Thursday, December 24, 2009

[IWS] DAILY POSTING - NO MESSAGES until 4 January 2010

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

NO MESSAGES will be sent until 4 January 2010.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016

Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************


[IWS] Watson Wyatt: DEFINED BENEFIT vs 401(K) INVESTMENT RETURNS: THE 2006-2008 UPDATE [December 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Watson wyatt

INSIDER

 

Defined Benefit vs. 401(k) Investment Returns: The 2006-2008 Update [December 2009]
http://www.watsonwyatt.com/us/pubs/insider/showarticle.asp?ArticleID=22909

Watson Wyatt has been comparing investment rates of return in defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) plans for more than 10 years,1 and DB plans have been the long-term victor. This analysis updates our prior studies with investment returns for 20062 and 2007 for a large set of plans, as well as a snapshot of year-end returns for 2008 based on a small set of plan sponsors.

 

In our last analysis, we found that between 1995 and 2006, DB plans outperformed DC plans by an average of 1 percentage point per year. Earlier studies also found that, over time, DB plans attained higher returns than 401(k) plans. In this year’s analysis, the results remain in line with past analyses; DB plans outperform DC plans by roughly an average of 1 percentage point a year.

 

Our current analysis of year-end 2008 also shows — albeit drawn from a reduced sample — that despite generally poor returns for both plan types during the financial crisis, median returns for DB plans remained around 1 percentage point higher than those for DC plans — and some DB plans even reported positive returns.

 

Like our earlier studies, this analysis is based on Form 5500 financial and pension disclosure data through 2007 released by the Department of Labor (DOL). Results for 2008 are based on a Watson Wyatt survey of plan sponsors about their Form 5500 information. We also use the same formula as earlier studies to calculate the average rate of return:

 

AND MUCH MORE...including TABLES...



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


Wednesday, December 23, 2009

[IWS] CRS: U.S. AEROSPACE MANUFACTURING: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW & PROSPECTS [3 December 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

 

U.S. Aerospace Manufacturing: Industry Overview and Prospects
Michaela D. Platzer, Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business
December 3, 2009
http://opencrs.com/document/R40967/2009-12-03/download/1013/
[full-text, 13 pages]

 

Summary

Aircraft and automobile manufacturing are considered by many to be the technological backbones

of the U.S. manufacturing base. As the Obama Administration and Congress debate how to

strengthen American manufacturing, aerospace is likely to receive considerable attention. Like

other manufacturing industries, the worldwide recession has affected aerospace manufacturing,

with both the defense and commercial sides of the industry facing difficult business conditions for

the near and medium term. This report primarily provides a snapshot of the U.S. commercial

(non-defense, non-space) aerospace manufacturing industry and a discussion of major trends

affecting the future of this industry.

 

The large commercial jet aviation market is a duopoly shared by the U.S. aircraft manufacturer

Boeing and the European aircraft maker Airbus, with fierce competition between these two

companies. The regional jet market is dominated by two non-U.S. headquartered manufacturers,

Brazil’s Embraer and Canada’s Bombardier, both of which utilize a high level of U.S.-produced

content in their products. The general aviation market includes companies such as Cessna and

Gulfstream.

 

Aerospace manufacturing is an important part of the U.S. manufacturing base. It comprised 2.8%

of the nation’s manufacturing workforce in 2008 and employed over 500,000 Americans in highskilled

and high-wage jobs. More than half (61%) of the nation’s aerospace industry jobs are

located in six states: Washington state, California, Texas, Kansas, Connecticut, and Arizona.

Several smaller aerospace manufacturing clusters are found in states such as Florida, Georgia,

Ohio, Missouri, and Alabama. Other aerospace centers are beginning to emerge in southern states,

such as South Carolina, where Boeing is now building a second production line to produce the

787 Dreamliner. Aerospace manufacturing contributes significantly to the U.S. economy, with

total sales by aerospace manufacturers (including defense and space) comprising 1.4% of the U.S.

gross domestic product in 2008.

