UK employment remains incredibly strong with even a flicker from real wages

Yesterday brought good news in that UK inflation is looking like it will be a little more subdued than our worst fears. However even so today we move onto comparing it with wage growth which is in a phase where it is below the inflation target measure of the Bank of England ( CPI 2.6% ) and even more so compared to the Retail Price Index at 3.6%. We started the week with some ominous news on the wages front as the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development or CIPD released this survey on Monday.

basic pay award expectations for the next 12 months remain at just 1%

That was a downgrade from the circa 2% that we seem to be rumbling forwards at. According to the CIPD the reasons for this are as follows.

Against the backdrop of poor productivity growth, the report points to an increase in labour supply over the past year as a key factor behind the modest pay projection. This is driven by relatively sharp increases in the number of non-UK nationals from the EU, ex-welfare claimants and 50-64 year olds; although the report is keen to stress the future migration trends appear highly uncertain.

I do not know about you but I was not expecting to see a rise in employment based migration from the European Union being reported! This seems to be predominantly for lower-skilled jobs.

Employers report a median number of 24 applicants for the last low-skilled vacancy they tried to fill, compared with 19 candidates for the last medium-skilled vacancy and eight applicants for the last high-skilled vacancy they were seeking to fill.

This is fascinating in an economics concept and of course yet more dreadful news for the Ivory Tower theorists who face yet again the prospect of explaining why 2+2=5. Labour supply is supposed to have shrunk as EU citizens leave adding to the output gap which means wages will surge. We got something on those lines from Ben Broadbent of the Bank of England a week or two ago. The same Bank of England that makes this mistake every year.

The good news was that labour demand was reported as strong.

the long-term unemployed are finding work more quickly and the amount of workers aged 50-64 who are in employment has risen by around 200,000 during the past year……This is reflected in the quarter’s net employment balance – a measure of the difference between the proportion of employers who expect to increase staff levels and those who expect to decrease staff levels in Q3 2017 – which shows an increase from +20 to +27 during the past three months.

Bank of England Agents

They were more upbeat perhaps indicating that bonus pay is on the rise.

Recruitment difficulties had edged higher, and were gradually broadening across sectors and skill areas. Despite this, labour cost growth had been modest, with pay awards clustered around 2%–3%.

Today’s data

Employment

There is continuing evidence that labour demand continues its long climb in the UK.

There were 32.07 million people in work, 125,000 more than for January to March 2017 and 338,000 more than for a year earlier…….The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.1%, the highest since comparable records began in 1971.

This backs up the CIPD view that labour demand remains strong and poses yet again a conundrum that was in vogue around 4 years ago. This is that the employment figures look stronger than the economic output ( GDP ) ones. Last time around it was the employment figures which were the leading indicator so let us cross our fingers. Also there was another piece of news hinting at a stronger jobs market.

There were 883,000 people (not seasonally adjusted) in employment on “zero-hours contracts” in their main job, 20,000 fewer than for a year earlier.

Also the numbers employed had something that you might not have thought was true if you read the mainstream media. From Andy Verity of the BBC.

In year to end of June, the number of UK born people working in the UK increased by 88,000. Non-UK born people working increased by 262,000.

I thought everyone was leaving? If we look at the sector mostly likely to be affected EU nationals there has still been growth mostly driven by Bulgarians and Romanians but slower growth than before.

Unemployment

There was further good news here.

There were 1.48 million unemployed people (people not in work but seeking and available to work), 57,000 fewer than for January to March 2017 and 157,000 fewer than for a year earlier……The unemployment rate (the proportion of those in work plus those unemployed, that were unemployed) was 4.4%, down from 4.9% for a year earlier and the lowest since 1975.

For newer readers higher employment mostly means lower unemployment but does not have to as there are other factors such as size of the labour force. The good news extends to the news on underemployment. We only get quarterly hints on this but in the 3 months to June the rate was 0.5% lower than last year at 7.7%. So relatively good but if we look back for some perspective then we see that it was pre credit crunch mostly in the mid 6% range.

Wages

There was some better news here which is welcome to say the least.

Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in nominal terms (that is, not adjusted for price inflation) increased by 2.1%, both including and excluding bonuses, compared with a year earlier.

This means that real wages fell by a little less than the trend predicted.

Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) fell by 0.5%, both including and excluding bonuses, compared with a year earlier.

Actually if we drill down into the monthly detail we see that in terms of official calculations real wages nudged a little higher in June as annual wage growth was 2.8%. This was due to two factors one is that bonus payments were strong and that weekly wages fell by £1 last June so sadly it seems set to drift away. Also for those of us who still look at the RPI inflation figures even this better number still gives a negative answer for real wages.

Comment

There is some genuinely good news here as we see that the employment picture remains very strong a year after the EU leave vote ( as the numbers stretch to June). Unemployment is hitting lifetime lows for an ever higher percentage of the population and even wage growth has nudged higher. Yet as ever we need to ask if this is an example of “tractor production is higher?”

As we do so then we need to note that the underemployment numbers are higher giving a rate a bit more than 1% higher than in the pre credit crunch era. So more jobs but perhaps not quite as much more work as one might think. This is a partial explanation of what are wages growth numbers less than half of Ivory Tower output gap style explanations and expectations.

