Many Reasons to Doubt the Strength in Employment

Chief Economist Eugenio J. Alemán discusses current economic conditions.

The U.S. labor market continues to be the star of the show, so to speak, for financial markets and for the U.S. economy, delivering an impressive number in September and defying expectations. We remain suspicious of the current strength as we were suspicious (and were shown to be correct after the recent revisions), of past strength. But not because we believe somebody is manipulating the data but because of what we have said for more than 2 years: that the disruptive effects of the pandemic are still reverberating across the economy and giving incorrect signs, in this case, of the U.S. labor market.

In order to gauge the U.S. labor market, we typically use a back of the envelope calculation which is nothing more than the average monthly growth in nonfarm payrolls dating back to the 1940’s. That average is close to 130,000 per month. It is not scientific; it is just an 85-year average. Thus, anything above that measure is judged to be strong and anything below is judged to be weak. The September number is on the very strong side. At the same time, other measures of economic activity are also pointing to a strong economic performance by the U.S. economy so this may not seem like an outlier.

But we also have our ears on the ground, and we hear clients and advisors with also no-so-scientific but highly credible stories of friends and family members having trouble landing a job, with many of those stories including recent university graduates. And we believe many of those stories because there have been clear signs that the labor market is not as strong as portrayed by some of the official statistics.

A recent research piece by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis titled “Fewer openings, harder to get hired: U.S. labor market likely softer than it appears” helps make sense of some of this data.1 The authors concluded that the “official job-vacancy data likely overstate tightness of labor market” and that “adjusting for long-term up-trend in vacancies shows U.S. Labor market has much more slack.” That is, they argue that what is happening today is not considered a structural shift as the above adjustment is consistent with the current business cycle.

The article adds that, “In the context of the Fed’s tighter monetary policy since 2022, open jobs have become less abundant, leading to a natural decline in job-finding. This development is the primary factor causing the unemployment rate to increase.” That is, it is possible to have an increase in the rate of unemployment that is void of a large increase in layoffs. When they measure the tightness of the U.S. labor market adjusting for the higher up-trend in vacancies, they find that “The unadjusted series suggests that right now each job seeker faces around 1.4 job openings. The adjusted series suggests the opposite: Each job faces 1.5 job seekers – much worse odds for unemployed workers.” Furthermore, economic research over the years has shown that “layoffs are historically the smaller factor” explaining the rate of unemployment and they find that this is what is occurring today in the U.S. labor market.