 

U.S. aircraft manufacturers depend heavily on the international market for their sales. The

aerospace industry sold more than $95 billion in aerospace vehicles and equipment (including

defense and space) to overseas customers in markets such as Japan, France, Germany, and the

United Kingdom, and imported over $37 billion in aerospace products from abroad, providing a

significant positive contribution of $57.7 billion to the U.S. trade balance in 2008. Increasingly,

other markets are becoming important as an opportunity to increase U.S. sales, but also because

of the potential for future competitors to challenge the U.S. aerospace industry’s competitive

position. U.S. aerospace exports to China have increased since 2003, totaling $5.5 billion in 2008.

At the same time, some analysts maintain that China could become a global competitor in the

commercial aerospace market. Already, China is working to develop airplanes that could become

globally competitive in both the regional jet and large commercial jet aviation market. Russia has

stated that it wants to become the world’s third-largest aircraft manufacturer by 2015.

 

Congress has been discussing issues affecting the competitiveness of the U.S. aerospace

manufacturing industry for most of this decade. Among the concerns and issues affecting the

future of the commercial sector of the industry are export control policies, environmental

concerns, and an aging aerospace workforce. Additionally, the United States and the European

Union are engaged in a long-running trade dispute over subsidies, with each side claiming the

other subsidizes its domestic companies.

 

Contents

Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1

Aerospace Manufacturing Industry Overview..............................................................................1

Aerospace Manufacturing Workforce ....................................................................................1

Economic Impact of Aerospace Manufacturing .....................................................................2

Aerospace Trade ...................................................................................................................3

The Commercial Jet Aircraft Market .....................................................................................4

The Regional Jet Market .......................................................................................................6

The General Aviation (GA) Aircraft Market ..........................................................................7

Potential Future Competition in the Aircraft Manufacturing Sector ..............................................8

Public Policy Issues ....................................................................................................................8

Export Controls.....................................................................................................................9

Environmental Concerns .......................................................................................................9

Aerospace Workforce Issues..................................................................................................9

Tables

Table 1. Boeing and Airbus Net Orders and Deliveries, 2000-2009..............................................5

Contacts

Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................10



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


[IWS] CRS: CHINA-U.S. RELATIONS: CURRENT ISSUES & IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY [20 November 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

 

China-U.S. Relations: Current Issues and Implications for U.S. Policy
Kerry Dumbaugh, Specialist in Asian Affairs
November 20, 2009
http://opencrs.com/document/R40457/2009-11-20/download/1013/
[full-text, 39 pages]

 

Summary

The bilateral relationship between the U.S. and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is vitally

important, touching on a wide range of areas including, among others, economic policy, security,

foreign relations, and human rights. U.S. interests with China are bound together much more

closely now than even a few years ago. These extensive inter-linkages have made it increasingly

difficult for either government to take unilateral actions without inviting far-reaching, unintended

consequences. The Administration of President Barack Obama has inherited from the George W.

Bush Administration not only a greater array of policy mechanisms for pursuing U.S.-China

policy, but a more complex and multifaceted U.S.-China relationship where the stakes are higher

and where U.S. action may increasingly be constrained.

 

Economically, the United States and China have become symbiotically intertwined. China is the

second-largest U.S. trading partner, with total U.S.-China trade in 2008 reaching an estimated

$409 billion. It also is the second largest holder of U.S. securities and the largest holder of U.S.

Treasuries used to finance the federal budget deficit, positioning China to play a crucial role, for

good or ill, in the Obama Administration’s plans to address the recession and the deteriorating

U.S. financial system. At the same time, China’s own substantial levels of economic growth have

depended heavily on continued U.S. investment and trade, making China’s economy highly

vulnerable to a significant economic slowdown in the United States.

 

Meanwhile, other bilateral problems provide a continuing set of diverse challenges. They include

difficulties over the status and well-being of Taiwan, ongoing disputes over China’s failure to

protect U.S. intellectual property rights, the economic advantage China gains from not floating its

currency, and growing concerns about the quality and safety of products exported by China.

China’s more assertive foreign policy and continued military development also have significant

long-term implications for U.S. global power and influence. Some U.S. lawmakers have

suggested that U.S. policies toward China should be reassessed in light of these trends.

