Connect with us

Black and Asian American Workers Falling Behind in Getting Back Jobs

This article investigates how demographic groups are transitioning from unemployment into employment and how that compares to their historical relationship between job openings and transitions.
The post Black and Asian American Workers Falling Behind…

Published

on

In the first half of 2021, the economy added more than 4.2 million jobs, a rise of almost 3.0 percent, as it rapidly added back jobs lost during the pandemic-related recession.

In a recent report in July 2021, Jason Furman and William Powell documented that the recent job transition rate from unemployment to employment was somewhat lower than expected given the job opening rate. The job opening rate averaged 5.6 percent in the first six months of 2021. It had previously never been higher than 4.8 percent — a peak hit in 2018 — and usually is well under 4.0 percent. Given this backdrop, this article investigates how demographic groups are transitioning from unemployment into employment and how that compares to their historical relationship between job openings and transitions.

Effects by Race and Ethnicity

Using the Current Population Survey, we investigate the month-to-month work transition rate of unemployed US workers since 2001 and report the annual aggregated employment transition by racial group. Figure 1 shows the predicted rate of transitions from unemployment to employment for whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asian American workers, based on the average job opening rate for the year. As can be seen, Black and Asian American workers have considerably lower transition rates than white and Hispanic workers.

Figure 1

Although the picture of job flows may not seem as bad as during the Great Recession, Black and Asian American job transition rates over the past few months were still not as high as the rates for whites and Hispanics in the recovery following the Great Recession.

In the first six months of 2021, 18 percent of Black and 20 percent of Asian American unemployed workers gained a job, which is around 5 percentage points lower than the rate of re-employment for white and Hispanic unemployed workers. Although unemployment among Hispanic workers usually is higher than that of white workers, their rate of moving into jobs does not look worse than that of their white counterparts, typically outperforming transition rates among unemployed whites, often by wide margins.

Figure 2

fig 2

To show how racial and ethnic groups transitioned into jobs in the first half of 2021 compared to their past patterns, Figure 2 compares the transition rate for the first six months of the year with the predicted rate (which is illustrated in the trend line) for each group, given the rate of job openings.

In the first quarter of 2021, white and Hispanic unemployed workers were mostly on the predicted path for regaining jobs based on the rate of job openings, although this pace slowed down in May and June. This summer, Black and Asian American unemployed workers were further off track to meeting the expected employment transition based on the job opening rate. For example, about 20 percent of Black, and 25 percent of Asian American unemployed workers gained jobs in June, far below the predicted rate of 30 percent given the job opening rate. This led to a gap between the predicted rate of re-employment and the actual rate of reemployment for the first six months of 2021 of 8.5 percentage points for Black unemployed workers and 6.4 percentage points for Asian American unemployed workers. This compares to a gap between predicted and actual rates of reemployment of roughly 3 percentage points for white and Hispanic unemployed workers (Table 1).

Effects by Gender and Age

We also examined how job transition rates behaved relative to the overall market by workers’ gender and age. Transition rates do not appear to differ significantly between men and women. Women experienced a relative slower exit from unemployment compared to men: 7.3 percentage points below the predicted value given the job opening rate, compared to 6.8 percentage points for men. Somewhat surprisingly, among all unemployed workers, 16 to 19-year-olds were the only group that outperformed with respect to month-to-month employment transition in the first six months of 2021. This mirrors the unusually low unemployment rate for teenagers that we have seen thus far this year.

We might expect to see a slower pace for 16 to 19-year-olds in the coming months, but their job prospects seem to be quite good at the moment. This could be due in part to the current state of the labor market, in which certain sectors, like the service sectors or hospitality, lost workers during the pandemic and now find it difficult to hire workers. Given their lack of work experience in jobs in other sectors, young unemployed workers may find it relatively easy to refill those vacancies. It is likely also the case that young people have fewer fears of the pandemic and are less likely to have family responsibilities that might keep them from working.

By contrast, unemployed workers in their later prime age appear to have a slightly lower rate of gaining jobs. With years of work experience, some of them might want to switch to better jobs or change industries and may be confident that they will find one, given the unusually high number of job openings.

