3 months: +244k/month average (quite decent, you know how I like 3 month averages)

Last 6 months: +278k/month average

(both averages figured using the original thousands numbers)

===================================================
# Employed (Houshold Survey), https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000
Monthly changes (in thousands): https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000?output_view=net_1mth
YEAR JAN FEB MAR etc.
2021 --90 334 546 420 311 202 1098 429 656 528 1140 546
2022 1041 468 738 --346 317 --242 215 422 156 --257 --66 717
2023 894 177 577 139 --310 273
January and February of each year is affected by changes in population controls
Negative numbers indicated by "--" to stand out more

Last 3 months: +33k/month average,
Last 6 months: +292k/month average
(both averages figured using the original thousands numbers)

Shows how much more wobbly (that's the word of the day) the Household Survey is compared to the Establishment Survey.

=========================================
Revisions: April and May were revised down by a combined 110,000. Which means that today's headline payroll jobs number is only 99,000 higher than was reported a month ago: 209 - 110 = 99. Despite that, the 3 month average is quite decent +244k/month. Goldilocks job growth.

=========================================
Labor Force Participation Rate -- I've been much happier about this in the last 5 or so months (I used to wail and gnash my teeth about it).

LFPR age 25-54: Jan-Feb-Mar-Apr-May-Jun: 82.7 -> 83.1 -> 83.1 -> 83.3 -> 83.4 -> 83.5
(Jan 2020: 83.1 (pre-covid local peak), June 2022, 1 year ago: 82.4).
83.5 is highest since about 2002 (so much for nobody wants to work) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060


LFPR age 16+ (the official LFPR, the default LFPR) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
After falling during the pandemic, it recovered somewhat in the latter part of 2020 and all of 2021, but then stalled beginning January 2022. But it started picking up late in 2022 and early 2023. It's still well below pre-Covid and probably will never get back up to that level thanks to boomer retirements (everyone 16 and older is counted in this one, including centenarians)


============================================
My Internet has been working flawlessly since noon yesterday when I reported it was B A A A C K. Thanks for asking

[BumRushDaShow]

26. Glad you are back up and holding!

And this -

Labor Force Participation Rate -- I've been much happier about this in the last 5 or so months (I used to wail and gnash my teeth about it).

It was not just wailing and gnashing but actual rending of garments!

I heard a business reporter on the radio this morning declaring that "the Great Resignation is over". I don't know how true that is but I think people have done their initial job shifts and we'll have to see if that holds for the longer term. If anything, many of the government jobs (local/county/state/federal) remain unfilled.

[progree]

27. Interesting rolling 3 month average graph of headline nonfarm payroll jobs

From January 2021 - June 2023 (Biden admin so far)

The Fed first raised interest rates in March 2022. Back then jobs were gaining 1682k per 3 month period (561k/month)



One has to divide the above by 3 to get the familiar per-month numbers.

The last 3 months averaged 244k/month.

SOURCE: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001

In above, click on More Formatting Options at the top right, then choose the 3-month checkbox. Also change the starting date to 2021.

[BumRushDaShow]

28. See you got me playing with the charts there

For the heck of it, looked at the 3-month % change. Looks like it wants to "normalize".

[progree]

29. Interesting how so much the same (as expected) and yet somewhat different

(speaking of the shape or "lineliness&quot , and how your percent one is trying to flatten out, whereas mine is a little wobbly (word of the day)

Edit - they might be rounding the percent changes to nearest 0.1% in the graph as well as the table, so that might explain its tendency towards flattiness.

[progree]

34. I see your graph disappeared. It uses to be that copying and pasting a BLS graph's URL

would work all month until the next revisions, and then it would disappear. That was several years ago.

Now they don't even last a day or two before they disappear. Really sucks having to Imgur or PostImage them in order to make them last, but that's the world we live in

[BumRushDaShow]

35. I'm guessing they kill the hotlinks after awhile

I do end up putting stuff on imgur though, and mainly because I have ended up having to do a screenshot or snip of the image in order to get the legends (some of the graphs on other sites are dynamic so they have a separate image "object" with the plot and the rest, including chart headers and X/Y axis, are separate).

[Johnny2X2X]

11. 209,000 is still a great number

i Know expectations are what matter, but 209,000 is about the same that Obama averaged in his 2nd term. George Bush averaged 22,000 jobs a month during his 96 months in the White House. Donald Trump lost on average 62,500 jobs a mnth during his time in the White House, and in the 3 years before Covid he averaged just +190,000 jobs a month.

Biden's job numbers are so great that a down month is still better than the Trump pre Covid years.