 

During the Bush Administration, the U.S. and China cultivated regular high-level visits and

exchanges of working level officials, resumed military-to-military relations, cooperated on antiterror

initiatives, and worked closely on the Six Party Talks to restrain and eliminate North

Korea’s nuclear weapons activities. These and other initiatives of engagement are likely to

continue in some fashion during the Obama presidency. Obama Administration officials already

have made known their views about China’s importance for U.S. interests. Secretary of State

Hillary Clinton included China in her first official trip abroad as Secretary in February 2009,

which included stops in Japan, Indonesia, South Korea, and China (February 20-22). In addition,

the Administration established a new Strategic and Economic Dialogue with the PRC in 2009,

and President Obama in November 2009 made his first official visit to China.

 

This report addresses relevant policy questions in current U.S.-China relations, discusses trends

and key legislation in the current Congress, and provides a chronology of developments and highlevel

exchanges. It will be updated as events warrant. Additional details on the issues discussed

here are available in other CRS products, noted throughout this report. For background

information and legislative action during the 110th Congress, see CRS Report RL33877, China-

U.S. Relations in the 110th Congress: Issues and Implications for U.S. Policy, by Kerry

Dumbaugh. CRS products can be found on the CRS website at http://www.crs.gov/.

 

Contents

Recent Developments..................................................................................................................1

Background and Overview..........................................................................................................1

China’s Importance and Implications for U.S. Policy.............................................................2

Current Issues in U.S.-China Relations........................................................................................3

President Obama State Visit to China, 2009.....................................................................3

Chinese Tire Imports.............................................................................................................4

Global Financial Crisis..........................................................................................................4

Uighur Protests in Xinjiang: July 2009 ..................................................................................5

Military and National Security Issues ....................................................................................6

South China Sea Incidents...............................................................................................7

China’s Growing Military Power.....................................................................................7

PRC Space Activities ......................................................................................................8

Economic and Trade Issues ...................................................................................................9

Currency Valuation .........................................................................................................9

Unfair Trade Subsidies ..................................................................................................10

Intellectual Property Rights ...........................................................................................10

Concerns about Product Safety............................................................................................ 11

Tibet ..................................................................................................................................12

U.S.-PRC Official Dialogues...............................................................................................13

The Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) .............................................................13

Taiwan...............................................................................................................................15

Prospects for U.S. Taiwan Policy...................................................................................16

U.S. Arms Sales to Taiwan ............................................................................................16

Taiwan’s Bid for U.N. Observer Status..........................................................................17

Resumption of PRC-Taiwan Talks.................................................................................18

China’s Foreign Relations ...................................................................................................20

Environmental Issues ..........................................................................................................22

Domestic Political Issues.....................................................................................................23

Social Stability..............................................................................................................23

Human Rights ...............................................................................................................24

China-Related Legislation in the 111th Congress ........................................................................26

Chronology of Events ...............................................................................................................29

Appendixes

Appendix A. Selected Visits by U.S. and PRC Officials.............................................................32

Appendix B. Selected U.S. Government Reporting Requirements..............................................34

Contacts

Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................36



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


[IWS] CRS: TRADE AGREEMENTS: IMPACT ON THE U.S. ECONOMY [10 November 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

 

Trade Agreements: Impact on the U.S. Economy
James K. Jackson, Specialist in International Trade and Finance
November 10, 2009
http://opencrs.com/document/RL31932/2009-11-10/download/1013/
[full-text, 24 pages]

 

Summary

The United States is in the process of considering a number of trade agreements. In addition, the

111th Congress may address the issue of trade promotion authority (TPA), which expired on July

1, 2007. These agreements range from bilateral trade agreements with countries that account for

meager shares of U.S. trade to multilateral negotiations that could affect large numbers of U.S.

workers and businesses. During this process, Congress likely will be presented with an array of

data estimating the impact of trade agreements on the economy, or on a particular segment of the

economy.

