Record employment...but also record vacancies

[EM2]

The latest figures show that unemployment is at a record low, with fewer people out of work than at any time since 1975.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan...oyeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/august2018

• There were 32.39 million people in work, 42,000 more than for January to March 2018 and 313,000 more than for a year earlier.
  
  
• The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 75.6%, unchanged compared with January to March 2018 but higher than for a year earlier (75.1%).

But, strangely, there are also more jobs available than at any time since 2001.

There were 829,000 job vacancies for May to July 2018. This was:

• 20,000 more than for February to April 2018
  
  
• 51,000 more than for a year earlier
  
  
• the highest since comparable records began in 2001

So we have more people working, but also more jobs available. A slightly unusual situation!

 

[WelshBluebird]

I wonder what "employed" actually means and what kind of jobs actually make up the increase in employment. Are these just low skilled / casual contract / gig economy "self employed" jobs, or are they actually decent well paid secure jobs?

 

[Bromley boy]

I wonder what "employed" actually means and what kind of jobs actually make up the increase in employment. Are these just low skilled / casual contract / gig economy "self employed" jobs, or are they actually decent well paid secure jobs?

It includes everything above (which probably comes as no great surprise), from the ONS website:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan.../methodologies/aguidetolabourmarketstatistics

The number of people in employment in the UK is measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and consists of people aged 16 and over who did one hour or more of paid work per week (as an employee or self-employed), those who had a job that they were temporarily away from, those on government-supported training and employment programmes, and those doing unpaid family work. Employment levels and rates are published each month in the labour market statistical bulletin.

Employment is a different, but similar, concept to jobs. Employment is a measure of people, and a person with more than one job would therefore be counted once in the employment estimates.

The LFS provides the best measure of employment at whole economy level as it is a more comprehensive measure than jobs. The LFS, unlike the jobs estimates, provides a coherent picture of the labour market as a whole, as it is used to produce estimates of unemployment and economic inactivity as well as employment.

Estimates are available by sex, by age and for full-time, part-time and temporary workers. Employment levels measure the total number of people estimated to be in employment while employment rates allow changes in the labour market to be interpreted in a wider context by allowing for changes in the population. The headline measure of employment for the UK is the employment rate for those aged 16 to 64.

 

[Clip]

There was a thing on R4 about this this morning and a lot of the vacancies were in the IT sector who just cant fill the roles with the people competent enough to do the jobs.

 

[DarloRich]

hmmmmm - i wonder how many of these "jobs" are real, quality. well paid jobs and how many are flimsy, exploitative, zero hours, gig economy, fake self employed ,casual roles

 

[pemma]

Esther McVey recently made a claim about how many jobs were available in Cheshire based on the number of vacancies listed on the 'Findajob' website. Unsurprisingly it was misleading as her claim was based on the total number of listings and didn't discount any duplicate listings or anything that's not really a job e.g. a posting for an advert for mystery shoppers. She was claiming hundreds of vacancies but there were only actually 35 full time vacancies and many of those require specialist skills so weren't jobs anyone can apply for.

 

[thejuggler]

The total number of hours worked is however down.

 

[pemma]

The total number of hours worked is however down.

Total number of contracted hours or total number of hours worked (including overtime)?

 

[Dave1987]

What a way to gloss over the reality of what is really happening in the economy. An economy dominated by low paid jobs and a rapidly expanding ‘gig’ economy where people are having to work frankly ridiculous hours just to make ends meet. Wouldn’t be so bad if the Government actually admitted the problem existed and vowed to tackle it. Instead of shouting about “record unemployment” the Government should be ploughing money into empowering people to upskill themselves and creating highly paid jobs. Not supporting the ‘gig’ economy.

 

[thejuggler]

Total number of contracted hours or total number of hours worked (including overtime)?

Actual hours. More people working, but doing less work per week.

 

[Clip]

What a way to gloss over the reality of what is really happening in the economy. An economy dominated by low paid jobs and a rapidly expanding ‘gig’ economy where people are having to work frankly ridiculous hours just to make ends meet. Wouldn’t be so bad if the Government actually admitted the problem existed and vowed to tackle it. Instead of shouting about “record unemployment” the Government should be ploughing money into empowering people to upskill themselves and creating highly paid jobs. Not supporting the ‘gig’ economy.

The gig economy exists because people want the aervices it provides - you can carry on your rants about the government all you want but if people want fast food late at night delivered to their door then people are goig to need to be employed to do that.

sometimea your blinkers are wedged so firmly on you cant see the wood for the trees

 

[Dave1987]

The gig economy exists because people want the aervices it provides - you can carry on your rants about the government all you want but if people want fast food late at night delivered to their door then people are goig to need to be employed to do that.

sometimea your blinkers are wedged so firmly on you cant see the wood for the trees

Ow I can see the wood for the trees believe me. What I hate is seeing the gradual casualisation of work and hate having a Government who is quite happy to see it expand and grow. If it continues many people ‘in work’ will have no guarantee on how much they will earn every month. That is not an economy ‘fit for all’. No wonder wages are seeing pitiful growth and the economy is on a knife edge.

