Gov't data: Every open job has four seeking employment

BY FRANCINE KNOWLESfknowles@suntimes.com

For each job opening in November, there were nearly four job-seekers, according to government data highlighting the impact of the recession.

An analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data by the Economic Policy Institute found there were 3.8 job-seekers nationally for every one job, up from 3.4 per job in October and from 1.8 per job a year earlier

"Seeing nearly four unemployed workers for every opening is a sobering indicator of how difficult it is to find a job in today's weak market," said EPI economist Heidi Shierholz. "With so few job openings, it is easy to understand why nearly a quarter of unemployed workers have been out of a job for over six months."

The unemployment rate was 6.8 percent in November and jumped to 7.2 percent in December, the Labor Department reported Friday.

Record low for 30-year fixed mortgage drops in at 4.96%

Long-term mortgage rates fell for the 11th straight week, setting a record, mortgage giant Freddie Mac said Thursday.

The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate dipped to 4.96 percent, down from 5.01 percent a week earlier. The rate hasn't been lower since Freddie Mac started its market survey in 1971.

The average 15-year fixed-rate mortgage edged up to 4.65 from 4.62 percent. Five-year adjustable-rate mortgages fell to an average of 5.25 percent from 5.49 percent, and one-year ARMs slid to 4.89 percent from 4.95 percent.

U.S. belt-tightening tightens: Put it on sale or we won't buy it

More shoppers are buying items that are on sale only, a survey by America's Research Group and UBS AG found.

Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they are buying only the essentials and on-sale items, up from 18 percent a year ago.

The survey also found 33 percent said they are pressured by debt and credit card bills, up from 24 percent.

Consumers "are in deep hibernation and there is no sign that they will wake up this spring or that the retail outlook will pick up any time soon," said America's Research Group Chief Executive Officer and Founder C. Britt Beemer.

Are We in a Recession?

On Friday, the Labor Department reports employment data for the month of May. The data will help us determine, once and for all, whether the economic slowdown that began in the fourth quarter of last year is actually a recession. Gross domestic product registered modest growth during the first quarter, but that figure was elevated because of a large buildup of inventories. Because inventory accumulation exceeded GDP growth, final sales of goods and services actually fell. This explains employers' pessimism and the decrease in jobs each month since January. Job losses, in turn, are pushing down household disposable income and consumer spending, and that might send second-quarter GDP growth into negative territory. Retailers, auto companies and other manufacturers are clearing out unwanted supplies at discounted prices. If payroll jobs decline for a fifth straight month in May, it will be hard to deny that the economy is in a modern recession, a period of malaise and protracted angst--lethargic growth interrupted by periods of contraction--of difficult-to-predict duration. The recession that ate into 2000 and 2001 featured three quarters of negative growth interrupted by three positive quarters, followed by five more quarters of sub-par growth. Right now, the economy seems headed into a similar pattern. Unlike post-World War II recessions, the current malaise is caused by the fallout from falling home values, as well as a crisis of confidence among fixed-income investors, such as insurance companies and pension funds, in the integrity and solvency of the major Wall Street banks. The rapid decline in the market value of mortgage-backed bonds issued by these banks--and erosion in the balance sheets of the major banks caused by the declining value of unsold bonds on their books--represents a modern-day run on the banks. This has required the Fed to lend the banks sums totaling about 4% of GDP. A job report documenting further loses indicates that problems in the financial sector are damaging the economy in lasting ways that will take many months to repair. The Bush administration predictably advises people to stay calm, but apathy toward prompt movement to repair damage in the banking sector has made credit more difficult to obtain for many sound businesses. Even as the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates and pumps the banks' coffers, business loans are contracting and layoffs are escalating across the economy. In Friday's employment report, the crucial data to watch are: Jobs Creation: On May 2, the Labor Department reported the economy lost 20,000 payroll jobs in April, after losing an average of 80,000 jobs each of the previous three months. In addition, retail sales, durable goods orders and industrial production have been weak. Inventories of unsold goods are building, indicating the housing and credit crises are causing a general contraction that is spreading to most of the economy. The consensus forecast is that the economy lost 55,000 jobs in May. My published forecast is for a 50,000 decrease in employment. Unemployment: In April, unemployment was 5%, up from 4.8% in February. For May, this figure is expected to edge even higher, to 5.1%. Well-paying jobs have been evaporating in the manufacturing sector under the rush of imports from China and now in construction with the collapse of the housing market. Many adults, especially those in families with multiple wage earners, have decided it doesn't pay to work and are sitting out until a new president is in the White House. Private Sector Payrolls: In April, government employment expanded by 9,000 even though overall payroll jobs contracted by 80,000. But failing tax revenues are already crimping state and local budgets, and state and municipal employment is expected to drop beginning in July. That's because it is difficult for the public sector to continue expanding if its tax base--the private sector economy--is contracting. Construction and Manufacturing: In April, construction lost 61,000 jobs and manufacturing lost 46,000 jobs. Over the last 97 months manufacturing has shed 3.7 million jobs.
What does that mean? Historically, construction and manufacturing offer workers with only a high school diploma the best pay, benefits and opportunities for skill attainment and advancement. Troubles in these industries push ordinary workers into retailing, hospitality and other industries, where pay often lags. These phenomena at are the heart of middle-class and blue-collar discontent coloring the economic debate in the presidential campaign. The growing trade deficit with China and other Asian exporters is a key factor. Were the trade deficit cut in half, manufacturing would recoup at least 2 million of those jobs, U.S. growth would exceed 3.5% a year, household savings performance would improve and borrowing from foreigners and the federal budget deficit would decline. Sadly, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, in a recent speech to the Economics Club of Chicago, expressed the view that the employment situation in manufacturing is healthy. He characterized as protectionist substantive efforts to redress exchange rate problems with China that were proposed by critics of the Bush administration in Congress. With such apathy from the administration and contempt expressed by Paulson for those who differ with him on appropriate tactics, it is a small wonder that blue collar workers and their unions question the efficacy of U.S. trade policy.
The trade deficit and other structural problems, like runaway oil prices, are further hampering prospects for employment growth. Unfortunately, the Bush administration's responses to these problems have been tepid and, in effect, encouraged pessimism among consumers and businesses about the economic outlook. Consumers are reluctant to spend, and businesses have cut hiring and laid off workers. All of these factors have increased the likelihood of an employment death spiral--and a dim jobs report on Friday. Peter Morici is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Business and former chief economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Record low hiring of U.S. workers seen