As to the wages numbers themselves we need to remind ourselves that they exclude the self-employed which means that we are likely to need to subtract something. But there is another factor heading the other way which is that we have created more lower paid jobs which seem to have weak wage growth and may be influencing the numbers or what is called compositional change. As ever the numbers let us down or as the TV series Soap reminded us.

Confused? You will be…..

 

 

 

When will real wages finally rise?

One of the main features of the credit crunch era has been weak and at times negative real wage growth. This was hardly a surprise when the employment situation deteriorated but many countries have seen strong employment gains over the past few years and in some employment is now at a record high. Yet wage growth has been much lower than would have been expected in the past. As so often the leader of the pack in a race nobody wants to win has been Japan although there has been claim after claim that this is about to turn around as this from Bloomberg in May indicates.

It’s not making headlines yet, but wages in Japan are rising the fastest in decades, in a shift that’s poised to divide the nation’s companies — and their stocks — into winners and losers, according to Morgan Stanley.

No doubt this was based on the very strong quantity numbers for the Japanese economy which if we move forwards in time to now show an unemployment rate of 2.8% and a jobs per applicant ratio summarised below by Japan Macro Advisers.

Japan’s job offers to applicant ratio rose to 1.51 in June from 1.49 in May. The ratio is the highest in the last 43 years since 1974. While the number of job offers continue to rise along with the expansion in the economy, the number of job applicants are falling. With the shrinking population, Japan simply does not have a resource to meet the demand for labor.

I can almost feel the wind of the Ivory Towers rushing past to predict a rise in wages in such a situation. They will be encouraged by this from the Nikkei Asian Review on Friday.

The labor shortage created by stronger economic growth has prompted many companies to raise wages. Tokyo Electron, a semiconductor production equipment manufacturer, is a good example.

Tokyo Electron introduced a new personnel system on July 1 in which salaries reflect the roles and responsibilities of employees. Under the new system salaries will rise, primarily for junior and midlevel employees. The change will raise the total wages paid to the company’s 7,000 employees in Japan by about 2 billion yen ($18.1 million) annually.

This is something we see regularly where the media presents a company that is toeing the official line and raising wages. But I note that it is doing particularly well and expecting record profits so is unlikely to be typical. By contrast I note that there is another way of dealing with a labour shortage.

In April, Lumine, a shopping center operator, responded to an employee shortage among its tenants by closing 30 minutes earlier at 12 locations, or 80% of its stores. The risk was that shorter operating hours would cut revenue, but Lumine sales held steady in the April-June quarter.

Awkward that in many ways as for example productivity has just been raised with total wages cut.

What about the official data?

I will let The Japan Times take up the story.

Japan’s June real wages decreased 0.8 percent from a year before in the first fall in three months, labor ministry data showed Friday.
Nominal wages including bonuses fell 0.4 percent to ¥429,686 ($3,880), the first drop in 13 months, the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry said in a preliminary report.

Up is the new down one more time. Also the official story that bonuses are leading growth due to a strong economy met this.

due mainly to a 1.5 percent decrease in bonuses and other special payments.

There is one quirk however which is that part-time wages are doing much better and rising at an annual rate of 3.1%. The catch is that you would not leave a regular job in Japan because those wages are lower and to some extent are catching up. How very credit crunch that to get wage growth you have to take a pay cut! Indeed to get work people had to take pay cuts. From the Nikkei Asian Review.

Japanese companies hired more relatively low paid nonregular employees during the prolonged period of deflation.

Now we find ourselves reviewing two apparently contradictory pieces of data.

 The number of workers in Japan increased by 1.85 million between 2012 and 2016……….Japan’s wage bill was 7% lower in May than at the end of 1997 — before deflation took hold.

Australia

You might not think that there would be issues here as of course the commodity price boom driven by Chinese demand has led to a boon for what we sometimes call the South China Territories. Indeed this from @YuanTalks will have looked good from Perth this morning.

The rally in industrial continues in . rebar limit up, surging over 6%

Yet according to the Sydney Morning Herald this is the state of play for wages.

But since 2012 and 2013, Australian workers have felt stuck in a holding pattern of slow wages growth. Wages for the whole economy increased by 1.9 per cent in the year to March just in line with inflation.

There are familiar issues on the over side of the balance sheet.

Families are also wrestling with rising electricity prices, skyrocketing property prices and high demand for accommodation has also forced up rents.

Even the professional sector has been hit.

When Sahar Khalili started work as a casual pharmacist eight years ago, she was paid $35 an hour. Over the years that has fallen to as low as $30 while her rent has more than doubled.

Actually there is something rather disturbing if we drill into the detail as productivity has done quite well in Australia ( presumably aided by the commodity boom) but wages have not followed it leading to this.

The typical Australian family takes home less today than it did in 2009, according to the latest Household Income and Labour Dynamics survey released this week.

These surveys are invariably a couple of years behind where we are but there are questions to say the least. Oh and the shrinkflation saga has not escaped what might be called a stereotypically Australian perspective.

“My beers are getting smaller,” he says.

The USA

Friday brought us the labour market or non farm payroll numbers. In it we saw that wage growth ( average hourly earnings) was at an annual rate of 2.5% which is getting to be a familiar number. There is a little real wage growth but not much which is provoking ever more food for thought as employment rises and unemployment falls. Indeed more and more are concentrating on developments like this reported by Forbes.

