The latest UI claims, Homebase, & Kronos numbers are consistent with payrolls coming in at -67K not-seasonally-adjusted for November, and -386K seasonally-adjusted.
There was a "pop" in the latest week of the Kronos data, but 1) it was the week after the reference week, and 2) because Kronos allows its sample to change over time, it may reflect new customers rather than employment changes at existing ones.
The St. Louis Fed uses Kronos microdata to calculate a "chained" version that keeps sample composition constant, but they don't have the latest week yet. Will be interesting to see if that rise is robust.
Just as a robustness check, I ran my model as if the week of Nov 21 were the CPS/CES reference week. Predicted jobs shifts to positive, but still very weak (+138K SA).
These are not the only metrics we have, and some data is coming in more positively, e.g. Markit PMIs. We also don't have this data for last year, so we can't be confident that Homebase & Kronos are picking up holiday-related hiring up.
But it's a cautious signal nonetheless.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🚨🚨🚨
A slew of recent data is consistent with slow or even negative jobs growth in November. A quick thread.
November is typically a month when we expect raw, non-seasonally-adjusted employment data to *strengthen* (due, among other things, to hiring up for the holidays).
So when the unadjusted data is weakening or shrinking in November, that's an especially bad sign.
Data from Homebase, a private scheduling firm, suggest shrinking employment b/t mid-Oct and mid-Nov. Kronos, a different firm, shows slightly positive but weak growth.
Both, in tandem w/ UI claims, are consistent with -143K jobs in Nov not-seasonally-adjusted, or -461K adjusted.
Initial claims rise modestly week over week, were ~1.1 million last week.
The recent declines in regular UI recipients, properly including the extended PEUC and EB programs, may be slowing.
And to punctuate that point: ~230,000 workers looked like they left regular state UI at the end of October, but actually just exhausted their regular benefits and transferred to the federal extended PEUC program.
On the one hand, the US recovery so far has been durably positive & modest
On the other hand, b/t the COVID surge, the cold winter weather, exhausted household savings, the end of moratoria on student loans/foreclosures/evictions, & UI expirations, we're piling on a lot of risks
And add on the risks of business closures & state/local cuts. There's a lot that can hurt us economically between now and wide vaccine distribution.
The wrong question to ask is whether the recovery is "self-sustaining" without further fiscal support. I am less confident in this assessment now, but it's still quite possible that if we got no fiscal package most economic data would continue coming in north of zero.
The good news is that the rate in which employed workers are going directly into *permanent* layoff has fallen, though is still elevated [left].
The bad news is that the rate at which already-nonemployed workers are *becoming* permanent layoffs is high and rising [right].
Meanwhile, hourly wage growth among workers keeping their jobs is stable [L], but weekly wage growth has fallen [R], a sign that employed workers are getting fewer hours.
The benefit cliff on December 31 is an economic setback when we least need one -- the winter months when businesses in many of the areas of the country will have a harder time staying open -- not to mention devastating for the affected workers.
Unlike the 7/31 expiration of the emergency $600/week FPUC, which was larger in aggregate dollar terms than this cliff, the 12/31 cliff will cut a deeper wound, because for many workers they won't get *any* aid after expiration; they still got base benefits when the FPUC expired.
It's less likely too that prior savings will be there to sustain the spending of unemployed workers; they've been drawing down their savings since the expiration of the $300/week LWA in mid-September. Many workers are likely to have exhausted their pandemic savings by New Year's.
The good news is: we're still adding jobs. +638K would be a gang-busters report by pre-COVID standards.
The bad news is: those standards don't apply now. We're only half dug out of our hole, and each month's pace of jobs growth has been slower than the last since July.
We're still 10.1 million jobs below where we were in February. We're 11.6 million jobs below where we'd expect to have been absent COVID.
As a pure illustration, if October's pace continued in perpetuity--and it might keep slowing--it'd take 1.5 - 2.5 years to fully recover.