China Hiring And Employment By The Graphs

The Talent in China blog has an interesting post up on China hiring issues. The post is entitled, "Graphs, Graphs, and More Graphs," and that is exactly what it is. It is a collection of graphs, graphically illustrating the following:

• China employee turnover, by industry
• Top 10 departments for turnover
• Foreign employers in China
• Employee expectations
• Motivations for changing jobs

It is a very easy to read and understand compilation of China employment data and I urge you to check it out.

Looking for Oil Workers

Play Video

Looking for Oil Workers KXMC CBS Bismarck North - (KXMC ) Jul. 18, 2007. 09:21 AM EST They were hoping to hire 50 people to work in oil fields of Wyoming and Utah. But an employment company that held an oil job fair in Minot today is more likely to get only about five new workers. Teresa Douthitt of SOS Staffing was disappointed more pot

July, 2007

Ah! Summer! Warm weather. Lazy moods.

In the northeast where I live and work from, the job market has remained strong BUT the placement of July 4th was confusing for many.

Do you take off before the 4th? After the 4th? Kiss off the entire week?

Firms have remained in hiring mode and the popular press is starting to catch up with what I've been writing about for a while--labor shortages in the US for skilled labor.

According to the US BLS, the US economy reported 132000 new jobs in June, 2007. ADP, which I consider far more reliable, reported 150000 new jobs created (It's more reliable because it actually counts new jobs at companies they provide payroll services to). The April and may numbers were revised higher by the BLS (to 190000 for May and 122000 in April).

At 4.5% unemployment is extremely low (if you have a college degree, unemployment is under 2%).

MSNBC offers the analysis that with the economy continuing to grow, there are "inflation worries" caused by firms that may face the new realities of the labor market by raising salaries--something I was telling you to expect in the second half of this year since the end of last year.

Our firm has been filling positions of all sorts yet the refrain from my colleagues is pretty similar--offers are being turned down because people now have choices where as a few years ago, they had one offer and needed to take it.

With rare exceptions, salaries are pushing higher (a colleague told me about a salary lateral that was offered to someone making $110000; she told the client to inceresae the offer by $10000 because that is where the appplicant's other offers were at).

MSNBC writes, "After rapid gains in productivity of the American workforce during the 1990s, for example, a slowdown in those gains could raise labor cost pressure. On the other hand, globalization and the outsourcing of production to cheaper labor markets continue to cut labor costs for some employers."

Only one problem--outsourcing employers are starting to find their labor costs rising, too so some are starting to recruit in the USA for positions abroad (There are two stories on this blog about that trend).

So, if you are an employer, this is the time you start planning for your 2008 budget. Start to look at increasing your labor costs.

Why?

Otherwise, you will not attract the kind of talent you want to accomplish your strategic objectives and, secondly, because your employees will start joining your competitors to help them meet their objectives.

Jeff Altman
The Big Game Hunter
Concepts in Staffing
thebiggamehunter@cisny.com

© 2007 all rights reserved.

