June Jobs Increase: All Part-Time Workers As Full-Time Jobs Drop

While the headline prints in today's jobs report were solid with the exception of hourly earnings, which disappointed consensus expectations on both a monthly and annual basis, however not too dramatically earning the report a "goldilocks" name, a look below the surface reveals at least one ugly side to today's jobs report: all the job gains were for part-time workers, while full-time employment dipped modestly.

In June, the number of part-time workers rose by 145K to 27.028MM, while the full-time workers declined by a modest 89K to 128.658MM.

On a longer-term basis, however, this month's jump in part-time workers appears to be an outlier, with the bulk of job additions in the past year manifesting in the form of full time jobs.

Finally, the part-time print may merely be a statistical anomaly, because on an unadjusted basis full-time workers surged by over 900K, while part-timers actually dropped by just under 500K.

Still, this is a series worth keeping an eye on as an increase in part-time workers at the expense of full-timers may explain the ongoing inability of a tight labor market to translate into higher wages, which as a reminder, was the biggest disappointment in this jobs report.



Endgame Napoleon Liquid_Silver Fri, 07/06/2018 - 09:35 Permalink

Thanks for that interesting comparison, Tyler. None of the mainstream media do anything like that. Wonder how many of the $900k full-time jobs went to the 1.5 million new, legal immigrants let in this year?

Wonder how many illegal aliens hold the part-time jobs that—when they have instant-citizen kids—qualify them for layers of monthly welfare that covers everything from rent to food? That happens because part-time work keeps them under the income limits for the programs, not to mention their up to $6,431 in refundable child-tax-credit money, which has a cut off, but is more of a pay-per-birth thing than an extremely-low-income limit thing, whereas monthly welfare programs have income limits that are super-low.

I mean LOW. When I worked at the Department of Human Services about a decade ago, the earned-income limits for EBT & cash assistance were under $900 per month. Wages can’t rise when so many citizens & noncitizens can get their major household bills paid by Uncle Sam for sex, reproduction and part-time work that keeps them below the income limits for welfare in single-breadwinner households.

It is good that full-time jobs are up, but citizens probably are not getting many of them since 101 million working-age US citizens are out of the workforce, and 78 million are self-employed gig pieceworkers. Among the 42 million womb-producing, EBT-eligible, “employed” citizens & noncitizens, there are a lot of part-time workers and some temp workers—even a few higher wage temp workers who forefeit the womb-productivity-based welfare for a few months of temp work and then go back on welfare, likewise collecting their up to $6,431 in refundable child tax credits. The tax-prep industry is only one area that has a deluge of womb-productive mom workers in that temp (or seasonal) category.

In reply to by Liquid_Silver

Endgame Napoleon NurseRatched Fri, 07/06/2018 - 09:45 Permalink

The pay of teachers is stretched out over the full year, and no, all teachers do not work the summer session. Some college professors teach classes every summer, but I know lots of primary & secondary school teachers with spousal income who take the summers off to be with their kids. Two former superintendents of schools and one school principal confirmed that teaching is a good job for a mom who needs a second income and summers off with her kids. That is the academic standard for hiring and retention; it revolves around accommodating the private lives & womb productivity of the employees. Ditto for most mom-dominated office jobs.

In reply to by NurseRatched

CRM114 Fri, 07/06/2018 - 09:16 Permalink

Remember that the BLS "full time job" definition has been specifically designed so it isn't, i.e. no assurance of benefits or sufficient work to pay bills.

Endgame Napoleon Thebighouse Fri, 07/06/2018 - 10:02 Permalink

Small businesspeople often cannot afford any more than they pay if they want to get anything out of taking the risk to start a business, but the same get-one-over apparatus applies to employees in bigly businesses—even worse, much worse in many cases.

Take the issue of the now-defunct up to $9,000 per employee in tax credits, issued to businesses that hired single moms on SNAP. This was an Obama Era program that I happen to know was used by bigly, bigly, nationally known corporations.

One of the umpteen hoops that non-welfare-eligible / non-womb-productive US-citizen temp workers—living on earned-only income, with unsubsidized rent consuming more than half of their monthly pay—had to jump through to get 6 weeks worth of work @ $10 to $12 per hour was a huge stack of paperwork, specifying that we were not single mommas on TANF & SNAP.