Starting pay at the Amazon warehouse, carved out of a large lot with a new road called Innovation Way designed for Amazon-bound trucks, is at $12.75, no degree required. For inventory managers with warehousing experience, the pay is $14.70 an hour and requires a bachelor’s degree.

The new warehouse offers 30 hour a week jobs because they slip under the state legislation on provision of benefits. In some parts of America they would qualify under the food stamp programme. No wonder that as of May some 41.5 million still qualified.

Yet the Wall Street Journal describes it thus.

a vastly improved labor market

Comment

This is a situation we have looked at many times and there is much that is familiar. Firstly the Ivory Towers have invented their own paradise where wages rise due to a falling output gap and when reality fails to match that they simply project it forwards in time. The media tends to repeat that. But if we consider the dangers of us turning Japanese we see that wages there are lower than 20 years ago in spite of very low unemployment levels. Over the past 4 years or so this has been always just about to turn around as Abenomics impacts.

My fear is that unless something changes fundamentally ( cold fusion, far superior battery technology etc..) real wages may flat line for some time yet. All the monetary easing in the world has had no impact here.

 

 

 

Welcome relief for UK real wages from lower inflation numbers

Today is inflation day in the UK as we get the official data for consumer, producer and house price inflation. In case you were wondering why they all come out on one day  meaning that some details get ignored in the melee ( mostly producer price inflation) well that is the point! Previously when the data were released separately there were potentially three days of embarrassment for the government and establishment which they have reduced to just one. Job done in a way.

However even before we get today’s numbers the subject is in the news in several ways. From the BBC.

Motorists are being saddled with the fastest year-on-year rise in insurance premiums since records began five years ago, the industry has warned. Average car insurance premiums have gone up by 11% in the past year, according to the Association of British Insurers (ABI). The typical bill for an annual policy is now £484, it said.

One of my themes which is institutionalised inflation is on the march here.

The ABI says the change in the discount rate is the main reason behind the rise, but also blames the latest increase in insurance premium tax which went up from 10% to 12% on 1 June…….That is why the government reduced the discount rate to -0.75%.

I have included the discount rate as it is a consequence of the way Bank of England QE has driven real bond yields into negative territory. Oh what a tangled web, and that is before we get to the plague of false claims and deliberate accidents which mar this area and drive up premiums.

Buttering us up

An odd feature of the current phase is high butter prices which stretch well beyond the UK as this from @Welt indicates.

price has risen this week in Germany by another 30 Cent or 20% to 1.79€, highest price ever after WWII.

In France there are worries about rises in croissant prices and maybe even a shortage of them. The causes are in essence the farming boom/bust cycle combined with a rise in demand as the Financial Times explains.

 

The combination of falling milk output in key producing countries and adverse weather sent the international butter price to a record high in June, according to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization…..

 

Raphael Moreau, a food analyst at Euromonitor, says that butter consumption has been lifted by demand for “natural” products among shoppers as they move away from spreads such as margarine. “In the UK, butter consumption has also been supported by the home-baking boom,” he says.

So far this has yet to be fully reflected in consumer prices but as supply is inelastic or inflexible in the short-term this could carry on for the rest of 2017.

The other side of the coin

On the 13th of June I pointed out this about the trend for producer prices.

Fortunately we see that the main push is beginning to fade.

Also adding to this is that the UK Pound has been improving against the US Dollar. Friday’s surge that took it to US $1.31 is of course after today’s numbers were calculated but the lower UK Pound will be a decreasing effect as we go forwards.

Today’s Numbers

There was a very welcome change today.

The Consumer Prices Index (CPI) 12-month rate was 2.6% in June 2017, down from 2.9% in May 2017.

The drivers of this were as follows.

Fuel prices fell by 1.1% between May and June 2017, the fourth successive month of price decreases. This contrasts with the same period last year, when fuel prices rose by 2.2%. Taken together, these movements resulted in prices for motor fuels making a large downward contribution to the change in the rate………Recreational and cultural goods and services, with prices overall falling by 0.1% between May and June 2017, compared with a rise of 0.6% a year ago.

If we look at the pattern actually there was no inflation in the month itself.

The all items CPI is 103.3, unchanged from last month.

Oh and the period where the oil price drove goods prices lower is over as we see that goods and services inflation are now pretty much the same.

The CPI all goods index annual rate is 2.6%, down from 2.9% last month. ……..The CPI all services index annual rate is 2.7%, down from 2.8% last month.

Looking Ahead

As we noted last month the pressure coming from higher producer price inflation is looking like it is fading.

Factory gate prices (output prices) rose 3.3% on the year to June 2017 from 3.6% in May 2017, which is the slowest rate prices have increased since December 2016…….Input prices rose 9.9% on the year to June 2017 from 12.1% in May 2017, meaning the annual rate has fallen 10 percentage points since January 2017.

This is mostly about one thing.

Inputs of crude oil is the main driver of the recent slowing of input price inflation as annual price growth for crude oil fell from 88.9% in February 2017 to 9.1% in June 2017.

Two factors are at play here as we see the impact of the oil price no longer falling and the UK Pound/Dollar exchange rate which has risen from its lows of January.

Housing Inflation

We have an official measure that includes imputed rents as a way of measuring housing costs for owner-occupiers. As you can see they are in fact reducing the level of inflation measured.

