Part Time America - 110 PT for every 1 FT Job!!!

[edthecynic]

Where did all the wing-nuts go?

 

[EriktheRed]

...his method of comparison is susceptible to creating extreme values. Second, the data set Conover uses, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' "household survey," is far too volatile to draw reliable conclusions from small samples.

Conover takes the number of new part-time jobs created over a six-month period, divided over that period's new full-time jobs. Here's the problem: If the number of new full-time jobs created is close to zero, it doesn't much matter how many part-time jobs are created -- the ratio will still be enormous.

Sure enough, the household-survey data Conover uses reports unusually slow full-time job growth since January: only 130,000 positions, versus 557,000 part-time ones. But this is just regular volatility in the household-survey data, and it’s not common practice among economists to rely on the household survey for just that reason.

Conover, to his credit, acknowledges the issue -- that's why he uses yearly, or in the case of 2013, six-month samples. But it is nowhere near enough to save his methodology. His data comes from a monthly survey of 60,000 households. That may sound like a lot, but it's small enough that no change in employment less than 436,000 people is statistically significant. Combined with his method, the volatility produces extreme yet insignificant results.

Is Obamacare Forcing You to Work Part-Time? - Bloomberg

 

[The Rabbi]

Obamacare was passed March 21, 2010, yet the below graph shows that the growth in part-time jobs and the decline of full-time jobs began sooner.

Well, that proves it.
Oh wait a minute.
When Obamacare was passed the economy had started recovering. In recovery there are more part time jobs as employers start to feel comfortable hiring but not full time. As the recovery gains steam many of those part time employees shift to full time.
That didnt happen here. Why not?
Perhaps the disincentive to add full time employees played a major role? Ya think?

 

[Pheonixops]

110 part time jobs for every ONE full time job? That is no growth or employment. I guarantee those PT jobs are at or slightly above minimum wage. We are becoming a banana republic!

The Obamacare economy: 35 part-time jobs for every new... | Kyle Wingfield | www.ajc.com

That means there have been 110 part-time jobs created for every one full-time job since March.

By "so much talk," Hall of course was referring to the numerous stories of employers that are cutting back on their workers' hours to avoid qualifying for Obamacare's mandate to provide health insurance for them. Just yesterday, the AJC reported on the various ways local employers are trying to cope with the looming mandate (subscription to MyAJC required for link), including the decision by AAA Parking to move 250 full-time workers to part-time status. Many of the Americans affected by these business decisions are, of course, the very people Obamacare was supposed to help.

In fact, we can get even more specific than the January-July numbers Hall outlined.

Looking at the BLS data, the number of Americans working part-time for economic reasons -- i.e., not because they want to work part-time -- hit a multi-year low in March. Since then, part-time jobs have accounted for a whopping 99.1 percent of all jobs created. Over the past four months, on a net basis, just 9,000 full-time jobs have been added in the entire United States.

That means there have been 110 part-time jobs created for every one full-time job since March.

As Hall notes, the BLS data themselves don't tell us why this is happening. But employment lawyers have been warning companies that, due to the way Obamacare's regulations work, now is the time for them to start establishing their full-time vs. part-time headcount for purposes of the mandate. Given the number of announcements by companies like AAA Parking, it seems logical that what we are seeing is a widespread shift of the lowest-skilled, lowest-paid Americans to jobs with even fewer hours. Which means they still aren't getting insurance, and now they aren't even making as much money at any given job

That's the "free market!", what's wrong with employers trying to trim the fat out of their companies so they can improve their bottom line? Don't you think that it will eventually lead to growth where they will be able to hire full time employees? The part time employees can find another job to supplement their loss in hours and they can also improve themselves by attending an educational or vocational school in order to make themselves more marketable as employees.

Do you think that government should be more involved in this economy?