 

[Clip]

Ow I can see the wood for the trees believe me. What I hate is seeing the gradual casualisation of some work and hate having a Government who is quite happy to see it expand and grow. If it continues many people ‘in some work’ will have no guarantee on how much they will earn every month. That is not an economy ‘fit for all’. No wonder wages are seeing pitiful growth and the economy is on a knife edge.

Added some words you seemed to have missed out in your post - if you think the whole of the UKs workforce is being forced into casualisation and stagnant growth along with wages then i refute your claim that you can see anything - you are only seeing what you want to see.

 

[BluePenguin]

I wonder what "employed" actually means and what kind of jobs actually make up the increase in employment. Are these just low skilled / casual contract / gig economy "self employed" jobs, or are they actually decent well paid secure jobs?

Yes working as a labourer on a building site, in the kebab shop at the weekend or for Deliveroo or Uber now counts even if not a career. Just because someone is employed doesn't mean they are getting by. The statistics say so little and hide so much.

 

[DarloRich]

The gig economy exists because people want the aervices it provides - you can carry on your rants about the government all you want but if people want fast food late at night delivered to their door then people are goig to need to be employed to do that.

sometimea your blinkers are wedged so firmly on you cant see the wood for the trees

So employ them. The work must be there.

 

[PeterC]

There was a thing on R4 about this this morning and a lot of the vacancies were in the IT sector who just cant fill the roles with the people competent enough to do the jobs.

In IT the problem is that requirements are over prescriptive. Employers will often specifiy very precise requirements despite the fact that anybody with similar experience on different software could convert in under a week.

One employer did once advertise for people with 3 years experience of software that had only been on the market for 18 months.

 

[Clip]

So employ them. The work must be there.

They do - but you know that dont you.

 

[pemma]

In IT the problem is that requirements are over prescriptive. Employers will often specifiy very precise requirements despite the fact that anybody with similar experience on different software could convert in under a week.

One employer did once advertise for people with 3 years experience of software that had only been on the market for 18 months.

Some also use recruitment agencies who aren't aware of things like 'Classic ASP' being exactly the same as 'ASP (VB Script)'

 

[trash80]

There was a thing on R4 about this this morning and a lot of the vacancies were in the IT sector who just cant fill the roles with the people competent enough to do the jobs.

Yes this, we've been trying to get another web developer for ages but its so hard to find one suitable. We did get one earlier in the year but he left soon for another gig (more $$$$).

Some also use recruitment agencies who aren't aware of things like 'Classic ASP' being exactly the same as 'ASP (VB Script)'

Been like that for years. Once i was sent to an interview as i had "javascript" on my CV. Turns out they wanted Java, the recruitment agency thought it was the same thing.

 

[Dave1987]

Added some words you seemed to have missed out in your post - if you think the whole of the UKs workforce is being forced into casualisation and stagnant growth along with wages then i refute your claim that you can see anything - you are only seeing what you want to see.

So how do you explain the thousands of people currently stuck in zero hours contracts/low hour contracts who would dearly love full time contracts? Or the rise of the "self employed contractors" that is increasing at rather scary rates which the Government seems unwilling to do anything about? I read recently the scale to with the "self employed contractor" style of employment is spreading and it is really quite scary the amount of industries it is spreading to. So maybe it is you who is refusing to see the slow but sure progression of the casualisation of work that is happening in the economy and the consequences that it will have unless Government legislates to stop it.

 

[Dave1987]

They do - but you know that dont you.

On zero hour contracts or as "self employed contracts" so they have no guarantee of any pay each week/month!

 

[Clip]

So how do you explain the thousands of people currently stuck in zero hours contracts/low hour contracts who would dearly love full time contracts? Or the rise of the "self employed contractors" that is increasing at rather scary rates which the Government seems unwilling to do anything about? I read recently the scale to with the "self employed contractor" style of employment is spreading and it is really quite scary the amount of industries it is spreading to. So maybe it is you who is refusing to see the slow but sure progression of the casualisation of work that is happening in the economy and the consequences that it will have unless Government legislates to stop it.

Id explain them by saying that the employers dont want full time workers and as private entities they are allowed to pick and choose who they employ and how.

Self employed contractors have been around for years so im unsure what your point is by bringing them into it - if people want to go down that route then thats up to them is it not?

I dont want the Government to legislate for everything that goes on in this world - theres a special name for that - but what they can legislate to stop is the abuse of contractors and employee rights - and dont worry I can see whats happening in the world but from what i see its not as much doom and gloom as you so wish it was.