The all items CPIH annual rate is 2.6%, down from 2.7% in May. …….The OOH component annual rate is 2.0%, down from 2.1% last month( OOH= Owner Occupied Housing Costs)……..Private rental prices paid by tenants in Great Britain rose by 1.8% in the 12 months to June 2017;

The problem for our official statisticians is that few people have bothered much with the change in its headline measure as this from Adam Parsons the Sky News business correspondent indicates.

CPIH – the stat that nobody wants, and nobody quotes

Oh and it is still not a national statistic which were the grounds for demoting RPI but seem to be ignored in the case of CPIH.

Meanwhile house price inflation is rather different to rental inflation.

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 4.7% in the year to May 2017.

This is why they put imputed rents into the new headline inflation measure! It was always likely to give a lower number because house prices can and indeed have been inflated by the way that mortgage costs have been driven lower by the Bank of England. As to troubles here we saw another sign last week. From whatmortgage.co.uk.

The Bank of England has warned mortgage lenders of the possible risks posed by the recent trend of longer loan terms………Woods highlighted the recent trend of mortgage terms rising from 25 years to 35 years or “even longer”.

Comment

First let me welcome the better inflation data which will help with the economic issue of the day which is real wage growth. Or to be more specific it is seems set to be less poor than it might have been. Good.

In terms of inflation I would like to draw your attention to a problem which the UK establishment does its best to try to sweep under the carpet. This is that the old inflation target called RPIX is at 3.8% but the newer CPI is at 2.6% with the gap now being 1.2% which is very significant. Also there is the issue that we pay things at RPI ( Retail Price Index) currently at 3.5% but only receive CPI currently at 2.6% which is quite an establishment scam. This particularly affects students who find that costs in their loans are escalating into the stratosphere with implications for matters such as mortgage affordability if not final repayment as so many of these will never be repaid.

Looking ahead we are certainly not out of the inflation woods as there are still dangers of higher numbers in the autumn as we note the butter and insurance effects discussed earlier. We do not know what the Pound £ and the oil price will do. As to comparisons with Euro area inflation at 1.3% we get a guide to how much the lower Pound £ has affected our inflation rate which has turned out to be pretty much along the lines I suggested back on the 19th of July last year.

I expect a larger impact on the annual rate of inflation than the Draghi Rule implies and estimate one of say 1%.

 

The UK productivity crisis meets real wage growth

As we advance on the UK labour market data let us first note some good news. This is that the procedure for an “early wire” to be given to the UK establishment has been stopped. To be specific a list of people were in the past given the data some 24 hours before the rest of us, and as the ship of state is a somewhat leaky vessel there were obvious concerns that some traders would be more equal than others.

Moving back to today’s data the background to it was set by this official release from last week.

Productivity – as measured by our main measure, output per hour – fell by 0.5% in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2017.

As this is a factor in wage growth we have a potential driver of the dip in wage growth we have seen in 2017 but the problematic news did not stop there.

A fall of 0.5% takes productivity Quarter 1 2017 back below the peak achieved in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2007, which was broadly matched in Quarter 4 2016. Productivity is now 0.4% below the pre-downturn peak and 0.4% below the post-downturn peak.

The productivity problem

This is an example of what Winston Churchill meant when he said that Russia was a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. The same type of thinking applies to productivity especially when it is described like this.

Productivity in Quarter 1 2017, as measured by output per hour, stood 16.8% below its pre-downturn trend – or, equivalently, productivity would have been 20.2% higher had it followed this pre-downturn trend

In my opinion looking at it like that merely tells us that the world has changed and that the productivity boat we were previously on sailed elsewhere. There is little point regarding it as a gap we can regain and I find it fascinating that those who seem to think we can get it back are supporters of policies like QE which have supported the zombie banks and companies which are a factor in this.

More significant to me is this from the June 2016 Economic Review.

Productivity is estimated to have grown at a compound average growth rate of 0.1% per quarter during the recovery between 2009 and 2014. This near-flat productivity growth is a phenomenon unprecedented in the UK since the Second World War.

We can update that because if we look at the expansion since the middle of 2013 we see that output per hour has risen from 98.1 then to 99.6 at the end of the first quarter. So a bit better than flat but not by much. This compares to past episodes.

This is in contrast with patterns following previous UK economic downturns where productivity initially fell, but subsequently bounced back to the previous trend rate of growth.

If we look back to the June 2016 Economic Review we can put a number on that.

However, at the same stages of both the 1990s and 1980s recoveries, productivity was more than 16% above the respective pre-downturn levels.

It is worse than that now as productivity three years or so later is where we thought it was then as whilst it has grown since the past was worse than we thought. What we can now clearly see is that yet another type of lost decade has been in play.

Moving to my explanation if we move on from the drop caused by the credit crunch and look at the more recent period I have written before that there are real problems in measuring productivity in the service industries. Not only are they pretty much 80% of our economy but they have been in essence our economic growth. Productivity in haircuts or operations for surgeons? Maybe in some cases but in others no.

The latest numbers seem to be picking this up.

Labour productivity fell in services but rose in the manufacturing industries; services productivity fell by 0.6% on the previous quarter, while manufacturing productivity grew by 0.2% on the previous quarter.

Employment

This is the good news side of the issue. What I mean by that is that the number of people who are employed continues to grow.

