OUR HOME

7 Human Resource Strategies to Use in a Recession

(April 5, 2009) By now most economists and armchair experts agree we're in a
recession.

What both the educated and lay pundits find more difficult to agree upon are the
answers to troubling questions like "How deep will the recession be?" and "How long
will it last?"
Estimates for recovery vary wildly from the blackly dismal to the rosily optimistic. It
seems the only thing we can know for sure is that no one really knows.

With the future so uncertain, business publications have taken to promoting the
philosophy that recessions create opportunity... at least for those with the moxie to
make success happen. While this may come across to some as a tired cheerleading
attempt, there is soundness to the ideology. Even during the Great Depression
companies like Kellogg's, Proctor & Gamble and Chevrolet did more than survive,
they excelled. The people who steered their winning course did so with a
combination of courage and inventiveness. In other words, they used moxie.

So where do you start? What kind of changes will ensure your company succeeds?
Below are seven human resource strategies that are easy to implement and can
make a big difference.

1.) Lead with Confidence - During these troubling financial times, it's natural to want
to take the backseat until the road ahead becomes clear. However, companies need
strong leadership to prosper, now more than ever. Providing direction inspires
confidence in your employees and helps build a faithful staff. Businesses that lead
effectively now will retain loyal staff to meet their present and future challenges.

2.) Communicate effectively - Making sure people have the information they need is
the foundation for any good relationship. Being honest and open with employees is
especially important at a time when they may be dealing with serious concerns
outside of the office. Present worries might include a laid off spouse, the possibility
of their own layoff, fears about not being able to pay the bills, etc. As their leader
you have the responsibility to lessen any stress they might be feeling by
communicating openly about the outlook for staff members at your company. Don't
forget to communicate frequently because your employees' financial positions
might be changing quickly right now.

3.) Recruit purposefully - The anticipated global shortage of workers has not gone
away: it has just been postponed. The reason? Baby boomers are choosing to work
a little longer because their retirement savings have been deflated. Once the
market comes back fully, you should expect a mass exodus as the boomers leave
the workforce. Companies who make severe staffing cuts and don't keep their HR
people connected to potential hires will be caught severely short staffed. Savvy
companies have a great opportunity right now to hire talented people who have
been down-sized by other organizations.
4.) Make cuts strategically - Consider outsourcing the functions you can to help
reduce costs, but don't forget to take good care of any employees you might
eliminate. Generous packages create goodwill and increase loyalty from those who
remain. What's more, the departing employees just might be more willing to return
to work when times are better and your company faces the global staffing
shortages that the recession postponed. Generous packages might seem out of the
question in tight times but you should give serious consideration to offering the
maximum that you can. Your company will be better able to recruit new staff in the
future if its reputation is bolstered by how it treated people during the 2009
recession.

5.) Be strategic about delivering PD - Use your slower times to sharpen the skills,
technical and personal, of your employees. This will help keep staff members
engaged and equip them to provide the exceptional service that can sustain your
company now and contribute to its prosperity later (see 6).

6.) Take great care of your customers - Remember the days when you attended
networking events to stay connected, while secretly hoping you would not get too
many new engagements because you did not know where you would find the staff,
time or energy to provide the service? It all seems like a distant memory but it was
probably less than 12 months ago.

What most business owners wouldn't do if they could just have that problem again!

Instead you're seeing business decline and you're wondering how to regain it. Part
of the answer is in training your people to be customer service specialists. Step
back to the times when you only hired people who would go the extra mile to give
your customers exceptional experiences with your company. Re-new your
company's customer focus now!

7.) Avoid layoffs with creative strategies - Before you cut staff, consider alternative
ways to save money while still saving jobs. A day off without pay, work sharing
arrangements, worker sharing with other companies, salary cut-backs, government
assistance programs - these are only a few of the numerous possibilities that may
work for you and your employees. Get creative!
Whether you consider yourself to have moxie or not, the current recession calls for
courageous and inventive thinking. Implementing ideas like the seven above can
not only help your company weather this global storm, but position it for full sail
ahead when the storm has passed.

Recruitment during Recession

Recruitment during recession seems a strange idea or even a stupid move.