 

[Bromley boy]

They do - but you know that dont you.

The point being made is that gig economy workers aren’t employees (or even workers), they’re often treated as self employed even when this isn’t the economic reality.

 

[Clip]

On zero hour contracts or as "self employed contracts" so they have no guarantee of any pay each week/month!

Keep on saying the same thing over and over doesnt make you right

LINK

People on “zero-hours contracts” are more likely to be young, part-time, women or in full-time education when compared with other people in employment. On average, someone on a “zero-hours contract” usually works 25.2 hours a week. Just over one-quarter of people (25.3%) on a “zero-hours contract” want more hours, with most wanting them in their current job, as opposed to a different job that offers more hours. In comparison, 7.3% of other people in employment wanted more hours.

Thats not a lot of people in the scheme of things from this survey and from the survey people are averaging what it states above so just because theres no guarantee of it doesnt mean that they are taking home nothing at the end of the week/month!!

 

[Dave1987]

The point being made is that gig economy workers aren’t employees (or even workers), they’re often treated as self employed even when this isn’t the economic reality.

Quite.

 

[Barn]

hmmmmm - i wonder how many of these "jobs" are real, quality. well paid jobs and how many are flimsy, exploitative, zero hours, gig economy, fake self employed ,casual roles

According to the ONS bulletin linked to in the first post, there were 104,000 fewer people relying on a zero hours contract for their main job.

 

[underbank]

I read recently the scale to with the "self employed contractor" style of employment is spreading and it is really quite scary the amount of industries it is spreading to.

It's been happening for 30 years and is actually now showing signs of slowing down. Nothing new. But the main driver is the "employer" costs, i.e. ever increasing employers NIC, ever increasing employment legislation, workplace pensions, apprenticeship levy, etc. A huge amount of "contractor" roles are full time, semi permanent, not the "turn up for an hour" type of zero hour contract, and a great many are actually very well paid. To show how long it's being going on, Gordon Brown brought in the ridiculous/unworkable IR35 rules back in 2001 to try to tighten up on artificial self employment through personal service companies, so that's at least 17 years since it was identified as a problem!

 

[WelshBluebird]

It's been happening for 30 years and is actually now showing signs of slowing down. Nothing new. But the main driver is the "employer" costs, i.e. ever increasing employers NIC, ever increasing employment legislation, workplace pensions, apprenticeship levy, etc. A huge amount of "contractor" roles are full time, semi permanent, not the "turn up for an hour" type of zero hour contract, and a great many are actually very well paid. To show how long it's being going on, Gordon Brown brought in the ridiculous/unworkable IR35 rules back in 2001 to try to tighten up on artificial self employment through personal service companies, so that's at least 17 years since it was identified as a problem!

But there surely is a very clear difference between say a Software Developer who is a contractor (who yes, will get paid very well indeed) and someone who drives for Uber?

If nothing else for the reason behind their employment status. The first will be a contractor because it generally pays better than being a standard employee and for the employer it gives the ability to quickly upsize and downsize development teams. The second is probably a contractor because they can choose their own hours (though the low pay means that many just work as much as they can anyway) and for the employer they save a tonne of money whilst still paying very low wages.

 

[deltic]

Back to OP's original point its not unusual to have high vacancy rates and high employment and low unemployment - it shows a tightening labour market. This has led to a reduction in number of people on zero hour contracts, and self employed (marginally) and increases (albeit modest) in wage levels. Also seen a reduction in EU nationals working in UK. With restrictions on freedom of movement we are likely to see further labour shortages in areas where skills are short (health) and where UK nationals dont seem to want to work (agriculture). With state pension ages increasing we are also seeing an increase in the number of older people in the labour market although there are a surprising number of 50-65 years olds who are not and presumably have taken early retirement or are long term sick.

 

[Dave1987]

Id explain them by saying that the employers dont want full time workers and as private entities they are allowed to pick and choose who they employ and how.

Self employed contractors have been around for years so im unsure what your point is by bringing them into it - if people want to go down that route then thats up to them is it not?

I dont want the Government to legislate for everything that goes on in this world - theres a special name for that - but what they can legislate to stop is the abuse of contractors and employee rights - and dont worry I can see whats happening in the world but from what i see its not as much doom and gloom as you so wish it was.

Indeed. But Government does not need to endorse it or encourage the casualisation as they have done. They should be promoting good quality full time work. Many people are forced into zero hours work or "self employed contractor" work by the DWP who want people off the dole anyway they can. I wonder why it is that we have record employment levels but wages are worse than before the crash of 2008. If everything was so rosy wages would be shooting up and the BOE would need to raise interest rates lots to keep the economy in check. As it is the BOE is scared to even raise them by 0.25% with some commentators saying even that tiny rise was probably too early. It's very doom and gloom at the moment no matter how much you try and rose tint it!