Employment Recovery
Part-Time Employment Recovery
Full-Time Employment Recovery
Full-time employment is up more in raw numbers but lags on a percentage basis.
Four months in, the part-time employment recovery is 68.1% vs 47.9% for full-time employment. Overall, the recovery is only 54.8%.
Part-time employment will recover first and then some. In a few months, it may exceed 100%.
Mish
This assessment sounds pretty accurate. Something to keep in mind is that the lift we’re seeing in part-time employment could correlate with the peak hiring period for summer seasonal workers. With winter approaching it will be interesting to see how these numbers fluctuate. In our business, we don’t carry as many employees moving into the winter months. link to roofingtoledoohio.com
I am doing well working my 15-30 hours per week
of course I am self employed and don’t do HACK WORK
Part time is where it’s at. Being an individual with various professional skills, whatever I agree to do for someone is by agreement. Often I charge nothing. If they have some currency I prefer them to pay what they consider fair. They might be more generous than what I would ask. If I get nothing, I don’t care anyway. I just like to get something done well. It is a gig economy. I pity anyone that takes ’employment’ seriously.
Why would you work for free ? I thought the whole idea of the gig economy is to get paid.
If you are financially secure and bored. There are many people who aren’t comfortable being alone. They mentally need to be with other people most of the time.
Part time president who played golf for weeks during covid leads to part time economy.
Playing Golf has got to be one of the least destructive things Trump has done since taking office. If playing golf was all being crowned “President” allowed a political hack to do, the world wouldn’t be half the tragedy it currently is. Just imagine if Trump hadn’t spent those hours playing golf and, like his most recent predecessors, entertained himself by bombing and invading stuff instead…..
In a consumption driven economy, these type situation can get nasty quick. Without production of goods it’s very hard to get out of a consumption slump once things start to turn south.
Recessions mean people save witch means consumptions drops witch means more saving and so on and so forth. More jobs are lost witch slows consumption further. It’s a deflationary look with an inflationary outcome.
How is this possible?
Are they digging holes in their backyard or sticking it in their mattress?
How are people preventing this money from being involved in the economy?
In many cases people are paying down debt rather than spending… I’m guessing you would suggest otherwise? Why?
“Recessions mean people save”
So, IOW, recessions mean people are putting wealth aside. Hence getting wealthier and wealthier the longer they go on………
Recovery you say?
NPR Poll: Financial Pain From Coronavirus Pandemic ‘Much, Much Worse’ Than Expected
September 9, 20205:00 AM ET
Tried to reply, but ended up clicking ‘like’.
One must wonder what the poll co-director (do they need more than 1?) was really expecting. For more than 6 months it has been widely discussed and known that the middle class is shrinking in number, a substantial percentage of U.S. households have too much debt/too little savings/both, and those of lesser means tend to have less ability to deal with economic dislocations. A huuuuuge federal relief package didn’t help enough of those in need? gasp
Perhaps the Harvard employee should adjusting their expectations. I’m sitting here unsurprised at the magnitude of economic havoc for the proletariat.
I remember about 30 years ago when highly regarded economists and sociologists were predicting that technology and automation would soon advance to the point where the average person would only have to work for 20 hours a week, or less.
Well, here we are.
We should have been far more advanced in automation than we are today. It is my belief that many hu-mans are dragging their feet, trying to block or defer automation whenever possible for their own personal benefit or the recognition that real automation is going to radically displace many workers.
There are so many examples of work that should have been automated away by now but hasn’t that one has to raise questions.
Stock buybacks have made large capital improvements less appealing.
Would you rather A – make a huge capital investment with a 10 year break even or B – take that money and buy back shares, boosting company metrics immediately.
Super low interest rates distort the cost of money. That stifles innovation while misallocating capital. I read the other day japan hasn’t had a new Fortune 500 company in 20 years(need fact checking).
A. You do the share buyback because you probably aren’t going to be working for the company 10 years from now anyway.
Perhaps a possible solution is to eliminate stock for all company workers? Then they have no reason to be concerned with the stock price when making decisions.
I like the “Super low interest rates distort the cost of money” angle. I’d like to see some MSM articles on this thought.
What you really mean is share buy back to increase your pay when you sell your ceo stock option
The average worker wouldn’t have to work more than 20 hours a week to obtain a 30-years ago lifestyle if everyone actually did real work. Or, even, if a similar share of the population did actual work as did so 30 years ago.
But since the overriding policy in the Fed era, is to steal everything everyone else makes, in order to hand it to a small number, of at best, purely make-working deadweight leeches; all those everyone-elses, will by necessity have to work harder and harder. Not because doing so is necessary to provide for themselves, but because them doing so is necessary to provide “home appreciation” for idle idiots who produce nothing.
As an employer, I have an incentive to keep my highest paid workers furloughed as long as possible, since COVID means our gross is down and isn’t likely to get back to the old normal anytime soon. It isn’t fair, but it’s what makes financial sense for my bottom line a the moment.
That’s just capitalism. That old saying life isn’t far rings true.
In theory your highest paid employees would have the most saved and be the most prepared for this situation but I love in the real world.
“The Recovery is Led by Part-Time, Not Full-Time Employment”
…
… to … avoid …….. health care costs.
MSN a week ago:
“Large employers are finalizing their health plans for 2021, and smaller companies are making decisions about cost and coverage now. The first glimpse into next year’s plans shows a moderate increase in health care costs. Large employers are expecting average health care costs of $15,500 per employee, a 5.3% increase from 2020 – similar to the increase over the past several years, according to the Business Group on Health’s survey of large employers.
…
But insurers and employers are concerned about what may happen to costs in 2021, when people finally get the delayed screenings and deferred care.”
…or not, if they don’t have insurance.
If we all just worked half time, unemployment wouldn’t exist.
The problem with that proposal has always been that people working half-time want/need full-time pay.
Because landlords are not going to lower the cost of their rentals by 50%, hospitals and MD’s and not going to cur by 50%, food is not going to be cut by 50%, etc.
If everybody has half as much money, the market dictates that they have to.
Sure, but it would be the transition to equilibrium that would be a bitch.
Seems better than the current rental income of “nothing “
One of the reasons Economics isn’t taught in school is so that the public will be susceptible to various myths, including the one you just cited, oft repeated by Unions and Progressives.
May I suggest that you can alleviate this deficiency by engaging in some reading on the topic? Henry Hazlitt’s book is a great place to start and can be found and read for free on the Interwebbies.
The fallacy involved here is presuming that there is a fixed amount of work to be done.
Not to mention, you would have to convince every other nation in the world, and their citizens, to go along with the hare-brained scheme. Unless you plan on competing internationally with half the productivity?
And productivity itself is key here… a nation’s wealth and living standard are functions of its productivity. You would be cutting both in half.
Why not just do everything by horse and oxen again lol?
+ a million.
If everyone working half as much somehow made people better off, why not rinse and repeat for another half of that again? And so forth…… until noone worked more than a second and everyone had plenty of jobs?
Lol… if this myth was the goods, none of us should be working more than 1 percent of the week any more–if that–given the tools and tech humans have invented.
There just isn’t a fixed amount of work to be done. There is always more and will always be more.
If you don’t believe me… ask your wife what happens when you get to the bottom of the list.
Agree with your closing line, the shift to part-timing human resources is well-established and an easy way for employers to trim the fat at the expense of the worker (i.e. < 30 hrs/wk).