 

An important policy tool that can assist Congress in assessing the value and the impact of trade

agreements is represented by sophisticated models of the economy that are capable of simulating

changes in economic conditions. These models are particularly helpful in estimating the effects of

trade liberalization in such sectors as agriculture and manufacturing where the barriers to trade

are identifiable and subject to some quantifiable estimation. Barriers to trade in services,

however, are proving to be more difficult to identify and, therefore, to quantify in an economic

model. In addition, the models are highly sensitive to the assumptions that are used to establish

the parameters of the model and they are hampered by a serious lack of comprehensive data in the

services sector. Nevertheless, the models do provide insight into the magnitude of the economic

effects that may occur across economic sectors as a result of trade liberalization. These insights

are especially helpful in identifying sectors expected to experience the greatest adjustment costs

and, therefore, where opposition to trade agreements is likely to occur.

 

This report examines the major features of economic models being used to estimate the effects of

trade agreements. It assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the models as an aid in helping

Congress evaluate the economic impact of trade agreements on the U.S. economy. In addition,

this report identifies and assesses some of the assumptions used in the economic models and how

these assumptions affect the data generated by the models. Finally, this report evaluates the

implications for Congress of various options it may consider as it assesses trade agreements.

 

Contents

Background ..........................................................................................................................1

An Overview of the Major Agreements .................................................................................1

Multilateral Agreements ..................................................................................................1

Regional Trade Agreements ............................................................................................3

Completed Bilateral Trade Agreements ...........................................................................5

Signed Bilateral Trade Agreements Requiring Congressional Approval ...........................7

Pending Bilateral Trade Agreements................................................................................8

Trade Liberalization and the Gains From Trade .....................................................................9

Production Gains.............................................................................................................9

Adjustment Costs..........................................................................................................10

Consumption Gains....................................................................................................... 11

Economic Growth ......................................................................................................... 11

Estimating the Economic Impact of Trade Agreements ........................................................12

Overview......................................................................................................................12

The Michigan Model and Estimates ..............................................................................13

Investment and Capital Flows .......................................................................................16

Data on Barriers to Trade in Services ............................................................................18

Implications for Congress ...................................................................................................20

Tables

Table 1. Major Components of U.S. Gross Domestic Product ....................................................10

Table 2. Estimated Economic Effects on the United States of a 33% Reduction in Barriers to Trade in Agriculture, Manufactures, and Services at the Doha Development Round......14

Table 3. Estimated Economic Effects on the United States of Free Trade Agreements with Various Trading Partners................15

Table 4. Projected Sectoral Employment Effects (Job Gains and Losses) in the United States of Various Multilateral Trade Agreements.......16

Table 5. Projected Sectoral Employment Effects (Job Gains and Losses) in the United States of Various Regional and Bilateral Trade Agreements........17

 

Contacts

Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................21



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


[IWS] ADB: [INDIA] SURVEYS OF INFORMAL SECTOR ENTERPRISES --SOME MEASUREMENT ISSUES [December 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Asian Development Bank (ADB)

ADB Economics

Working Paper Series

No. 183 | December 2009

 

[INDIA] Surveys of Informal Sector Enterprises— Some Measurement Issues
by Kaushal Joshi, Rana Hasan, and Glenita Amoranto
http://www.adb.org/Documents/Working-Papers/2009/Economics-WP183.pdf
[full-text, 37 pages]

 

Abstract

The informal sector represents an important part of the economy and the labor

market in many countries, especially developing countries. Measurements of the

informal sector are of intrinsic interest in their own right and contribute toward

exhaustive measures of gross domestic product (GDP). Considering that the

informal sector provides employment for income creation to a large number of

poor and contributes significantly to the GDP of many developing countries,

collecting statistics through surveys for accurate measurement of output, net

surplus, and value added is critical for national accountants, other users, and

for researchers working on policy-related issues. As most of the informal sector

enterprises do not maintain business accounts, the survey responses depend

highly on the recall by the respondent and the skills of the interviewer. Thus a

very important aspect of the surveys of informal sector enterprises is the design

of the survey questionnaire and the details to be captured in data collection

in order to accurately measure the characteristics of these enterprises. The

details sought in the survey questionnaire have implications on the accuracy

of data and hence in the measurement of expenditure, receipts, profits, and

gross value added (GVA) of these enterprises. In this paper we examine the

differences in the measures of (i) profits of an enterprise derived from a detailed

set of questions on incomes and expenses, versus profits obtained through a

single direct question; and (ii) GVA obtained using the production approach as

the difference of output and intermediate consumption from a detailed set of

questions on incomes and expenses, versus GVA using the income approach by

asking a few questions on factor incomes, and a single direct question on profits.