It is not just the businesspeople, but the non-welfare-eligible employees who often get little out of their low-paid hard work, who are overburdened with too much hoop-jumping for every two-bit “job.” Most of this is imposed ON CITIZENS by big government.

Meanwhile, millions of womb-productive illegal aliens work for low, [traceable] earnings that keep them under the income limits for free EBT groceries, free rent, free monthly cash assistance and up to $6,431 in refundable child tax credits without being treated like mice on a treadmill. 

In reply to by Thebighouse

Endgame Napoleon CatInTheHat Fri, 07/06/2018 - 10:14 Permalink

Every office job I have had fit that definition of “full time.” When you subtract off all of the official & unofficial excused time off for crony moms (and a few others), the full time is actually flextime. It is likely due to computers, doing more of the work, but also due to employers avoiding the cost of benefits. Thing is, even office jobs with the full benefits structure have this “full-time” arrangement, ostensibly to avoid issues of over-time pay. That is how some explain it. Many of the sales-related jobs I had required SOMEBODY to wait on the late-show customers. Hint: That somebody was never or rarely womb-productive.

In reply to by CatInTheHat

Endgame Napoleon MusicIsYou Fri, 07/06/2018 - 10:29 Permalink

No, everyone does not start a business for the love of $$$$. Many people do it for the independence from The Man, the fact that they do not fit into crony-corporate structures OR for the love of designing a product, providing a service they believe in, etc.

The former business that I owned was a niche business, teeming with too much competition, mostly from retiree hobbyists with secondary income streams. But there were also many shop owners, struggling to make a living, like my ex and I.

We made a living, a modest one, and paid a business loan back. Limited as the income was—as I knew it would be from working in the industry for years—it was still better than the fly-by-night, cutthroat, unprofessional-cubed “jobs” out there, where daily / all-day attendance and every-month quota meeting mean nothing, but where crony-absenteeism-gang membership, mom-bonding parties at work and honed bullying skills mean everything.

The [atmosphere] in small business is very different; it is much more polite. It is much more product / service-focused. It is much more about the customers, as opposed to the social lives, family composition or social characteristics of the employees. 

The motivation for small-business ownership is often an exodus from the atmosphere of big business, and yes, the regulations need to be kept down to make small business a real alternative for individuals in a free Republic. There is the unsolvable conundrum of wages that often really can’t be too high without small-business employers shedding staff. Some small businesses can afford to pay more, and a few do. 

In reply to by MusicIsYou

Knave Dave Fri, 07/06/2018 - 09:50 Permalink

Something is wrong with the numbers reported here: How do you add 145,000 part-time jobs, subtract 89,000 full-time jobs and come up with 213,000 total jobs added (as reported in the headline prints)?

Quivering Lip Knave Dave Fri, 07/06/2018 - 11:42 Permalink

BLS birth/death model is based on fictional new or closed businesses. It's complete bullshit. If people actually think new business are popping up everywhere every month every year they're deluded.

In a time of mass Consolidation the birth death model is a joke. 

Just Google this! BLS B.S.: 93% Of New Jobs Since 2008 Were Birth/Death Model Estimates - Dave Kranzler (5/6/2017) 


In reply to by Knave Dave

Byrond Fri, 07/06/2018 - 09:58 Permalink

Full time employment is if you're employed 35 hours or more total, even if you work multiple jobs. Many businesses of course keep the hours below 40 so they don't have to pay benefits. There's all kinds of ways a corrupt government can make the 60,000 household data look like something it is not.

Balance-Sheet Fri, 07/06/2018 - 11:48 Permalink

Aside from the Daily News(?) manufacturing effort the uptake of new technologies runs far more smoothly that the jagged day to day perspective so expect the percentage of those employed FT to trend ever lower. Many many jobs are bs shuffling work especially in government and these will gradually be liquidated.

abgary1 Fri, 07/06/2018 - 15:07 Permalink

Automation (blockchain) of the public sector means higher efficiency, reduced expenditures and taxes.

Automation of the private sector means we all become wards of the state.

Automation of both means the end of civilization as we know it.


Amazon's average wage for their warehouse workers is $25,000 because the workers are part-timers due to the automation of it's warehouses.

Anyone who thinks that automation is beneficial for anyone but the top 10%'ers is in denial.


Besides giving away our digital data and thus our privacy for convenience sake, we are also killing jobs.