Jeff Altman, The Big Game Hunter, is Managing Director with Concepts in Staffing, a New York search firm, He has successfully assisted many corporations identify management leaders and staff in many disciplines since 1971. He is a certified leader of the ManKind Project, a not for profit organization that assists men with life issues, and a practicing psychotherapist.

To receive a daily digest of positions emailed to you, search for openings that The Big Game Hunter is working on, to use Jeff’s free job lead search engine, Job Search Universe, to subscribe to Jeff’s free job hunting ezine, “Head Hunt Your Next Job, or his staffing ezine, “Natural Selection”, or to learn about his VIP program, go to www.jeffaltman.com. Job Search Universe is also available at www.jobsearchuniverse.com To add your firm’s career page to “The Universe” email the url to jobsearchuniverse@gmail.com.

If you would like Jeff and his firm to assist you with hiring staff, or if you would like help with a strategic job change, send an email to him at thebiggamehunter@cisny.com (If you’re looking for a new position, include your resume).

If you have a question that you would like me to answer pertaining to job hunting or hiring, email it to me at:
thebiggamehunter@gmail.com

More Malaysian men tend to take nurses as career: official

Tight job market forces up wages for summer jobs

Solar power may bring new jobs to Texas

The Palazo Resort-Hotel-Casino Now Hiring

CH2M Hill Hires Almost 900 Workers During 1st Quarter

Sacremento CIO's Forecast Increase in 3rd Quarter Hiring

Washinton DC CIO's Forecast on 3rd Quarter Hiring

Hartford, New Haven CIO's Forecast Increase in 3rd Quarter Hiring

EU to Crack Down on Employers Hiring Illegal Aliens

Employment data augurs well for job seekers

By Jeannine Aversa

WASHINGTON — If you're thinking about looking for a job, this might be the time to polish your résumé.

The news is good if your field is health care, education, accounting, engineering, Internet-related activities, banking, food services or government.

But be cautious about looking in manufacturing or retailing, which cut positions last month. Construction jobs were flat. Those pockets of weakness mostly reflected problems related to the troubled housing and automotive industries.

All told, the employment picture provided by the Labor Department on Friday showed job creation bounced back, with payrolls growing by 157,000 last month. That was an improvement over the 80,000 new jobs generated in April, the fewest in 2 1/2 years.

The overall unemployment rate held steady at 4.5 percent, low by historical standards.

"I think for job seekers the climate is pretty good right now, but it does vary," said Mark Vitner, an economist at Wachovia. "But I think companies are looking at each new hire more carefully than in the past.

No question about that," he added.

The 157,000 jobs generated in May is good — not fantastic— but it does bode well for the hoped-for economic rebound in the current April-to-June quarter, Vitner and other analysts said.

Many economists believe the economy in the current quarter is growing at a pace of about 2.3 percent. Others think economic growth will be better — topping 3 percent. Either way, it would mark a considerable pickup from the anemic 0.6 percent growth rate registered in the January-to-March quarter, the worst in more than four years.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues also are betting economic growth will perk up.

In another hopeful sign for the anticipated rebound, factories gained ground last month.

The Institute for Supply Management's manufacturing index rose to 55 in May, the best showing in a year. A reading above 50 indicates growth, while a reading below 50 indicates contraction.

On Wall Street, investors also were encouraged by the latest batch of economic data. The Dow Jones industrials gained 40.47 points to close at 13,668.11, the index's 26th record close for the year.

In the labor report, the performance was better than economists were expecting. They were forecasting that employers would add 135,000 jobs in May. They did, however, say they believed the overall unemployment rate would stay at 4.5 percent.

The main reason the employment climate has been holding well through the economy's nearly yearlong period of sluggishness is because most of the weakness has been concentrated in the housing and automotive industries. Those problems spots, thus far, haven't spread widely through the rest of the job market.

That being said, those pockets of weakness are surely being felt.

In the first five months of this year, job growth averaged 133,000 a month, compared with 189,000 a month in 2006. And, economists do expect the jobless rate will creep up this year, perhaps rising to as high as 5 percent by year end.

Workers saw modest wage gains.Average hourly earning rose to $17.30 in May, a 0.3 percent increase from the previous month.

Cringely catches IBM trying to hire 15,000

By Ashlee Vance in Mountain View → More by this author
22 May 2007 20:11

Comment Those of you afraid of Robert Cringely's claim that IBM will layoff 150,000 workers might want to read his latest column. The PBS scribe has blown it again.

At the bottom of a piece on Google, Cringely returns to the IBM layoff topic and makes the following statement: "Last week IBM also posted more than 15,000 new positions on Yahoo HotJobs. If these jobs are real and IBM foresees stable employment numbers, won't 15,000 existing IBM employees have to leave?"