Normally, a downturn should be a state where everything in the business should be
in freeze and have to wait until the storm is over. So the first challenge of the
recruitment personnel is to convince management that a hiring freeze is not proper
and may even be disadvantageous to the company. Once the go signal is given the
recruitment personnel should keep in mind that these are not normal times and
therefore he has so many aspects to consider for the good of the business.

Any kind of business must have a continuous search for talent because talented
workers are like well-performing parts of the business machine. Antiquated and low
performers need to be changed. Recession could even be a favorable time for
recruitment because there is fare chance that other businesses might release even
their talented pool. So, recruiters may simply go on cherry picking.

Recruitment during a recession is a strategic move. Recession is seen by several

companies as an opportunity to be almost at level with those who already had an
edge over them during normal times. The budget cuts and layoffs implemented by
competitors may work to the advantage of companies which made the unusual
move of recruiting for the best there is during bad times. It’s almost like playing a
game against a team who has no more reserved players and fatigue could tear
them out.
Hiring could be a long and short term marketing strategy. During a recession there
would be a lot of options for hiring and lot of candidates to choose from. Boosting
your marketing personnel capacity should put you in a better position to increase
productivity and establish a good standing for your company.

Economic pressures during a recession are a double-edged sword. It cuts into your
business through increases in productivity costs and it cuts inputs. This is why
logically business has to cut down on productivity cost by a freeze in hiring and
even layoffs. This route is an easy one and does not in any way prove the skill,
aggressiveness and creativity of the company – qualities of a robust and reliable
business which banks and financial institutions are very willing to be a partner.

Of course, prior to any strategic move, there should be a careful analysis of the
business situation and relative aspects like suppliers, prospects for new products,
adjustments needed and where to focus your efforts during the hard times. Only
then can you identify the type of recruits you will hire.

Reports show that online recruitment has dramatically dropped these times except
a few businesses, like IT which still register a modest increase. It is probably an
indication that companies are being very cautious about recruitment during the
downturn and are still carefully weighing their options before going ahead with
recruitment.
Recruitment during a recession is a sound economic advice which has been
scientifically studied. There are many who have claimed that it really worked. An
economic downturn is a real test for business.

September 3, 2010
Employment from the BLS household and payroll surveys:
summary of recent trends
This report is updated monthly in conjunction with the release of the Employment Situation. The release
dates are available on the BLS website.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has two monthly surveys that measure employment levels
and
trends: the Current Population Survey (CPS), also known as the household survey, and the
Current
Employment Statistics (CES) survey, also known as the payroll or establishment survey.
Employment estimates from both the household and payroll surveys are published in the
Employment Situation news release each month. These estimates differ because the surveys have
distinct definitions of employment and distinct survey and estimation methods. (See the
comparison of the surveys on page 4.) This report is intended to help data users better understand
the differences in the surveys’ employment measures as well as divergences that sometimes
occur
in their trends.
Both the payroll and household surveys are needed for a complete picture of the labor market.
The
payroll survey provides a highly reliable gauge of monthly change in nonfarm payroll
employment.
The household survey provides a broader picture of employment including agriculture and the
self
employed.
Latest trends in payroll and household survey employment
Seasonally adjusted, numbers in thousands
1 Payroll survey estimates for July and August 2010 are preliminary and subject to revision.
2 The effects of population control revisions in January 2000 and January of 2003-10 have been smoothed out in the
historical household survey employment estimates used here; thus, the changes shown above will differ from those
calculated using the official estimates in the Employment Situation and in the public database available on the BLS
website. See Appendix for further explanation.
3 This is a research series created from household survey employment to be more similar in concept and definition to
payroll survey employment. Household survey employment is adjusted by subtracting agriculture and related
employment, nonagricultural self employed, unpaid family and private household workers, and workers absent
without
pay from their jobs, and then adding nonagricultural wage and salary multiple jobholders. The effects of population
control revisions also have been smoothed out in the historical data in this series.
4 The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) has designated
December 2007 as the most recent business cycle peak. NBER has not yet determined an endpoint for the recession
that
began in December 2007.
Reference period
Payroll survey
employment 1
Household survey
employment 2
Adjusted household
survey employment 3
Over-the-month change
July-August 2010 -54 290 369
Over-the-year change
August 2009-2010 229 55 245
Since the business cycle peak 4
December 2007-August 2010 -7,640 -5,753 -5,860
September 3, 2010
2
Numbers in thousands