For March to May 2017, there were 32.01 million people in work, 175,000 more than for December 2016 to February 2017 and 324,000 more than for a year earlier.

Which brings more associated good news.

For the latest time period, March to May 2017, the employment rate for people was 74.9%, the highest since comparable records began in 1971.

My argument would be that the employment is mostly in the service sector where we struggle to measure productivity. If we note the rise and the recent struggles of UK output it may be that measured productivity fell again in the second quarter of this year. So there you have it would you prefer more people in employment or higher productivity? It is not of course completely that simple but it is a factor in play.

Oh and I noted another factor in rising employment.

The increase in the employment rate for women is partly due to ongoing changes to the State Pension age for women resulting in fewer women retiring between the ages of 60 and 65.

Unemployment

This does not necessarily get better as employment improves but generally does.

the unemployment rate for people was 4.5%; it has not been lower since April to June 1975………1.49 million unemployed people, 64,000 fewer than for December 2016 to February 2017 and 152,000 fewer than for a year earlier

Wages

Actually these were a little better although you might not think so from the official release.

Between March to May 2016 and March to May 2017, in nominal terms, total pay increased by 1.8%, lower than the growth rate between February to April 2016 and February to April 2017 (2.1%).

If you look into the detail you see that the annual rate of growth in May at 1.8% was better than the 1.3% in April ( where the annual bonus season was weak dragging it lower). This meant that if we switch to real wages the annual rate of fall rose to -0.9% from the -1.3% of April.

If we look deeper into the real wage situation we see that the index in May was at 100.8 which means that as it was set at 100 in 2015. So we have had economic growth with little if any real wage growth and that stretches back as the index was at that sort of level in the summer of 2011. There is a long way to go to the January 2008 peak of 105.8.

Actually as the “not a national statistic” CPIH is used as the inflation measure I am sorry to have to tell you that a more accurate inflation measure would show an even worse performance.

Comment

To my mind we should be more concerned about the slow rate of productivity growth than the drop in 2007/08. We are now in a world of QE and zombie banks which will take us some time to get out of especially as many places are still getting in it! I would be looking to take some of the service sector out of the numbers on two grounds. The first is that we simply cannot measure it and for others it is not appropriate. As to improving our performance there have been some interesting ideas from Diane Coyle but there are also dangers as I find myself thinking of all the money being spent on Smart Meters for a very small potential gain as I read this.

Ensuring adequate investment in infrastructure to meet our current and future needs and priorities

Also today is another grim day at the Bank of England especially for its Chief Economist Andy Haldane. Perhaps this is the true reason he is on something of a tour of the UK! Regular readers will be aware that I have listed the many failings of “Output Gap” theory in my time here. Andy has been a test case for these as he has got wage growth wrong again and again and again by using it. Well in February he thought he had struck a cunning plan by changing his framework so that the level at which wages would start to surge higher ( NAIRU) would be when unemployment fell to 4.5% or where we are now only a few months later as opposed to the couple of years he expected/hoped.

Dreamer, you know you are a dreamer
Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!
I said dreamer, you’re nothing but a dreamer (Supertramp)

 

Of weak wage growth and bond markets

Today I am going to look at some clear changes in the credit crunch era and the way that they link together. Let us start with a clear theme of these days about which there has been news this morning from the land of the rising sun. From Japan Macro Advisers.

The demand/supply condition in the labor market seems as tight as it could be. In May 2017, Japan’s job offers to applicant ratio soared to a 43-year high of 1.49. The increase in the job-offers-applicant ratio marks the third consecutive monthly rise. The current print exceeds the July 1990 levels (1.46) when the Japan economy was enjoying a bubble economy.

It makes you think that the labour market is on this measure stronger than it was than when Japan’s economy was at its peak albeit an unsustainable one. Actually on another measure the situation is so tight they need to look even further back.

New job offers to applicant ratio also show that there is simply not enough supply of labor in Japan. The new job offers to applicant ratio rose to 2.31 in May from 2.13 in the previous month. This marks the highest level of this ratio since November 1973.

As you can see by these measures the labour market is very tight in Japan and is reinforced by these ones reported by Market Insider.

The number of employed persons in May was 65.47 million, an increase of 760,000 or 1.2 percent on year.

The number of unemployed persons in May was 2.10 million, a decrease of 70,000 or 3.2 percent on year.

On the month ( May ) the unemployment rate did rise to 3.1% but as you can see the overall trend seems to be lower in spite of the fact that it is extraordinarily low. Indeed as we have discussed before theories such as the “natural rate of unemployment” or “full employment” are pretty much torpedoed by it as we mull how employment can be more than full?

But if we move to wage growth which according to econ 101 should be soaring we instead see this. From Japan Macro Advisers.

In April 2017, basic and overtime wages, otherwise known as regular wages, rose by 0.4% year on year (YoY), recovering from a decline of 0.1% YoY in March. While an increase in wages is a better news than a decline, the magnitude of the rise continues to be underwhelming.

Quite. As to the real wage growth promised by Abenomics and  reported by the financial  media?

The real wage growth, after offsetting for the inflation in consumer prices, was 0.0% YoY,

So Japan should be seeing wage growth but instead it is flat lining. If we are “Turning Japanese”  then the next bit of news is even worse you see that current wage index for full-time workers is 101 giving an initial though that there has not been much growth since it was based at 100 in 2015. But if you look back the peak in the series was 104.4 in January 2001 and no that is not a misprint.

