The
alleged failure of the economy to create jobs is an illusion that
stems from a survey of employment conducted each month by the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), commonly known as the payroll
survey. The payroll survey has problems measuring the modern
workforce and contains a unique methodological problem: It
systematically overcounts the jobs of many workers when they change
employers. But worker turnover has declined significantly since the
1990s, artificially deflating payrolls.
Since the recession ended in November
2001, payroll jobs are down by over 700,000, in contrast to the
additional 1.9 million Americans who say they are working,
according to the latest Labor Department household survey. A close
examination of the two surveys suggests that payrolls are missing
something. Congress should not move to protect jobs or meddle in
labor markets if, as the facts show, those markets are functioning
well.
- The payroll
survey double-counts many workers who change jobs and is now
artificially deflated because job turnover is down.
Decelerating turnover in 2002-2003 explains up to 1 million jobs
"lost" in the payroll survey since 2001.
- The payroll
survey does not count the surge in self-employment. The
household survey has recorded a surge of 650,000 self-employed
workers. This number may be even higher if modern workers in
limited liability companies or in consulting positions with
traditional firms are not identifying themselves as
self-employed.
- Revisions of the
payroll survey have frequently been in the millions.
Overestimates of 1 million payroll jobs were common in the early
1990s and also in 2002. Underestimates of 1 million jobs were
common during the 1993-1996 period.
- The disparity
between the two BLS employment surveys is cyclical. The
disparity widens during recessions and narrows during periods of
rapid growth in gross domestic product (GDP). Such variation
strongly suggests a statistical bias in one of the surveys.
- The BLS
household survey indicates record high employment. The
disparity of 3 million jobs (in employment growth) between the
household and payroll surveys since the recovery began is
unprecedented.

Pessimists have tried to defend the
payroll survey because it is bigger and less volatile than
household survey data. The danger in the "bigger is better"
rationale is mistaking quantity for quality. The big sample in the
payroll survey is filled with double-counts and miscounts. The
supposedly high monthly variability in the household survey is no
worse than the large revisions in payroll data, except that revised
payroll variability is historically invisible.
The Modern
Workforce
One could think of the payroll survey as counting all the
"brown-eyed" workers at traditional firms and "blue-eyed" workers
at start-ups. It does not count "green-eyed" individuals who are
self-employed, consult 20 hours a week, or simply home-school their
children.
Further, workers who leave the IBM payroll
for full-time consulting roles with IBM are still likely to
consider themselves IBM employees. Likewise, partners at a limited
liability company (LLC, a new company form) often consider
themselves traditional employees, while the government classifies
them as self-employed. The number of LLCs has swelled from near
zero in 1993 to over 700,000. Clearly, a "hazel-eyed"
workforce--self-employees who consider themselves payroll
"brown-eyes"--is emerging. Yet these consultants and partners, like
every farmer and sole proprietor in America, are considered jobless
by the payroll survey.
Decelerating
Turnover Since 2001
The payroll survey double-counts any individual who
changes jobs during the pay period in which the worker is on two
payrolls. "If a person leaves one job and starts another during a
relatively short time span, they could appear on both employers'
payrolls," said Labor Department economists in late 2003. Constant
turnover means that the payroll survey systematically overestimates
the level of jobs.
Because worker turnover has declined since
1999, the measure of payroll jobs has been deflated by up to 1.77
million jobs. In the two years since the recession ended, gross job
flows are down by 1.2 percent, deflating the payroll survey by 1
million jobs. Thus, a net growth in payroll jobs in the real
economy looks like a job loss in currently published data.
The
bottom line is that either the current payroll data will be revised
significantly or they will not. If they are revised, the household
survey will be essentially vindicated. The more intriguing
possibility is that there are structural problems within the
payroll survey that have only just now surfaced in the wake of the
odd recovery of the "new" economy. The loss of payroll jobs may be
permanent as the workforce shifts to new forms.
Conclusion
Policymakers and analysts should treat payroll data with
caution when making comparisons to employment levels in 2001 and
earlier years. A better measure of employment is the household
survey, and analysts can now point with confidence to the
employment of an additional 1.9 million workers since the recession
ended.
Tim Kane,
Ph.D., is Research Fellow in Macroeconomics in the Center
for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.