Chart 1. Household and payroll survey employment,

seasonally adjusted, 1994-2010
100,000
105,000
110,000
115,000
120,000
125,000
130,000
135,000
140,000
145,000
150,000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
100,000
105,000
110,000
115,000
120,000
125,000
130,000
135,000
140,000
145,000
150,000
Adjusted
household
survey
Payroll
survey
Household
survey
NOTE: The household series presented here has been smoothed for population control revisions. The “adjusted”
household series has been adjusted to an employment concept more similar to the payroll survey’s and smoothed
for population control revisions. Shaded areas represent recessions as determined by the National Bureau of
Economic Research (NBER). NBER has not yet determined an endpoint for the recession that began in December
2007.
SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 3, 2010.
Chart 1 shows employment from the household and payroll surveys from January 1994 through
the
most recent month available.
Because the household survey has a broader employment definition than the payroll survey, the
household employment level (green line) exceeds that of the payroll survey (blue line).
For research and comparison purposes, BLS creates an “adjusted” household survey employment
series (red line) that is more similar in concept and definition to payroll survey employment. The
adjusted household survey employment series is calculated by subtracting from total
employment
agriculture and related employment, nonagricultural self employed, unpaid family and private
household workers, and workers absent without pay from their jobs, and then adding
nonagricultural wage and salary multiple jobholders. The resulting series is then seasonally
adjusted. (See Appendix for data series.)
The adjusted household survey employment tracks much more closely with the payroll survey
measure; nonetheless, occasional trend discrepancies occur. For example, there is a noticeable
period from the late 1990s until the 2001 recession when payroll employment grew at a faster
rate
than household survey employment. Possible causes of employment trend differences are
discussed
on pages 5-8.
September 3, 2010
3
Numbers in thousands