And this wasn't a big miss, 225K was expected. And most importnantly, wage growth beat expectations. Wage growth was +4.4% over the last 12 months, which is higher than inflation was.

[gab13by13]

5. CNBC LOL,

job growth wobbles and then later the numbers will be revised up hidden in the back of the newspaper.

[NoMoreRepugs]

6. Lower numbers reduce potential for more rate hikes.

[doc03]

7. The MSM has been beating this a recession is coming ever since Biden's

inauguration. A 50 year record low un-employment rate, a recession is coming, a recession is coming.
Shut the f-- up.

[IronLionZion]

12. The beating will continue until morale improves

GOP presidential candidates like Pence are openly campaigning on causing higher unemployment to lower inflation. They want job losses and recession so bad it's pathetic.

[Yavin4]

21. How else can they get Republicans to win next year's elections.

These asshats are doing everything that they can to talk down the economy in order to set up the Republicans next year. Given Trump, the presidency may be lost, but congress is the true prize. Their greatest fear is a Democratic majorities in both houses, a fear bigger than a Trump 2nd term.

[progree]

14. LINKS to some BLS Data Series Numbers and Graphs

BTW, for a bit of good news, the unemployment rate fell from 3.7% in May to 3.6% in June

Table A - Summary of Household Survey (produces unemployment rate, labor force participation rate) - https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm

Table B - Summary of Establishment Survey (produces the headline payroll jobs number and the average earnings) - https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.b.htm

Every one of these data series comes with a table and graph:

# Nonfarm Employment (Establishment Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001
Monthly changes (in thousands): https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
   NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CEU0000000001

# Employed in thousands from the separate Household Survey, http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000
Monthly changes (in thousands): http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000?output_view=net_1mth
   NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02000000

# Nonfarm PRIVATE Employment (Establishment Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001
Monthly changes: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001?output_view=net_1mth
    ^-Good for comparison to the ADP report that typically comes out a few days earlier
NOT SEASONALLY ADJUSTED: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CEU0500000001

# INFLATION ADJUSTED Weekly Earnings of Production and Non-Supervisory Workers http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031

# Labor Force http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11000000?output_view=net_1mth

The labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed. To count as unemployed, one must have actively sought work in the past 4 weeks (just looking at want ads and job postings doesn't count)

# ETPR (Employment-To-Population Ratio) aka Employment Rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

# LFPR (Labor Force Participation rate) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Unemployed, Unemployment Rate
# Unemployed http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13000000
# Unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
    # Black unemployment rate (%), https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006
    # Hispanic or Latino unemployment rate (%), https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000009
    # White unemployment rate (%), https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000003
# U-6 unemployment rate http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13327709
------------ end unemployed, unemployment rates --------

# NILF -- Not in Labor Forcehttp://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS15000000

# NILF-WJ -- Not in Labor Force, Wants Job http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS15026639

# Part-Time Workers who want Full-Time Jobs (Table A-8's Part-Time For Economic Reasons) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12032194

# Part-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12600000

# Full-Time Workers (Table A-9) http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12500000

# Multiple Job holders (Table A-9) - http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12026619

# Multiple Jobholders as a Percent of Employed (Table A-9) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12026620

# Civilian non-institutional population
Seasonally adjusted (they seem to have gotten rid of this) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS10000000
NOT seasonally adjusted: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU00000000
. . In Table A-1 https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm they show the same numbers for seasonally adjusted and non-seasonally adjusted

LFPR - Labor Force Participation Rate for some age groups
The LFPR is the Employed + jobless people who have looked for work in the last 4 weeks (and say they want a job and are able to take one if offered. Looking for work involves more than just looking at job listings). All divided by the civilian non-institutional population age 16+ (in the case of the regular LFPR, or divided by the civilian non-institutional population of whatever age, gender, race etc. for the various sub-demographic measures. For example. the LFPR of age 25-54 females is the number of those employed or actively seeking work divided by the civilian non-institutional population of age 25-54 females.)

SA means Seasonally adjusted. NSA means Not Seasonally Adjusted
16+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300000
25-34: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300089 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300089
25-54: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300060
55-64: -------------------- NSA: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300095
55+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11324230 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01324230
65+: SA: ---------------- NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU01300097

LFPR - Labor Force Particpation Rate (prime age 25-54) by gender
All: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300060
Men: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300061
Women: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300062

More LFPR links including by race: https://www.democraticunderground.com/111695870

ETPR - Employment to Population Ratio for some age groups
SA means Seasonally adjusted. NSA means Not Seasonally Adjusted
16+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300000
25-34: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300089 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300089
25-54: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300060 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300060
55-64: SA: ---------------- NSA: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300095
55+: SA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12324230 NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02324230
65+: SA: ---------------- NSA: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNU02300097