We use data from the 56th round survey of unorganized manufacturing conducted

by the National Sample Survey Organization of India during the period July

2000–June 2001. We also examine if the differences vary with the characteristics

of the enterprises, and suggest further empirical research to develop suitable

tools for providing accurate measurements of informal sector enterprises.

 

Contents

Abstract v

I. Introduction 1

II. Measurement of Informal Sector 2

III. NSS Surveys on Unorganized Manufacturing 4

IV. Data Description 5

V. NSS 56th Round Questionnaire 6

VI. Results of Data Review 9

A. Books of Accounts 11

B. Response Code 13

C. Informant 13

D. Enterprise Type 14

E. Size of Employment 15

F. Size of Plant and Machinery 15

G. Registration 16

H. Location of Enterprise 17

I. States 17

VII. Profits(derived) and Profits(direct): Profile of Enterprises 18

VIII. What do We Conclude from Above? 19

IX. Suggestions for Further Methodological Work 21

Appendix 23

References 29

 



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


[IWS] Census: ESTIMATES OF TOTAL U.S., STATE, & PUERTO RICO POPULATION for July 1, 2009 [23 December 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

 

Census

 

ESTIMATES OF TOTAL U.S., STATE, & PUERTO RICO POPULATION for July 1, 2009 [23 December 2009]

Detailed Tables

http://www.census.gov/popest/estimates.html

 

State Contacts

http://www.census.gov/sdc/

 

Press Release 23 December 2009

Census Bureau: Texas Gains the Most in Population

Last State Population Estimates Before 2010 Census Counts
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/population/014509.html

 

     Texas gained more people than any other state between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2009 (478,000), followed by California (381,000), North Carolina (134,000), Georgia (131,000) and Florida (114,000), according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau estimates

 

     California remained the most populous state, with a July 1, 2009, population of 37 million. Rounding out the top five states were Texas (24.8 million), New York (19.5 million), Florida (18.5 million) and Illinois (12.9 million).

 

     "This is the final set of Census Bureau state population estimates that will be published before the official 2010 Census population counts to be released next December," said Census Bureau Director Robert Groves. "We are focused now on ensuring we get a complete and accurate count in 2010. The census counts will not only determine how many U.S. House seats each state will have but will also be used as the benchmark for future population estimates."

 

     Wyoming showed the largest percentage growth: its population climbed 2.12 percent to 544,270 between July 1, 2008, and July 1, 2009. Utah was next largest, growing 2.10 percent to 2.8 million. Texas ranked third, as its population climbed 1.97 percent to 24.8 million, with Colorado next (1.81 percent to 5 million).

 

     The only three states to lose population over the period were Michigan (-0.33 percent), Maine (-0.11 percent) and Rhode Island (-0.03 percent). The latter two states had small population changes.

 

     Other highlights:

 

    * Net domestic migration has slowed dramatically in many states in the South and West, including Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, North Carolina, South Carolina and Montana.

    * Several states have negative net domestic migration, which means more people are moving out than moving in. Florida and Nevada, which earlier in the decade had net inflows, are now experiencing new outflows.

    * Louisiana’s July 1, 2009 population, 4.5 million, is up 40,563, or 0.91 percent, from a year earlier.

    * The nation’s population as of July 1, 2009, was 307 million, an increase of 0.86 percent since July 1, 2008.

    * The estimated July 1, 2009, population for Puerto Rico was 4 million, up by 0.32 percent (12,735) from one year earlier.

 

-X-

 

The Census Bureau develops state population estimates by measuring population change since the most recent census. It uses births, deaths, administrative records and survey data to develop estimates of population. For more detail regarding the methodology see <http://www.census.gov/popest/topics/methodology/>.