Chart 2. Household and payroll survey employment,

seasonally adjusted, March 2001-August 2010
126,000
128,000
130,000
132,000
134,000
136,000
138,000
140,000
142,000
144,000
146,000
148,000
150,000
Mar-01
Nov-01
Dec-02
Dec-03
Dec-04
Dec-05
Dec-06
Dec-07
Dec-08
Dec-09
Aug-10
126,000
128,000
130,000
132,000
134,000
136,000
138,000
140,000
142,000
144,000
146,000
148,000
150,000
Adjusted
household
survey
Payroll survey
Household
survey
NOTE: The household series presented here has been smoothed for population control revisions. The “adjusted”
household series has been adjusted to an employment concept more similar to the payroll survey’s and smoothed
for population control revisions. Shaded areas represent recessions as determined by the National Bureau of
Economic Research (NBER). NBER has not yet determined an endpoint for the recession that began in December
2007.
SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 3, 2010.
Chart 2 shows the same payroll and household employment series as chart 1, but begins with the
March 2001 peak of the previous recession period. The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) has designated December 2007 as the most
recent
business cycle peak. NBER has not yet determined an endpoint for the recession that began in
December 2007.
September 3, 2010
4
Summary comparison of survey concepts, definitions, and methodologies
Major features and distinctions of the two surveys are shown below. Additional information on
the
methodologies of the two surveys can be found in the Quick Guide to Methods and Measurement
Issues on the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/bls/empsitquickguide.htm.
Comparison by: Household Survey (CPS) Payroll Survey (CES)
Universe Civilian noninstitutional
population age 16 and over
Nonfarm wage and salary
jobs
Type of survey Monthly sample survey of
approximately 60,000
households
Monthly sample survey of
about 150,000 businesses
and government agencies
covering approximately
390,000 establishments
Major outputs Labor force, employment,
unemployment, and associated
rates with demographic detail
Employment, hours, and
earnings with industry and
geographic detail
Reference period Calendar week that includes
the 12th of the month
Employer pay period that
includes the 12th of the
month (could be weekly,
biweekly, monthly or other)
Employment concept Estimate of employed persons
(multiple jobholders are
counted only once)
Includes individuals absent
from work without pay
Estimate of jobs
(multiple jobholders counted
for each nonfarm payroll job)
Includes only those receiving
pay for the reference pay
period
Employment definition
differences
Includes the unincorporated
self employed, unpaid family
workers, agriculture and
related workers, private
household workers, and
workers absent without pay
Excludes all of the groups
listed at left, except for the
logging component of
agriculture and related
industries
Size of over-the-month
change in employment
required for a statistically
significant movement
+436,000 +101,000
(updated annually in
February)
Benchmark adjustments to
survey results
No direct benchmark for
employment. Adjustments to
underlying population base
revised annually to intercensal
estimates, and every 10 years
to the decennial census
Employment benchmarked
annually to employment
counts derived primarily
from Unemployment
Insurance (UI) tax records
September 3, 2010
5
Comparing employment trends from the two surveys
Although the payroll and household surveys track well over the long term, periodic discrepancies
in
trend have occurred. The following sections summarize some issues with the surveys that are
important to consider when comparing employment changes and trends from the two sources.
Sampling error
Both surveys are subject to sampling error. The payroll survey has a much larger sample size
than
the household survey. The payroll survey’s active sample covers approximately 390,000
business
establishments of all sizes representing about one-third of total nonfarm employment. The
household survey is much smaller at 60,000 households, covering a very small fraction of total
employed persons. Household survey employment is therefore subject to larger sampling error,
about four times that of the payroll survey on a monthly basis.
When looking at short-term trends in either survey, especially over-the-month changes, it is
therefore essential to assess the statistical significance of the change. (The sizes of the over-
themonth
changes in employment needed to be statistically significant are shown on page 4.) When
comparing the two series over longer periods of time, however, other factors also need to be
considered; some of these are discussed below.
Payroll survey benchmark revisions
Benchmark revisions are a standard part of the payroll survey estimation process. The
benchmark
revision represents a once-a-year re-anchoring of the sample-based employment estimates to full
employment counts primarily available through unemployment insurance (UI) tax records that
nearly all employers are required to file with State Employment Security Agencies. Following
standard BLS methodology, the sample-based estimate for the month of March is replaced by the
March UI-based employment level and estimates for the 12 months preceding and the months
following the March benchmark reference month are recalculated. Estimates for the 12 months
preceding the March benchmark are recalculated by wedging back the difference between the
UIbased
