> BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 2001:
>
> RELEASED TODAY: In April, 223 metropolitan areas recorded unemployment
> rates below the U.S. average (4.2 percent, not seasonally adjusted), while
> 99 areas registered higher rates, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported
> today. Fourteen metropolitan areas had rates below 2.0 percent. Among the
> nine areas with jobless rates over 10.0 percent, six were in California's
> Central Valley and two were along the Mexican border in other states.
>
> Personal income increased 0.3 percent in April, posting its weakest
> increase since last autumn, according to the Commerce Department.
> Consumer spending, meanwhile, rose 0.4 percent, as weak auto sales were
> offset by solid gains in spending for nondurables and services. After
> adjusting for inflation, spending rose 0.2 percent. The Bureau of
> Economic Affairs data show private wages and salaries rose $21.7 billion
> in April, compared to an increase of $23.8 billion in March (Daily Labor
> Report, page D-1; The Washington Post, page E2).
>
> A brighter view of the future helped lift consumer confidence in May,
> boosting the index by 5.6 points to 115.5, despite some concern over the
> shrinking supply of new jobs, the Conference Board reports. The report by
> the New York-based business research group was taken by analysts as a sign
> that the downward trend in consumer confidence over the previous 6 months
> may have come to an end. Apparently, Americans are adopting a rosier view
> of the country's economic future, despite gradually worsening impressions
> of the job market they face. The number of consumers believing jobs are
> now "hard to get" rose in May to 14.7 percent from 14.2 percent in April,
> while those who consider jobs "plentiful" decreased to 39.5 percent from
> 40.1 percent (Daily Labor Report, page A-7; Associated Press,
> http://www.boston.com/dailyglob.../Consumer_confidence_makes_strong_gain_i
> n_may+.shtm).
>
> Consumer confidence rose in May as Americans refused to let an eroding job
> market cloud their expecations that the economy would pick up, a survey by
> the Conference Board indicated today. While survey participants were
> concerned that jobs were hard to find, they did not pull back on plans to
> buy appliances, cars and homes, the figures showed (Bloomberg News, The
> New York Times, page C9).
>
> The Conference Board's consumer confidence index rose in May, as consumers
> apparently shrugged off the dire predictions and looked to better times
> ahead. In addition, the Commerce Department reported spending rose 0.4
> percent in April, following a 0.2 percent rise in March, and that personal
> income grew, but only 0.3 percent on the heels of a 0.5 percent increase
> in March. The data hinted at the renewed optimism necessary for a quick
> recovery, with rising confidence, income and spending. Consumer spending
> remains one of the crucial supports propping up the lethargic U.S. economy
> (The Wall Street Journal, page A2).
>
> Industrial production around the country fell or suffered a slowdown in
> March compared with a year earlier. Regions that rely on consumer-goods
> manufacturing, including Great Lakes and Southeast states, saw declines in
> the industrial-production index, which measures the output of
> manufacturers, utilities, and mines. Areas that depend more on
> technology-related manufacturing, including Western and New England
> states, fared better. But tech production has been rapidly eroding (The
> Wall Street Journal, page B9).
>
> In the era of the flexible work force, being laid off does not seem as
> though it should be as painful as it once was -- particularly for someone
> with experience and a willingness to learn new skills. However, a recent
> study by Henry S. Farber, a Princeton economist,
> asks workers what they earned in their old jobs and what they make in the
> ones they have found to replace them. The gap between the two salaries
> does, indeed, fluctuate with the economy. In the late 1990's, there was
> virtually no gap, while in the early 1990's, people who had lost their
> jobs had to take pay cuts of more than 10 percent in their new positions.
> But using the data on average wages to estimate what the displaced workers
> would have been making had their original jobs not been eliminated, Farber
> found that layoffs caused about an 11 percent pay cut for most of the last
> 2 decades. In good times, the displaced workers miss out on raises they
> would have received. Someone who was making $40,000 a year when he lost
> his job might find a new one that 3 years later is paying him $40,000
> again. In the meantime, however, the typical person who had been making
> $40,000 and kept his job has received an 11 percent raise to nearly
> $45,000. In bad times, when most workers are receiving only slight pay
> increases, displaced workers actually fall behind where they had been (The
> New York Times, May 27, "Money & Business" section, page 4).
>
> DUE OUT TOMORROW: Mass Layoffs in April 2001
>
application/ms-tnef
