Showing posts with label QNHS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label QNHS. Show all posts

Thursday, August 29, 2013

29/8/2013: Broader Unemployment & Underemployment in Ireland: Q2 2013


On foot of the latest data from the QNHS (broad trends analysis here), let's take a look at the broader measures of unemployment, as reported by the CSO (with the last measure: PLS4+STP being compiled by myself based on CSO data from the Live Register and QNHS).

Here are the core definitions, used:


And the numbers are:



  • PLS1 - unemployed persons plus discouraged workers - rose from 14.6% in Q1 2013 to 14.8% in Q2 2013, but declined 1.3 percentage points on Q2 2012. Relative to peak (16.2% in Q3 2011), the indicator is now down 1.4 percentage points, which is a pretty poor performance, when you think of it: 1.4 ppt down in 7 quarters).
  • PLS2 is at 16.2% in Q2 2013, up on 16% in Q4 2012 and Q1 2012. Year on year, indicator is down 1.0 percentage points and it is down 1.1 percentage points on peak attained in Q3 2011. Again, poor performance relative to peak.
  • PLS3 is at 18.2%, up on 18.0% in Q1 2013 and down 0.7 ppt on Q2 2012. Relative to peak the indicator is down 1.0 percentage points with the peak at Q3 2011.
  • PLS4 is at 24.7%, which is down on 24.9% in Q1 2013 and is also down 1.1 ppt y/y. Q2 2012 was the peak reading for indicator, so PLS4 is down now 1.1 ppt on peak too - decline delivered over 4 quarters.
  • Finally, adding State Training Programmes participants to PLS4, we have PLS4+STP indicator at 27.8%, down on 28.9% in Q1 2013 and down only 0.5 ppt on Q2 2012. Indicator peak was attained in Q3 2012, so the indicator is now down 1.1 ppt on peak.
Summary of y/y and relative to peak changes recorded in Q2 2013 is here:



Lastly, gains in the labour force illustrated:


The above marks a nice increase in the labour force participation out to 2,170,700 in Q2 2013 from 2,137,500 in Q1 2013 and 2,159,100 in Q2 2012. The increase, however, comes off the low base to begin with and basically returns labour force numbers to the levels where they were back around Q3 2011.

Summary: Broader unemployment and underemployment metrics are improving y/y but not q/q. The broadest measure PLS4+STP down very marginally y/y by just 0.5 percentage points. This is hardly encouraging. On a positive side, all metrics are showing signs of stabilisation, albeit at very high levels of unemployment and underemployment. In most basic terms, with 27.8% of our broader potential workforce either unemployed, underemployed or in state training programmes, we have a real problem on our hands, still, and it is not getting better at any appreciable rate of improvement.
Any source

29/8/2013: Some positives v negatives from QNHS data: Q2 2013

Latest QNHS figures from Ireland are encouraging. Actually, given much of the tough news on the front of employment and jobs creation prior, these are heart warming. Here are the headlines:

Employment:
  • "There was an annual increase in employment of 1.8% or 33,800 in the year to the second quarter of 2013, bringing total employment to 1,869,900. This compares with an annual increase in employment of 1.1% in the previous quarter and a decrease of 1.3% in the year to Q2 2012." This is good. Employment is up against adverse demographic effects, which is good, but it is also up due to superficial effects of reclassifications of some categories (see warning below).
  • Even better news: "Full-time employment increased by 21,600 or 1.5% in the year to Q2 2013 while part-time employment increased by 12,100 or 2.8% over the year." So levels of increase in full-time employment are outstripping increases in part-time employment, implying that average jobs pool quality is not declining anymore.
  • This marks third consecutive quarter of q/q increases in employment: "On a seasonally adjusted basis, employment increased by 9,600 (+0.5%) in the quarter." There was a seasonally adjusted increase in employment of 9,000 (+0.5%) in Q1 2013 and 12,100 (+0.7%) in Q4 2012.
  • Employment increases and decreases composition are not sending a good signal, with higher value-added sub-categories of employment up: "Employment fell in five of the fourteen economic sectors over the year... The greatest rates of decline were recorded in the Administration and support service activities(-7.9% or -5,000), Transportation and storage (-5.4% or -4,900) and Public administration and defence; compulsory social security (-4.5% or -4,500) sectors. The largest rates of increase were recorded in the Agriculture, forestry and fishing (+18.7% or 16,300) and the Accommodation and food service activities(+8.0% or 9,600) sectors. 
  • Here is a warning shot on the above figures: "In the case of the Agriculture, forestry and fishing sector it can be noted that estimates of employment in this sector have shown to be sensitive to sample changes over time." So, wait... +16,300 'new' jobs in Agriculture etc are really old jobs reclassified... or at least a large share of these are... Oops.. Note that this exactly matches decrease in the 'Not in the labour force' category (-16,300 y/y) and this knocks out quite a bit of wind out of the 'jobs creation' figures sails...