employment level and the sample-based estimate: 1/12 of the difference is applied to April of
the prior year, 2/12 to May, and so forth, through February of the benchmark year which receives
11/12 of the difference. Estimates for April of the benchmark year forward are recalculated by
applying the over-the-month changes from the sample to the new benchmark level, along with
recomputed net birth/death factors. (See “New business births” below.)
The payroll survey’s most recent benchmark—to March 2009 employment records—resulted in
a
downward revision of 902,000 (930,000 on a seasonally adjusted basis). Detailed information
about this and previous benchmarks can be found on the BLS website at
http://www.bls.gov/ces/tables.htm#benchmark.
continued on next page
September 3, 2010
6
Payroll survey benchmark, continued
With regard to the benchmark source data, BLS issued a report in 2004 evaluating the timeliness
of
new business enrollments into the UI system. The report, “Assessing the Timeliness of Business
Births in BLS Establishment Statistics,” is available on the BLS website at
http://www.bls.gov/cew/eta581study.pdf.
New business births in the payroll survey
The payroll survey sample cannot include new firms immediately. These are incorporated with a
lag. In the interim, a model-based estimate is used each month to account for employment
resulting
from new firm births. A summary of how the birth/death model improves the payroll survey
estimates is on the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/pdf/opbils70.pdf.
Technical information about the birth/death model methodology used in the payroll survey
estimates can be found at http://www.bls.gov/ces/cesbdtech.htm. The latest monthly adjustments
resulting from the birth/death model are available at http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm.
Population control adjustments to the household survey
Population controls are used to weight the household survey sample results to reflect the overall
level of the U.S. population. The population controls are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau.
They are derived from decennial census information and, between census years, from
administrative
and other data. There are limitations with the intercensal population controls due primarily to the
difficulties associated with estimating the net international migration component of population
change. The population controls contributed significantly to discrepancies between payroll and
household survey employment in the 1980s and 1990s when the household survey showed less
growth than the payroll survey due to understated population growth in the intercensal controls.
continued on next page
September 3, 2010
7
Population control adjustments, continued
With the release of January data each year, BLS incorporates population control adjustments into
the household survey estimates. The adjustments reflect the Census Bureau’s review of the
components of population change—births, deaths, and net international migration—and of the
methodology used to estimate population. BLS typically does not revise the historical household
survey data series to reflect new population controls because of the extensive effort needed to
completely revise and verify all of the time series produced, and because the revisions would be
negligible for most series. (Information on the specific effects of population control adjustments
made since Census 2000 is found on page 9 of this report and on the BLS website at
http://www.bls.gov/cps/documentation.htm#pop.)
Substantial revisions to the population controls in some years have created historical data
comparability problems in some household survey data series, particularly the labor force and
employment levels. In December 2003, BLS outlined a method to “smooth” such level shifts in
major CPS data series as a convenience to its data users. The method distributed the January
2000
and January 2003 level shifts incrementally over a multiyear period rather than incorporating the
entire change in January of the years that they were implemented. See the Appendix,
“Interpreting
household survey employment data with population control adjustments,” on pages 9-11 of this
report.
Worker classification in the household survey
For research and comparison purposes, BLS creates an “adjusted” household survey employment
series that is more similar in concept and definition to payroll survey employment. (This adjusted
household survey employment series is featured in the charts and comparisons in this report.)
The
adjusted household survey employment series is calculated by subtracting from total
employment
agriculture and related employment, nonagricultural self employed, unpaid family and private
household workers, and workers absent without pay from their jobs, and then adding the number
of
nonagricultural wage and salary multiple jobholders.
This adjustment process is imperfect, however, because precise data are not available in some
cases
to make the best possible adjustment. For example, some independent contractors mistakenly
report
themselves as wage and salary workers, rather than as self employed, in the household survey.
This
leads to some overstatement of the adjusted household survey employment. Separately, the
adjustment for multiple jobholding adds the number of workers whose primary job is
nonagricultural wage and salary, but not necessarily their secondary job. Some may in fact be
self
employed in their secondary job. This, too, will cause some overstatement of the adjusted