A possible cause of this is highlighted below and it does provide food for thought as of course Japan is leading the way on a road that many others will be travelling.

The working age population in Japan, defined as the population of the age between 15 and 64, has been shrinking rapidly. In 2016, the work age population in Japan fell by 0.7 million people. Accordingly, job applicants have been declining by 5% per year in the last few years.

Moving On

If we look wider afield we see that wages are struggling beyond the shores of Japan as this from Reuters reminds us.

Wage growth across the developed world is weak. It’s only 2.5 percent in the United States and 2.1 percent in Britain.

It is interesting to note that the have real average hourly earnings falling at an annual rate of 1.3% in the US. The chart below shows that this particular dog is not barking.

Even the figures for Germany are no great shakes when we note this from this morning’s release on the labour market.

In May 2017, roughly 44.1 million persons resident in Germany were in employment according to provisional calculations of the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis). This was a record high since German reunification.

In the UK we have seen quite a change as fears of robots taking everyone’s jobs have been replaced by fears of a former Chancellor of the Exchequer doing so.

George Osborne, the editor of the Evening Standard and former chancellor of the exchequer, has added a sixth job to his portfolio – that of honorary professor of economics at the University of Manchester.

For some Friday humour here are some suggestions for George from the past.

Bond Markets

This week has seen bond markets fall as they try to adjust to a barrage of rhetoric and open mouth operations from central bankers. Those who immediately hid behind a sofa when Janet Yellen told us there would not be another financial crisis in our lifetimes will have missed U-Turns by the ECB and the Bank of England. Also there has been a rather bizarre PR campaign conducted by Bank of England Chief Economist Andy Haldane puffing him up to be the next Governor of the Bank of England on the grounds that he keeps forecasting wages incorrectly. Do I have that right?

We see that the ten-year yield in Germany has risen to 0.47% at one point this morning. If we stay with that whilst it is up that only takes it to around where it was in some of both February and March and indeed May. So not quite as being reported in many places. If we look at the UK the ten-year Gilt yield nudged 1.29% this morning. But if we step back these are very minor moves for markets that really believe what the central bankers are saying which is of course yet another failure for Forward Guidance.

Comment

I wanted to like these two factors ( wage growth and bond yields) because they provide a link to what has happened in 2017. I thought and wrote that it would be a rough year for bond markets based on rising consumer inflation whereas they appear to have looked at low rates of wage growth instead. Of course there have been all the central banking QE purchases but they were a known factor.

As to wages growth itself regular readers will be aware that I fear it is in fact worse than we are told due to the exclusion of the self-employed from the numbers. But also employment figures do not tell the whole story as this from Mario Draghi in Sintra tells us.

Another reason why there is some uncertainty over slack is the correct notion of unemployment – that is, there may be residual slack in the labour market that is not being fully captured in the headline unemployment measures. Unemployment in the euro area has risen during the crisis, but so too has the number of workers who are underemployed (meaning that they would like to work more hours) or who have temporary jobs and want permanent ones…….If one uses a broader measure of labour market slack including the unemployed, underemployed and those marginally attached to the labour force – the so-called “U6” – that measure currently covers 18% of the euro area labour force.

Maybe the weak wage growth is much less of a surprise than we are often told. Especially as it comes with an implied kicker that everything is okay due to this. From Reuters.

In the United States, household net wealth has soared by $40 trillion since the beginning of the expansion in 2009 to $95 trillion from $55 trillion. It is up $11 trillion in just the last two years.

Well that’s okay then is the message, except it isn’t or we would not be where we are.

 

 

UK Real Wages took quite a dip in April

As we looked at the inflation data yesterday it was hard not to think of the implications for real or inflation adjusted wages from the further rise in inflation. There were quite a few such stories in the media about a fall in real wages although they were a little ahead of events because the inflation data was for May and even today we will only get wages data up to April. However there is an issue here that has been building in the credit crunch era where real wages fell heavily as the Bank of England looked the other way as inflation went above 5% in the autumn of 2011. Sadly they relied in their Ivory Tower models which told them that wages would rise in response. Not only did that not happen but the recovery since has been weak and was in fact driven much more by low inflation than wage growth. This is different to past recessions as this from the Resolution Foundation shows.

As you can see the pattern has been very different from past recessions. Real pay rebounded very strongly after 1979 and did well after 1990 but on the same timescale in remains in negative territory this time around. A lot of care is required with long term data like this but this is a performance that looks the worst for some time.

The Napoleonic war period seems especially grim for real wages. If I recall correctly we were imposing a blockade on much of Europe which seems to have our economy hard as well.

Today’s data

We see that wage growth has faded a bit in the latest numbers.

Between February to April 2016 and February to April 2017, in nominal terms, regular pay increased by 1.7%, slightly lower than the growth rate between January to March 2016 and January to March 2017 (1.8%)……..Between February to April 2016 and February to April 2017, in nominal terms, total pay increased by 2.1%, lower than the growth rate between January to March 2016 and January to March 2017 (2.3%). The annual growth rate for total pay, in nominal terms, has not been lower than 2.1% since October to December 2015.

This is of course happening at the same time that inflation is rising and leads to this situation.

The rate of wage growth slowed in the 3 months to April 2017; adjusted for inflation, annual growth in total average weekly earnings turned negative for the first time since 2014.

