Population Adjustment in January Jobs Report?

[tsptalk]

I wish I could find more on this but on CNBC Steve Liesman just reported that they are planning to adjust the US population up 3.5 million in the January jobs report, which could move the unemployment rate up. The timing is interesting, but it could also change as deportations rise over the course of the year. But when would they adjust for that?

I'll post details if I find them.

 

[TommyIV]

I wonder if those 3.5 million are able workers. Labor force participation in the U.S. was at 62.5% in December. That would be 2.1 million if this increase is statically equivalent to the current population.

But when you say that could move the unemployment rate up.. I'm curious because an increase in the denominator would decrease the unemployment rate. So, which does the Bureau of Labor Statistic know more accurately? The Civilian Labor Force or the unemployed. Assuming they can verify their unemployment number with unemployment check data, then the Civilian Labor Force would be adjusted higher to accommodate the increase in reported population, thus pulling the unemployment rate down.

Or if the BLS is getting their numbers from a completely random sample size, then ratios of their sample sizes to the overall population shouldn't change the rate of unemployment. If they do a survey of 60,000 citizens, then the numbers they get will just be applied to the larger population as a whole, keeping the same ratios of unemployed to civilian labor force.

With the latest deportations I suspect job openings to see a pop higher. Although I'm not sure how many of the ~6.8 million unemployed will be willing to trade their unemployment checks for the types of jobs the deported are leaving behind.

 

[tsptalk]

I wonder if those 3.5 million are able workers. Labor force participation in the U.S. was at 62.5% in December. That would be 2.1 million if this increase is statically equivalent to the current population.

But when you say that could move the unemployment rate up.. I'm curious because an increase in the denominator would decrease the unemployment rate.

I guess it depends on the employment situation of those 3.5 million. CNBC speculated it will increase the unemployment rate by about 0.04%.

 

[tsptalk]

This article says just 0.01% higher.

Population adjustments will cause the next jobs report to be misinterpreted and misconstrued

The recent surge in immigration made the household survey especially hard to interpret, but if historical data were revised, we’d see that the labor force has grown smoothly and steadily

The employment level and the labor force in the household survey are likely to be almost 2 million higher in January 2025 than in December 2024, in addition to whatever real changes happened in the labor market during that month. Plus, the labor force participation rate is likely to be one-tenth of a point higher due to the population adjustment. But the unemployment rate and the prime-age employment-population ratio will be only minimally affected.

Population adjustments will cause the next jobs report to be misinterpreted and misconstrued

The recent surge in immigration made the household survey especially hard to interpret, but if historical data were revised, we’d see that the labor force has grown smoothly and steadily

www.briefingbook.info

From BLS:

New population controls will be incorporated in the Current Population Survey with the release of January 2025 estimates on February 7, 2025

New population controls will be incorporated in the Current Population Survey with the release of January 2025 estimates on February 7, 2025

www.bls.gov

 

[TommyIV]

Plus, the labor force participation rate is likely to be one-tenth of a point higher due to the population adjustment. But the unemployment rate and the prime-age employment-population ratio will be only minimally affected.

Ah, an increase in labor force participation would be mean a decrease in the unemployment rate. But they're implying its effect alone wouldn't move it too much.