employment. On the other hand, BLS does not make an adjustment to account for the number of
multiple jobholders with three or more jobs; the adjustment process presumes all multiple
jobholders have only two jobs. This introduces some understatement into the adjusted household
survey employment. These types of worker classification issues limit the ability of BLS to fully
reconcile the two employment measures.
September 3, 2010
8
“Off-the-books” employment
Workers who are paid “off-the-books” are not reported in the payroll survey. The household
survey
could possibly include some of these workers, but BLS cannot determine the extent to which
they
might be reflected in household survey employment.
Job changing
Employment estimates from the payroll survey are a count of jobs, unlike the household survey
which provides a count of employed persons. If a person changes jobs and is on the payrolls of
two
employers during their pay periods that include the 12th of the month, both jobs would be
counted
in the payroll survey estimates.
If the rate of job-to-job movement changes substantially over time, it could impact trends
produced
from the payroll survey. While there is no method to directly measure effects from job changing,
BLS researched this issue using job change rates from the household survey. The findings from
this
research are provided in the report “Effects of Job Changing on Payroll Survey Employment
Trends” at http://www.bls.gov/ces/cesjobch.pdf.
Research on trend discrepancies
• Research that examined micro-level household survey data linked to employer-reported
administrative data to identify sources of discrepancy between household and payroll
employment was published in a National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working
Paper in March 2009. The paper is available from the NBER website at
http://www.nber.org/papers/w14805.
• An article was published in the February 2006 Monthly Labor Review that discusses BLS
research and findings on the divergence between the two surveys. The article is available on the
BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2006/02/art2full.pdf.
• A summary of BLS research into the late 1990s discrepancy was presented to the Federal
Economic Statistics Advisory Committee (FESAC) in October 2003. The paper is available on
the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/bls/fesacp2101703.pdf.
• In 2005, a FESAC subcommittee carried out its own review of the two surveys’ employment
measures at the request of BLS. The FESAC report to BLS is available on the BLS website at
http://www.bls.gov/bls/fesacp2120905.pdf.
September 3, 2010
9
Appendix: Interpreting household survey employment data with population control
adjustments
The adjustments to the population controls introduced into the household survey each year
represent
the cumulative over- or under-estimation of population since the last decennial census. For
example, the January 2000 adjustment represented the cumulative underestimation over the 10-
year
period since the 1990 census, whereas the January 2010 adjustment represented the cumulative
overestimation during the 10-year period since Census 2000.
The following table shows the employment effect of population control adjustments made in
January of 2000 and 2003-10.
Effect on household survey employment from
population control adjustments, 2000-10
(In thousands)
January 2000…………………… +1,555
January 2003…………………… +576
January 2004…………………… -409
January 2005…………………… -45
January 2006…………………… -123
January 2007…………………… +153
January 2008…………………… -598
January 2009…………………… -407
January 2010…………………… -243
The usual BLS practice is to introduce the entire population adjustment amount into the January
data each year, without making retroactive revisions to apply the adjustment back to the
decennial
census base year. In years when the population adjustments are large, this results in significant
shifts in the January labor force and employment levels that can be problematic for data analysis.
When calculating changes in the employment level over certain time periods, for example, a
level
shift due to a population adjustment may distort the actual trend. Consequently, as a convenience
to
its data users, BLS created a research series that smoothes out the level shifts in employment
resulting from the January 2000 and January 2003-10 population control adjustments. The
population adjustments are wedged back incrementally to the decennial census base year, rather
than incorporating the entire change in January of the years that they were implemented.
This household survey employment research series was used in Charts 1 and 2 and the box on
page
1 to provide a clearer picture for analysis. The full series, 1990-2009, is shown in the following
table (see next page). Users should be aware that this research series will not match the official
household survey employment estimates in BLS publications and on the BLS website.
September 3, 2010
10
Household Survey Employment Smoothed for Population Controls, Seasonally Adjusted,
January 1990-December 2009
(In thousands)
January February March April May June July August September October November December
1990 119,093 119,082 119,238 118,898 119,209 119,052 118,891 118,894 118,628 118,651 118,432 118,379
1991 118,089 117,915 117,823 118,293 117,634 117,845 117,785 117,712 118,169 118,052 118,033 117,740
1992 118,265 118,050 118,454 118,748 118,709 118,764 119,071 119,195 119,101 119,020 119,280 119,413
