Employment, Unemployment, and Hours: A Comment on Farmer's "Unemployment and Hours Are Very Different Creatures"
Roger Farmer
recently argued that, as the title of his blog post says, “Unemployment and Hours Are Very Different Creatures.” I’m
not so sure I agree.
Using data for the 1965-2016 period, he charts the
unemployment rate and the labor force participation rate in Chart 1. The LFPR rises fairly steadily from 1965
until late 1999 and then begins to decline.
The UR, by contrast, rises in recessions and falls in recoveries, with
no particular long-term trend. He
suggests—and this seems clear—that there is no relationship between the LFPR
and the UR.
In Chart 2, he shows average weekly hours in the private
sector (AveWH) an the unemployment rate.
For most of the 1965-2016 period AveWH are declining; again, there is no
apparent relationship with changes in the UR.
The chart below indexes the employment-population ratio and
(1 minus the unemployment rate—a 7% unemployment rate is therefore 93% here)
using 2007 as the base period [IEPR and I(1-UR)] in order
to chart them along with an index, not
of Average Weekly hours, but of Aggregate Weekly Hours (AggWH), which,
on the BLS web site is presented with a base period of 2007 = 100. (Data on AggWH are available beginning in
March 2006). All three of these are
indexed to 2007, and, because I transformed the unemployment rate, we would
expect the indexes to rise or fall together—if they are related at all. I also included an index of Average Weekly Hours (AveWE) worked.
Well, they do appear to be
related, and fairly closely—except for the index of AveWE. Why do I find something different from
Farmer? His hours measure is Average Weekly Hours. If, during downturns, employers respond by laying workers off and maintaining the
average work week, we would see Aggregate
Weekly hours to fall in recessions and rise in recoveries, even as Average Weekly Hours change little or
not at all. And, based on the 2006-2016
period, laying off workers and maintaining the work week is exactly what happened. And we would expect the EPR to fall in recessions
and rise in recovery, and (1 — UR) to fall in recessions (UR rises) and rise in
recoveries (UR falls).
I only have one business cycle here (Farmer has 6 in his
data series), so there’s no guarantee that what I have found will be replicated
in subsequent cycles (or would appear in prior cycles if I had aggregate hours
data). But I’d be willing to bet on it.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home