Data series finder (employment/unemployment related): https://www.bls.gov/data/#employment

The entire report: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Inflation rate (CPI)
. . . Monthly report: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm
. . . Regular CPI: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0?output_view=pct_1mth
. . . Core CPI: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0L1E?output_view=pct_1mth
. . . Energy: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0E?output_view=pct_1mth
. . . Food: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SAF1?output_view=pct_1mth
. . . Food at home (groceries): https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SAF11?output_view=pct_1mth
. . . Calculator at: https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
. . . One Screen Data Search for CPI components: https://data.bls.gov/PDQWeb/cu

Grocery prices (food at home) inflation compared to overall inflation rate
. . . . . https://www.in2013dollars.com/Food-at-home/price-inflation
. . . From 1947 to 2021 and from 2000 to 2021, food at home inflation very slightly lagged the overall inflation rate
. . . . . https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142735789


Archives of previous reports - The monthly payroll employment reports from the BLS are archived at Archived News Releases (https://www.bls.gov/bls/news-release/ ). In the list up at the top, under Major Economic Indicators, select Employment Situation ( https://www.bls.gov/bls/news-release/empsit.htm ). That opens up links to reports going back to 1994.

[Fiendish Thingy]

15. This story is directly contradicted by story from the same source here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143097196

From just a day or two ago.

So which is it CNBC, “ U.S. labor market showed no signs of letting up in June”, or “jobs market wobbles”?

Sloppy journalism.

Either way, unemployment is still at record lows.

[progree]

16. No, yesterday's report is the ADP payrolls report

Today's report is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and is considered the official jobs report.

Please see number 10 and number 13 above

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. I am criticizing the meaning ascribed to each report

One says “job market shows no signs of stopping” the other says “job market wobbles”.

[progree]

19. OK, the big difference between 497,000 private sector jobs and 209,000 total jobs

might account for some of the difference in the description. Although +209,000 jobs is not wobbly to me. Although it is down from previous months.

I was commenting on your original version, not your edited version. Original version:

15. This story is directly contradicted by story from the same source here:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143097196

From just a day or two ago.

Edited to add - I see your subject line in your #15 as of 10:17 AM ET still has

from the same source here

It's not the same source, you might want to fix that.

Another edit OK, the same media source (CNBC), but the sources of yesterday's (ADP) and today's (BLS) reports are different.

[Fiendish Thingy]

23. My criticism was of the quality of CNBC's reporting

Not the data of the two different sources.

It’s like the two CNBC reports exist in a vacuum, separate from each other - doesn’t that network have an editor to review stories before they are published?

[progree]

24. I didn't have much of a problem myself with it, except I wouldn't use "wobbly" for today's

Last edited Fri Jul 7, 2023, 01:13 PM - Edit history (1)

though I'm starting to rethink that considering the downward revisions of April and May.

A labor market with +497,000 private sector job gains (yesterday) looks a lot different than today's with +209,000 total jobs gains (+149,000 private sector jobs gains -- that's 30% the number of private sector jobs gains as the ADP report)

(and by the way, there were downward revisons of 110,000 in April and May combined in the BLS report, so that we only have +99,000 net new jobs as compared to what was reported a month ago).

I'm still not getting your point I guess, but if you expect the same headline for a +497,000 and a +209,000 jobs report (+99,000 when downward revisions to prior months considered), then that's OK with me.

I certainly didn't expect them to have a crystal ball yesterday when writing about yesterday's job report, but obviously my standards are lower than yours. So good on you

[Skittles]

32. so, the stock market went down....why?

it all confuses me

[progree]

33. I dunno. Yesterday the S&P 500 went DOWN 35 points after a +497k private sectors job report

and today it went DOWN 13 points after a +209k jobs report (+149k private sector jobs)

(S&P 500 down 0.8% yesterday and down 0.3% today), so I dunno.

The first jobs report was a positive side block buster way above expectations. Today's job report was a little below expectations (although the unemployment rate fell from 3.7% to 3.6% in today's report, so I'd call it a mixed report).

So dunno. But there's a consensus both yesterday and today that the Fed is going to hike rates in late July -- a 92% chance of that as I look right now at the FedWatch tool:

https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/interest-rates/cme-fedwatch-tool.html

so that and other factors at work, I guess.

In other news, inflation reports coming up soon: CPI Wednesday and PPI Thursday.

[Yavin4]

22. None of these numbers are precise.

There's always noise and later revisions. There's no sure way to accurately count the exact number of unemployed given how fluid jobs today are. Drive an hour for Uber and you're considered employed at least by U3 standards. Stop looking for a job, and you're not counted.