1993 119,503 119,715 119,995 119,938 120,594 120,781 120,970 121,373 121,081 121,363 121,722 122,031
1994 122,547 122,679 122,534 122,908 123,497 123,277 123,362 124,013 124,372 124,811 125,230 125,448
1995 125,402 125,681 125,720 125,722 125,207 125,321 125,629 125,677 125,972 126,241 126,052 125,963
1996 126,013 126,542 126,779 126,924 127,189 127,562 127,922 128,161 128,540 128,909 128,801 128,904
1997 129,358 129,370 129,981 130,247 130,584 130,544 130,970 131,172 131,194 131,368 131,859 131,898
1998 131,958 132,053 132,072 132,484 132,614 132,545 132,643 132,718 133,333 133,359 133,655 133,994
1999 134,436 134,276 134,381 134,402 134,775 134,855 134,905 135,097 135,227 135,529 135,862 136,092
2000 136,554 136,589 136,687 137,252 136,607 136,913 136,499 136,626 136,852 137,042 137,272 137,559
2001 137,718 137,548 137,714 137,226 137,014 136,791 136,984 136,150 136,750 136,292 136,133 135,938
2002 135,587 136,319 136,054 135,998 136,406 136,278 136,271 136,558 137,150 136,851 136,360 136,261
2003 136,656 136,700 136,632 136,809 136,700 136,924 136,590 136,644 136,683 137,035 137,451 137,417
2004 137,873 137,930 137,829 138,043 138,202 138,510 138,878 138,883 138,785 139,016 139,501 139,383
2005 139,535 139,663 139,919 140,504 140,845 140,938 141,237 141,631 141,586 141,720 141,660 141,900
2006 142,400 142,690 142,999 143,018 143,320 143,570 143,420 143,809 143,964 144,446 144,619 145,043
2007 144,997 144,995 145,306 144,617 144,869 144,982 144,818 144,567 145,059 144,741 145,323 145,003
2008 145,839 145,578 145,580 145,706 145,418 145,159 144,901 144,568 144,397 144,048 143,276 142,554
2009 141,993 141,457 140,624 140,669 140,204 139,803 139,580 139,195 138,529 138,002 138,138 137,548
NOTE: This series reflects seasonally adjusted CPS employment that has been revised from January 1990-December 2009 to smooth out the
effects
of population control revisions introduced in January 2000 and January of 2003-10.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 5, 2010.
September 3, 2010
11
The “adjusted” household survey employment research series used in Charts 1 and 2 and the box
on
page 1 is a variation of the smoothed household survey employment research series that has been
adjusted to be more similar in concept and definition to payroll employment. That series, which
begins in January 1994 and is updated monthly, is provided below.
Household Survey Employment Smoothed for Population Controls and Adjusted to a Payroll Concept, Seasonally Adjusted,
January 1994-August 2010
(In thousands)
January February March April May June July August September October November December
1994 113,684 113,268 113,797 114,366 114,603 114,661 114,826 115,260 115,800 116,101 116,345 116,565
1995 116,763 117,097 117,018 117,094 117,226 117,443 117,750 117,667 117,720 117,766 117,661 117,817
1996 116,727 118,208 118,582 118,144 118,873 119,334 119,547 120,141 120,435 120,760 121,146 120,716
1997 120,629 121,144 121,532 122,202 122,348 122,804 123,192 123,238 123,276 123,553 123,839 123,888
1998 123,888 124,044 124,253 124,055 124,499 124,470 124,362 124,848 125,252 125,292 125,820 126,380
1999 126,638 126,653 126,721 126,680 126,798 126,833 126,904 127,166 127,296 127,784 128,227 128,331
2000 128,823 128,925 128,936 129,988 129,181 129,338 129,345 129,404 129,495 130,045 129,990 130,366
2001 130,068 130,069 130,044 129,667 129,916 129,658 129,987 129,345 129,490 128,848 128,707 128,681
2002 128,585 129,470 129,161 129,315 129,220 129,331 128,995 129,847 130,021 129,392 128,768 129,105
2003 129,410 129,670 129,491 129,715 129,557 129,567 129,097 129,202 128,954 129,348 129,534 129,404
2004 130,201 130,283 130,617 130,561 130,891 131,131 131,416 131,327 131,558 131,860 132,022 132,132
2005 131,834 132,159 132,352 132,822 133,163 133,548 133,942 134,262 134,358 134,361 134,375 134,696
2006 134,847 135,011 135,125 134,860 135,846 135,691 135,966 136,235 136,551 136,945 137,182 137,475
2007 137,427 137,408 137,617 137,018 137,669 137,596 137,567 137,564 137,832 137,783 138,331 137,879
2008 138,191 138,091 138,234 138,322 138,164 138,176 137,684 137,750 137,318 137,317 136,297 135,729
2009 135,124 134,800 133,946 133,845 133,156 132,700 132,739 131,774 131,264 130,936 130,779 130,252
2010 131,093 131,071 131,539 131,921 132,328 131,965 131,650 132,019
NOTE: This series represents not seasonally adjusted household survey employment that has been adjusted to an employment concept more
similar
to the payroll survey by subtracting from total employment agriculture and related employment, the self employed, unpaid family and private
household
workers, and workers on unpaid absences and then adding nonagricultural wage and salary multiple jobholders. The data were then revised to
smooth out
the effects of population control revisions introduced in January 2000 and January of 2003-10. The resulting employment series was then
seasonally
adjusted.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 3, 2010.
http://www.bls.gov/web/ces_cps_trends.pdf

Potential Growth Remains Healthy

• Following sustained period of strong global expansion, now underperforming

– Little aggregate impact on global potential

• Critical issues: the necessary adjustments to resume potential

– Private sector : prices, activities, etc.

– Financial market : asset prices, interest rates, exchange rates, etc.

– Government policies

• Sharpest declines in economic activity are occurring now

• US will lead global rebound, beginning late 2009, but

• Dramatic shifts in expectations, risk preferences will redefine economic and financial
behavior