Chuck: A lot of good points. The main one is that census counts workers
not jobs. I receive bulletins re multi job holding from BLS on an
occasional basis. Yes, men's lf partic has been declining. The lf rate is
rising per person is still rising I think, but because of the declining size
of hh's the number per hh has stayed about the same. Vehicles per worker
has been growing as well. Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Purvis <CPurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov>
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:44 AM
Subject: RE: [CTPP] Changes in Workers per HH and Vehicles per HH (longpost)
David raises good points about moonlighting and
average HH size....
1. "Moonlighting" data is collected for the Bureau of Labor Statistics as
part of the Current Population Survey. I recall an article in the BLS
journal "Monthly Labor Review" from several years ago, and it is available
online at:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1997/03/art1abs.htm
Also, some interesting time use articles in the current edition of the
Monthly
Labor Review, at:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/mlrhome.htm
In a nutshell, moonlighting rates (multiple job holding rates) have
fluctuated both
upwards and downwards since they began collecting the data
in 1970. It looks like they're fairly stable in the early 1990s, at about
6.2 to 6.4 percent of employed persons with more than one job.
I still think it's very plausible that this moonlighting rate increased
between
1996-2000 in response to our economic boom and a slow growth in our
labor force. And I would definitely agree that understanding the multiple
job holding is important in reconciling job growth with labor force growth.
By the way, the census journey-to-work is basically about the principal or
main (or
is it "usual") job reported by the census respondent, not all jobs
that a respondent may have. So, workers at place of work ARE NOT an estimate
of total employment, but are LOWER than "true" total employment because of
a) weekly absenteeism; and b) moonlighting jobs held by 6.0 percent or so of
workers.
Moonlighting data can also be extracted from HH travel surveys by
examining the
extent of multiple locations for work activities, if not by
collecting data such as a simple tally of the number of paid jobs held by
each person in the household.
2. Yes, average household size in the US declined from 2.63 p/hh in 1990
to 2.59
p/hh in 2000. What I'm suspecting, looking at population age 16+,
age 16-64, and age 65+, and civilian employed by sex, is that the MALE labor
force participation rates ARE LEVELLING OFF, if NOT LOWER, for selected age
cohorts. This is a guess based on the growth in female civilian employed
(14.4%) which is faster than the growth in male civilian employed (10.2%).
Chuck
>> David Abrams <dabrams(a)mrgcog.org>
07/08/02 03:27PM >>>
>We are
thinking that there may be a major increase in persons working two jobs.
If
this is more widespread than Albuquerque it could have
considerable
consequences. To my knowledge there is not data collected on workers
working multiple wage jobs.
>>A question for Chuck Purvis: Did you control for the change in
household
size when you compared the workers to households
ratios for 1990 and 2000.