You might wonder how IBM hiring 15,000 workers, while also laying off 15,000 as Cringely suggests, would really back up the claims about a severely reduced US workforce. As we see it, that would leave IBM with the same number of staff in the US.

Don't spend too much time pondering that idea though because the 15,000 jobs don't really exist anyway.

It seems that Cringely simply typed "IBM" into the Yahoo! HotJobs keyword search bar.
Try it yourself, and you'll find that, yes, 15,081 jobs are up for grabs.
Of course, a huge chunk of those jobs aren't really tied to IBM corporate at all. For example, Spherion wants an IBM storage expert and Cisco wants an IBM project intern.
Cringely might have got a more accurate account by sorting the results by company and focusing on IBM. Do that, and you find 12,859 jobs at Big Blue.
We'll grant you that's still quite the total.

But, according to spokesman Fred McNeese, IBM typically has only 3,000 job postings up at any given time. Many of the jobs on Yahoo!'s board are repeat offers for the same position just in different cities. Search for "Software IT Architect", for example, and you find 22 listings for the position in towns such as Los Angeles, Houston and New York. When all is said and one, IBM is looking for close to 3,000 staff via Yahoo! - just like it always does.

Cringely also attaches a time element to his claim, stating that the jobs appeared "last week."
Er, again, that's not true. The job posting dates on the HotJobs site change from day-to-day. For example, almost all of the IBM jobs appear today to have been posted today. We're sure the same thing held true when Cringely checked the site last week. IBM clearly doesn't want people to ignore the openings because of an old posting date, so Yahoo! tweaks the postings every day.
One mistake as part of Cringely's fear-mongering campaign would be fine, but that's not what we're dealing with.

Cringely's original story on the IBM layoffs claimed that 150,000 US workers would be fired. Thing is, IBM only employs 130,000 people in the US. Cringely also claimed that all the layoffs were taking place under a project code-named LEAN. Those familiar with Six Sigma will know that Lean is simply the term associated with cutting waste out of business practices and not some nefarious culling program developed by IBM.

Cringely has done so much for technology over the years, so it's a huge shame to see his reporting reach such lows on this IBM matter. If IBM is really about to layoff a huge chunk of its US workforce, IBMers and the rest of us deserve to know about it. Layoffs on the scale posited by Cringely would devastate the US economy in the near-term. But we'll never get close to the truth with people like Cringely making such wild accusations without bothering to do one bit of research about the topic at hand.

Many of you have attacked The Register for not recognizing Cringely's brilliance on this topic. And, perhaps, this story comes from a defensive posture.

The evidence, however, seems to suggest that Cringely writes whatever he feels like without ever bothering to check the basics. Shouldn't PBS strive for higher standards? ®

U.S. multinational corporations add more employees overseas, data show

WASHINGTON – U.S. multinational corporations hired workers overseas at a faster pace than in the United States in 2005, for the second year in a row, a Commerce Department report said Thursday.

U.S. multinationals – defined as U.S. companies, excluding banks, that own majority stakes in foreign affiliates – added 310,900 people to their overseas payrolls in 2005, an increase of 3.6 percent to 9.1 million.

Meanwhile, the same companies hired 238,000 workers in the United States, boosting their U.S. employment by 1.1 percent to 21.5 million.

The figures for 2005 continue a long-standing trend. U.S. multinationals increased their domestic employment by 0.6 percent in 2004, the report said, while boosting their overseas hiring by 6.1 percent that year. From 1988 to 2002, hiring by U.S. multinationals abroad rose by an average of 4 percent annually, while hiring by the same companies in the United States increased by 1.6 percent.

Seventy percent of the 30.5 million people employed by U.S. multinationals were in the United States in 2005, the department said, down from 78.8 percent in 1988.
In the area of capital spending, U.S. companies boosted their activity in the United States faster than overseas, the report found.

U.S. multinationals increased their spending on buildings, machinery and other equipment in the United States by 15.3 percent to $340.7 billion in 2005. Foreign investment by U.S. multinationals, meanwhile, increased 14.9 percent, to $137.3 billion, the department said.

The report, by the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis, said that shifts in employment and capital spending by U.S. multinationals do not necessarily result from shifts in production overseas. Other causes could include different rates of economic growth between the United States and other countries, the report said, or the creation of new market opportunities abroad that cannot be served by exports.

The report, which is based on preliminary data, found that foreign multinational companies employed 5.1 million people in the United States in 2005, or 4.5 percent of total U.S. employment in private industries. That figure represented a slight drop of 0.7 percent from 2004.

But foreign-owned firms continued to increase their capital spending in the U.S., investing $120.9 billion, up 7.1 percent from 2004.