Unemployment:
  • "The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate decreased from 13.8% to 13.7% over the quarter while the number of persons unemployed fell marginally by 500 persons, again on a seasonally adjusted basis." This is news in so far it is 'official' QNHS reading, but we knew 13.7% figure back in May when we had the standardised rate of unemployment estimate from Live Register.
  • "Unemployment decreased by 22,200 (-6.9%) in the year to Q2 2013 bringing the total number of persons unemployed to 300,700. This is the fourth quarter in succession where unemployment has declined on an annual basis." Which is good news, indeed, except, wait... what about the 16,300 'new' jobs in Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing flagged above? Marginal decline of just 500 in terms of q/q seasonally-adjusted unemployment is a poor reading, to be honest. Better than an increase, but still, very weak. This weakness suggests that the bulk of 22,200 declines in unemployment rosters is due to exits and reclassifications of workers, not due to jobs creation.
  • "The long-term unemployment rate decreased from 9.2% to 8.1% over the year to Q2 2013. Long-term unemployment accounted for 58.2% of total unemployment in Q2 2013 compared with 61.8% a year earlier and 56.1% in the second quarter of 2011." What we do not know here is whether this decrease was due to exits from benefits or entries into jobs or move to state-run training programmes. I will do analysis on these later, so stay tuned.

Labour force participation:

  • Good news: "The total number of persons in the labour force in the second quarter of 2013 was 2,170,700, representing an increase of 11,500 (+0.5%) over the year. This compares with an annual labour force decrease of 19,600 (-0.9%) in Q2 2012." 
  • The above is a good bit of news and it is made even better when we consider that increases in labour force were driven by increased participation rather than by demographic effects. In Q2 2013 there was a negative demographic effect cutting -16,300 from the overall labour force. This was more than offset by "a positive participation effect of 27,800 on the size of the labour force over the year.
  • There was "an increase in the overall participation rate from 60.1% to 60.5% over the year to Q2 2013." Which is excellent news.
  • "The number of persons not in the labour force in Q2 2013 was 1,415,600, a decrease of 16,300 (-1.1%) over the year." This seems to be related to reclassifications into Agriculture, etc. sector.
To summarise:
We have some positive news above, but overall, numbers remain obscured by reclassifications, changes in composition and lack of clarity on flows in- and out- of unemployment. 

Analysis of broader measures of unemployment, more indicative of underlying quality and nature of changes in the aggregate figures, is to follow, so stay tuned.
Any source

Thursday, August 1, 2013

1/8/2013: Anatomy of the Personal Crises: QNHS Q3 2012

CSO has published Q3 2012 survey concerning the Effect on Households of the Economic Downturn: here.

Some core findings:

  • 82% of households cut spending on at least one of the main categories of expenditure as a result of the economic downturn in the 12 months before July-September 2012. 
  • Nearly a quarter of all households indicated that they had cut back on five or more categories of spending out of 9 categories listed.
  • Over 1/3 of households who used a car had cut back on their expenditure on this means of transport.
  • "Some 14% of owner occupied households with a mortgage were unable to make mortgage repayments on time at least once in the previous twelve months due to financial difficulties." This number is strangely well below the current rate of mortgages arrears by accounts. Does this suggest that households tend to overstate their financial health?
  • "On the rental side 19% of all renting households failed to pay rent on time at least once."
  • 43% of households "indicated that they had experienced difficulties in keeping up with their bills and debts."
  • "Two fifths of individuals were concerned about their level of personal debt. Over half of these said that they were currently more concerned than they had been twelve months previously. Only 5% indicated that their level of concern had decreased."
  • "households consisting of one adult aged 65 or over said they had the least difficulty" paying bills and funding debt (27%).
  • "Of households where the reference person was at work 41% experienced difficulty [paying bills and funding debt] compared with 73% where the reference person was unemployed." Note that 41% is a frightening number, still.
  • "Looking specifically at those households which had experienced difficulty in managing bills and debts, 47% of them said that it was due to loss of income, 73% said it was due to higher than expected or additional costs and 5% said the difficulty was due to other reasons."
  • "Looking more deeply into the type of higher or additional costs mentioned by those households for whom it caused difficulty, 90% of those households mentioned higher or additional utility bills , 32% mentioned higher or additional school, college or university costs, 17% mentioned higher or additional medical or dental costs and 15% mentioned higher or additional loan or mortgage repayments" Now, run through these again. All of them are state-controlled and state-regulated services, ex mortgages and loans. That's the cost of Irish State policy of extracting rents out of already stretched households.


And a handy chart summarising demographics of debt crisis:
That's right: core crisis impact on debt side - 25-54 year olds, majority with kids and homes, just the crowd that the Government is targeting for cash extraction via higher prices and charges for services like health, health insurance, transport, energy, utilities, education... you name it.

And as you read data in Table 1.1.1. showing details of the households experiencing financial difficulty due to loss of income, classified by main reasons over 12 months prior to July-September 2012, keep in mind - almost all 'employment creation' in the labour market that the Government and 'green jerseys' keep talking about is taking place in the part-time jobs, which cannot cover the true cost of living in this country.

Finally, take a look at Table 1.2. This shows the extent of debt restructuring delivered by the 'reformed' banks. At 7% total - it is laughably low.

Any source

Thursday, May 30, 2013

31/5/2013: Part-time v Full-time Unemployment in Ireland


"Less positively, the Quarterly National Household Survey showed that most of the gains in employment have been in part-time rather than full-time jobs." Irish Times : http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland/employment-grows-for-third-successive-quarter-1.1412103?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Sadly, I must say, this is simply incorrect.

In Q1 2013, full-time jobs stood at 1,391,100 which is down on Q4 2012 when these counted 1,398,700 (-7,700 q/q change) and is down on Q1 2012 when the full-time jobs counted 1,394,800 (-3,700 y/y). This is also down on Q1 2011 when full-time jobs numbered 1,401,800 (a net loss of 10,700 full-time jobs in 2 years).

Part-time jobs rises accounted for all, repeat all, increases in Q1 2013: these increased to 454,400 in Q1 2013 from 450,200 in Q4 2012 (+4,200 q/q) and were up on 430,200 (+24,200 y/y) on Q1 2012. This is goodish, as - obviously - it is better that people are working at least part-time. However, it is simply incorrect to claim that "most of the gains in employment have been in part-time rather than full-time jobs" when there were DECREASES in full-time jobs.

Worse than that: the picture is further distorted by the differences in changes in part-time underemployed jobs numbers and part-time not underemployed numbers.

Year on year, part-time not underemployed numbers rose from 291,300 in Q1 2012 to 298,500 in Q1 2013 - a gain of 7,200 or just 29.7% of all part-time (and net) jobs gained y/y. The rest 70% of the jobs gains were amongst part-time underemployed. And compounding this, quarter on quarter, numbers of those in part-time employment who are not underemployed actually fell - from 304,400 in Q4 2012 to 298,500 in Q1 2013.

It would help to read the Table 1 of the CSO release : http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/labourmarket/2013/qnhs_q12013.pdf
Any source

30/5/2013: Official Broader Unemployment in Ireland stands at 25%


The latest data for Q1 2013 from QNHS is out today with worrying sub-trends indicating that the labour markets are not showing any significant improvements in broader metrics of unemployment.

CSO defines 4 measures of broader unemployment:
PLS1 indicator is unemployed persons plus discouraged workers as a percentage of the Labour Force plus discouraged workers.
PLS2 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force
PLS3 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training.
PLS4 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training plus part-time underemployed persons as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training.

Since all exclude training, we can add those on State programmes into PLS4 to arrive at PLS4+STP - the broadest measure of unemployment.