That is rather ominous when we consider the first chart above as it means that we are getting further away from regaining where we were in 2008 rather than nearer so let us look deeper. The emphasis is mine.

Average weekly earnings, including bonuses, grew by 2.1% in the same period and are the weakest since the December to February 2016 period. Taking into account recent increases in inflation, real average weekly earnings decreased by 0.4% including bonuses and by 0.6% excluding bonuses in the 3 months to April 2017 compared with the same period a year earlier. This is the first annual decline in total real average weekly earnings since 2014.

Of course they are using the new lower headline measure of inflation called CPIH which uses Imputed Rents to estimate owner-occupied housing costs. So the goal posts have been moved a little and this happens so often these days that we should be grateful that so many goal posts now come with wheels.

Where does this leave us overall?

The situation is as follows according to our official statisticians. They are using constant 2015 prices so they are real numbers.

average total pay (including bonuses) for employees in Great Britain was £487 per week before tax and other deductions from pay, £35 lower than the pre-downturn peak of £522 per week recorded for February 2008.

Number Crunching

We can go deeper because there are numbers for the month of April on its own. In that month total pay only rose at an annual rate of 1.2% because whilst regular pay rose by 1.8% bonuses fell by 5.8%. Care is needed as if we look back April has been an erratic month for bonuses but we see that real wages were falling at an annual rate of 1.5% if we use CPI inflation. 1.4% if we use CPIH and 2.3% if we use RPI. Even if we ignore the bonus numbers we see -0.9% for CPI, -0.8% for CPIH and -1.5% for RPI.

The sectors which seem to have impacted in April are the finance and construction ones which both saw total pay fall at an annual rate of 0.5%.

Is the UK labour market tight

Conventional analysis based on such theories as the Phillips Curve will be telling us that the UK labour market is “tight”. An example of this is below from Andy Verity of the BBC.

Unemployment: a 42-year low (1.53m, 4.6%); work force: another record high (31.95m people). But tight labour market isn’t pushing up pay.

If we put some more meat on those bones there are things heading in that direction as this shows below.

The number of people in work increased by 109,000 in the 3 months to April 2017 compared with the previous 3 months, to 31.95 million, with an increase in full-time employment (162,000) partly offset by a fall in part-time employment (53,000) . The employment rate reached a joint record high of 74.8%.

This looks good and indeed is but questions remain. For example having checked I know that there is not a clear definition of full-time work it is something that responders to the survey decide for themselves. Added to this is the issue of self-employment and how much work they are actually doing.

self-employed people increased by 103,000 to 4.80 million (15.0% of all people in work).

Just as a reminder the self-employed are excluded from the official wages data. There is more reinforcement for the labour market being tight here.

Total hours worked per week were 1.03 billion for February to April 2017. This was 0.7 million more than for November 2016 to January 2017 and 15.4 million more than for a year earlier.

We are left with the concept of underemployment here I think which measures the gap between the work that people are doing and what they would like to do. Sadly the UK does not have an official measure of this unlike the US with its U-6 data. We only have flickers of insight via the growth of self-employment which needs to be sub-divided into positive and negative and the rise of zero hours contracts. In terms of influencing pay there seems to have been an associated rise in job insecurity but we have no clear measure of this.

Comment

The real wage squeeze we feared for this year is now upon us and we face the grim reality that it has been more than a lost decade for them.

Looking at longer term movements, average total pay for employees in Great Britain in nominal terms increased from £376 a week in January 2005 to £502 a week in April 2017; an increase of 33.5%. Over the same period the Consumer Prices Index including owner occupiers’ housing costs (CPIH) increased by 31.8%.

The cross-over was in early 2006. This poses all sorts of problems for the Ivory Towers who will look at the employment numbers and forecast much stronger wage growth. Of course they were usually responsible for the increasingly inadequate employment data as we note that one thing they are certainly very poor at is adapting to ch-ch-changes.

Grenfell Tower

Let me express my deepest sympathies for anyone involved in the dreadful fire there which started this morning.

 

 

Are we measuring the wrong type of productivity?

Today gives us an opportunity to look at the latest data on what is the key economic number these days which is wages growth. After yesterday’s inflation data we will be able to look at both nominal and real or inflation adjusted wages growth. The reason it has become a key number is that in countries like the UK ( and US and Japan..) is that the employment situation is strong and recorded unemployment has improved considerably but wages growth has been weak. In the extreme case of Japan there has so often been no wages growth.

An associated influence on this has been problems with productivity as of course it has helped drive wages growth in the past. Whereas according to Bank of England Chief Economist Andy Haldane that happy situation has been replaced by this.

Productivity growth has consistently underperformed relative to expectations, since at least the global financial crisis. This tale of productivity disappointment, in forecasting and in performance, has been extensively debated and analysed over recent years. Some have called it the “productivity puzzle”.

Indeed we have been on something of a road to nowhere.

For the past decade, average productivity growth has been negative. This is unusual, if not unique, historically. You would have to go right back to the 18th century to see a similarly lengthy period of stagnant productivity.

In case you were wondering it compares to this.

there has been a near-monotonic rise in UK productivity. UK TFP growth since 1750 has averaged 0.8% per year. Since the Industrial Revolution, GDP per capita has doubled roughly every 65 years and productivity roughly every 85 years.