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky                   
Director, IWS News Bureau                
Institute for Workplace Studies 
Cornell/ILR School                        
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor             
New York, NY 10016                        
                                   
Telephone: (607) 255-2703                
Fax: (607) 255-9641                       
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu                  
****************************************

 

 


[IWS] BLS: UPCOMING CHANGES to EMPLOYMENT SITUATION starting w/ JANUARY 2010 Release [9 December 2009]

IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor----------------------
Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)

Upcoming Changes to the Employment Situation News Release on February 5, 2010 [9 December 2009]

http://www.bls.gov/bls/upcoming_empsit_changes.htm

Overview

Beginning with the release of data for January 2010 on February 5, 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) plans to implement several changes to the content and format of the Employment Situation news release. Changes will be reflected in both the text and tables.

Summary tables

Both the household survey and the establishment survey will now provide separate summary tables, which contain the most commonly used data series from each section of the release. These two summary tables will immediately follow the text analysis describing the monthly data. They replace Table A in the current version of the news release.

Household survey data from the Current Population Survey (CPS)

Three new tables will be added to the household survey section ("A tables") of the release. These new tables cover the employment status of veterans, persons with a disability, and the foreign born. (Data on these persons have been collected in the CPS previously, but now are being added to this news release.) In addition, two new seasonally adjusted series are being added to the table showing unemployment by reason; specifically, the series for permanent job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs.

Establishment survey data from the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey

New data on all employee hours and earnings will be added to the Employment Situation news release starting with this release. The text and tables ("B tables") will reflect these additions. BLS also will publish CES data on employment of women and production and nonsupervisory workers in the Employment Situation release each month concurrent with the newest-available establishment survey employment data; previously, employment data on women were available with a one-month lag and were not published in the Employment Situation news release.

The establishment survey tables in the news release will be redesigned to incorporate the addition of the all employee hours and earnings and employment series for women and for production and nonsupervisory workers. The redesigned tables will display seasonally adjusted data, while the CES public database will contain both seasonally adjusted and not seasonally adjusted data. Some diffusion indexes and industry level detail for manufacturing production worker hours, earnings, and indexes of aggregate weekly hours will be removed from the CES tables in the news release, but will be available through the CES public database.

Employment Situation Technical Notes and Access to Historical Data

The technical notes at the back of the news release will be updated to cover the new concepts introduced. The historical links section of the HTML version of the news release on the BLS Web site will be modified, again providing easy access to historical data for every series presented in the release. These changes will be effective when the data are released in February 2010.

In order to help users prepare for the changes, sample versions of the new Employment Situation News Release Tables in pdf format are posted below. In January, sample html versions of each table will also be available.

Employment Situation News Release Table Samples

* Summary tables: link to Household and Establishment summary tables (PDF)

o NEW Summary table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Summary table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

* Household tables: link to all Household tables (PDF)

o Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age (PDF)

o Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age (PDF)

o Table A-3. Employment status of the Hispanic or Latino population by sex and age (PDF)

o Table A-4. Employment status of the civilian population 25 years and over by educational attainment (PDF)

o NEW Table A-5. Employment status of the civilian population 18 years and over by veteran status, period of service, and sex, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table A-6. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, and disability status, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table A-7. Employment status of the civilian population by nativity and sex, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o Table A-8. Employed persons by class of worker and part-time status (PDF)

o Table A-9. Selected employment indicators (PDF)

o Table A-10. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o Table A-11. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment (PDF)

o Table A-12. Unemployed persons by duration of unemployment (PDF)

o Table A-13. Employed and unemployed persons by occupation, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o Table A-14. Unemployed persons by industry and class of worker, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization (PDF)

o Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted (PDF)

* Establishment tables: link to all Establishment tables (PDF)

o NEW Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail (PDF)

o NEW Table B-2. Average weekly hours and overtime of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-3. Average hourly and weekly earnings of all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-4. Indexes of aggregate weekly hours and payrolls for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-5. Employment of women on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-6. Employment of production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-7. Average weekly hours and overtime of production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-8. Average hourly and weekly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)

o NEW Table B-9. Indexes of aggregate weekly hours and payrolls for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls by industry sector, seasonally adjusted (PDF)



________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016

Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?