Here is a chart:



Year on year through Q1 2013:

  • Standard unemployment (PLS1) declined 1.4% from 16.0% in Q1 2012 to 14.6% in Q1 2013. This is good news, made even better by realising that Q1 2013 reading stood at the lowest level since Q1 2010 when it was 14.2%.
  • Adding potential additional labour force to the PLS1 we have PLS2 measure, which in Q1 2013 was 16.0%, down 1% o n Q1 2012 and marking the lowest reading since Q1 2010 when it was registering 15.1%.
  • PLS3 is the above unemployment plus others who want a job, not available & not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training. This measure stood at 18.0 in Q1 2013, down on 18.8% in Q1 2012 (-0.8% y/y) and bang-on identical to the levels in Q1 2011.
  • Last official measure reported by CSO, PLS4 combines PLS3 and those who are underemployed (in part-time employment, but are seeking full-time employment). PLS4 in Q1 2013 was 25.0% - identical to Q1 2012 and up on Q1 2011 when it stood at 23.7%. Thus, once underemployed are added into the equation, Irish unemployment stood still over the last 12 months. This is not great by any means.
  • Finally, I compute PLS4+ State Training Programmes participants by combining QNHS data with Live Register. In Q1 2013, PLS4+STP measure stood at 29.0%, up 0.7% on Q1 2012 and marking the highest historical point for any quarter on the record (previous record was recoded at 28.991% in Q3 2012, which compares against Q1 2013 level of 28.994%).


Chart 2 shows Q1 2013 measures relative to their historical peaks.



Overall labour force participation rate fell again, this time -0.44% y/y and labour force is now down 162,600 on peak.


Notice: the above numbers do not account for emigration and the above unemployment numbers do not account for those who are of labour force participation age, but are not seeking employment and are no longer registering as being a part of labour force. If gross emigration in 2008-2012 stood around 300,000, and assuming that all of it related to families, taking average participation rate at current 59.5% and applying average size of household to the above emigration numbers implies ca 90,000 emigration for those who otherwise could have been in the labour force. With this number factored in the above numbers change as follows:

  • PLS1 standard unemployment would rise from 312,075 to 401,325 or in percentage terms, from 14.6% to 18.0%
  • PLS2 standard unemployment, plus potential additional labour force numbers would rise from 342,000 to 431,250 or in percentage terms, from 16% to 19.4%
  • PLS3 = PLS2, plus others who want a job, not available & not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training would rise from 384,750 to 474,000 or in percentage terms, from 18% to 21.3%
  • PLS4 combines PLS3 and those who are underemployed (in part-time employment, but are seeking full-time employment) would rise from 534,375 (or 25.0%) to 623,625 (or 18.0%)
  • PLS4 + STP would rise from 619,744 (or 29.0%) to 708,994 (or 31.8%)
With some serious caution we can say that approximately over 700,000 people in this country are now either unemployed, underemployed, on State Training Programmes or have been forced to emigrate by the realities of this crisis. We can also say, with much more clarity, that - per official figures - broad unemployment and underemployment in this country is running at its highest level ever, or 29%. recorded.

Any source

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

10/4/2013: Broader measures of unemployment in Ireland: 2012

Ireland's broader unemployment rates per CSO and adding State Training Programmes participants are as follows:

  • PLS1 indicator is unemployed persons plus discouraged workers as a percentage of the Labour Force plus discouraged workers as of Q4 2012: 14.9%
  • PLS2 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force as of Q4 2012: 16.1%
  • PLS3 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training as of Q4 2012: 18.2%
  • PLS4 indicator is unemployed persons plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training plus part-time underemployed persons as a percentage of the Labour Force plus Potential Additional Labour Force plus others who want a job, who are not available and not seeking for reasons other than being in education or training as of Q4 2012: 24.6%
  • PLS$ indicator including those on State Training Programmes as of Q4 2012: 28.4%


And three charts with dynamics:



Now, y/y changes in percentage points change:
  • PLS1: -0.7 ppt
  • PLS2: -0.6 ppt
  • PLS3: -0.2 ppt
  • PLS4: -0.2 ppt
  • PLS4 and State Training Programmes participants: +0.98 ppt
So one thing is pretty clear: the broader the measure of unemployment we take, the lower is the rate of decline y/y and the smaller is the rate of decline relative to peak. 




Any source