Actually some of Andy’s numbers are a little contradictory as he suddenly agrees with the theme on here that things were deteriorating even before the credit crunch.

From 1950 to 1970, median global productivity growth averaged 1.9% per year. Since 1980, it has averaged 0.3% per year.

I find that fascinating because is not that the same period where we saw the influence of increasing globalisation and internationalisation which were badged as bring significant economic benefits?

The United States

The international scale of the issue has been highlighted by the Financial Times today.

US productivity is set to grow this year at around a third of the pace prevailing before the financial crash………..
US labour productivity — a driver of the economy’s fortunes — is forecast to expand 1 per cent this year, an improvement on the 0.5 per cent recorded for 2016 but far shy of the 2.9 per cent growth seen from 1999 to 2006, according to Conference Board projections shared with the Financial Times.

This is true of others as well.

The EU will see 1 per cent growth in GDP per hour, an improvement on last year’s 0.8 per cent but short of the 1.9 per cent seen in 1999-2006.  Japan is on course for 1.1 per cent productivity growth, up sharply from 0.5 per cent in 2016 but still well shy of the 2.2 per cent pace seen before the crisis.

I cannot move on without pointing out that the pre credit crunch figures were inflated in many places by booming housing and banking sectors which then went bust.

the figures lag far behind the 4.9 per cent pace in 1999-2006.

Is it the service sector?

To my mind a large factor in the productivity puzzle has been the switch from actual things being produced to more intangible types of economic growth. If we look at it in a stereotypical sense we see output of cars replaced by output of haircuts or teaching or nursing. The latter is much harder to measure in productivity terms as who wants teachers to be more productive via larger class sizes? It is even worse for nurses as who would want to be in a hospital ward with fewer nurses? The problem here is we need a measure of quality of the output and we struggle to define and measure that. Even worse some areas of production face a future of possible enormous gains in labour productivity by the use of robotics and artificial intelligence but where does that leave the labour? Can we have too much of something that is usually considered to be good.

Looking forwards as Sarah O’Connor points out we are likely to see more growth in the service sector.

The undramatic truth is that many of the jobs of the future are also those of the present. Prime among them are jobs that involve humans looking after other humans. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics has predicted the top 30 fastest-growing occupations for the next 10 years; more than half are some variety of nurse, therapist, healthcare worker or carer. This feels like a safe bet — and not just in the US.

She also points out that this growth will be in jobs that we tend to not value.

Social care jobs, for example, are defined by economists everywhere as low-skilled or unskilled…….Personal care and home health aides in the US make roughly $23,000 a year on average. In Britain, a prolonged squeeze on public spending has had knock-on effects on care workers, many of whom work for private companies that rely on public sector contracts. In England last year, 43 per cent of care workers earned less than £7.50 an hour.

There are plenty of thought-provoking issues here as raising productivity here would involve paying them more as that is the only measure of output we have here. Indeed both GDP and productivity fail us when we cannot measure economic output. On this road no wonder both metrics have problems. If a service sector producer gets more efficient and reduces its price then as money is often the only measure we record lower productivity when in fact things have improved. In other words we are in a something of a mess of our own making.

Today’s data

Not the cheeriest I am afraid to say.

Output per hour – our main measure of labour productivity – fell by 0.5% in Quarter 1 (January to March) 2017. This compares with growth of 0.4% in Quarter 4 (October to December) 2016.

My explanation given above may well work though.

was a result of hours worked growing faster than output;

What about wages?

Growth has been pretty consistent at what seems to be something of a new normal.

Between January to March 2016 and January to March 2017, in nominal terms, total pay increased by 2.4%

It is in fact marginally higher but as we look for real wage growth and note that nominal growth in March was 2.4% we see that it was a mere 0.1% and should it remain the same in April then wage growth will be negative. Of course if we use the RPI then annual wage growth was negative again in March at -0.7%. Sadly such numbers come on the back of a credit crunch era decline.

The Resolution Foundation has a somewhat enduring if increasingly lonely faith in officialdom so it still takes the forecasts of the OBR seriously and has switched to the CPIH inflation measure. I think though like so many places today it was so revved up to say real wages were falling again that it has used the regular rather than total pay data.

Comment

There is much to consider here as we find yet another set of statistics that are failing us in the credit crunch era. Our outdated concept of productivity needs to change and it is being challenged at both ends of the spectrum. At one extreme we have the sort of situation covered by Skynet in the Terminator series of firms where robots rule and at the other we have what we might call 100% human occupations. Do we really want to say that one provides a sort of 100% productivity and the other 0% because that is where we are heading right now?

Let me add in another sector which is the self-employed which these days is 15% of our workforce or 4.78 million people. For those in the service sector our main measure of output and hence productivity will be their pay. The very pay numbers that are ignored by the official average earnings data. What could go wrong?

Number Crunching

Regular readers will be aware of my love for football. The numbers game at The Emirates where Arsenal were playing Sunderland had me intrigued. You see pictures of a ground that was a long way from full were all over social media and BBC 5 live reported it was at least a third empty, and yet.

the official number for Tuesday’s game was 59,510. ( ESPN)

Actually Arsene Wenger claimed it was “sold out” but of course he has a long history of eyesight problems and myopia so let’s pass on that. But could we one day see the first empty ground that is counted as sold out?