Table 1. Unemployed Workers’ Job Transition Rates, First Half 2021, by Race, Ethnicity, Gender, Age
  First Half of 2021 (Job Transition Rates) Difference from Pre-Pandemic Trend
  Percent Percentage Points
White, non-Hispanic 25.25 -3.21 pp
Black, non-Hispanic 19.96 -8.51 pp
Hispanic 25.78 -2.68 pp
Asian, non-Hispanic 22.08 -6.38 pp
Men 24.34 -6.83 pp
Women 23.89 -7.29 pp
Age: 16-19 32.88 2.57 pp
Age: 20-24 26.21 -4.11 pp
Age: 25-34 24.66 -5.65 pp
Age: 35-44 23.14 -7.18 pp
Age: 45-54 23.21 -7.10 pp
Age: 55-64 21.41 -8.91 pp
Age: 65 or over 17.18 -13.14 pp

Source: Authors’ analysis from the Current Population Survey, accessed through https://cps.ipums.org/cps

Why This Matters

The pandemic has created an extraordinary labor market situation. During the shutdown last spring, we saw unemployment rates unequaled since the Great Depression. As the economy reopened, we saw extraordinary job growth and rapid declines in unemployment. Looking at standard measures like unemployment and employment rates, the labor market would look reasonably healthy in August of 2021, although “healthy” still implies large amounts of discrimination.  

However, we know that in many ways the labor market is very far from normal. In many sectors, workers are still finding it difficult to get reemployed. We also know that there appears to be far more turnover than we would ordinarily see in the labor market.

This analysis provides insight into the extent to which different groups are or are not transitioning from unemployment to employment. While we cannot directly determine the reason for gaps in transition rates from these data, it can be suggestive. For example, the rapid transition rates for teens likely indicates less fear of the pandemic and workers who are less picky about their jobs.

The unusually low transition rates among older workers could stem from a combination of difficulty finding jobs, fears about the pandemic, and workers being more selective about their job choices. The unusually low rates of transitions among Blacks and Asian Americans could reflect similar issues, as well as discrimination in the labor market.

Clearly this is a labor market in which many workers are facing considerable hardship, while others are seeing unusual possibilities. Over 60 percent of current jobholders looked for new jobs in late summer, seeking expanded benefits and more workplace flexibility, besides better pay. More than half the workforce anticipates looking for new jobs in the next 12 months. As the economy moves back towards full employment and the pandemic is hopefully controlled, we may end up with a labor market that looks very different from the one that existed before the pandemic.  

The post Black and Asian American Workers Falling Behind in Getting Back Jobs appeared first on Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Beloved mall retailer files Chapter 7 bankruptcy, will liquidate

The struggling chain has given up the fight and will close hundreds of stores around the world.

Published

on

It has been a brutal period for several popular retailers. The fallout from the covid pandemic and a challenging economic environment have pushed numerous chains into bankruptcy with Tuesday Morning, Christmas Tree Shops, and Bed Bath & Beyond all moving from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation.

In all three of those cases, the companies faced clear financial pressures that led to inventory problems and vendors demanding faster, or even upfront payment. That creates a sort of inevitability.

Related: Beloved retailer finds life after bankruptcy, new famous owner

When a retailer faces financial pressure it sets off a cycle where vendors become wary of selling them items. That leads to barren shelves and no ability for the chain to sell its way out of its financial problems. 

Once that happens bankruptcy generally becomes the only option. Sometimes that means a Chapter 11 filing which gives the company a chance to negotiate with its creditors. In some cases, deals can be worked out where vendors extend longer terms or even forgive some debts, and banks offer an extension of loan terms.

In other cases, new funding can be secured which assuages vendor concerns or the company might be taken over by its vendors. Sometimes, as was the case with David's Bridal, a new owner steps in, adds new money, and makes deals with creditors in order to give the company a new lease on life.

It's rare that a retailer moves directly into Chapter 7 bankruptcy and decides to liquidate without trying to find a new source of funding.

Mall traffic has varied depending upon the type of mall.

Image source: Getty Images

The Body Shop has bad news for customers  

The Body Shop has been in a very public fight for survival. Fears began when the company closed half of its locations in the United Kingdom. That was followed by a bankruptcy-style filing in Canada and an abrupt closure of its U.S. stores on March 4.

"The Canadian subsidiary of the global beauty and cosmetics brand announced it has started restructuring proceedings by filing a Notice of Intention (NOI) to Make a Proposal pursuant to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). In the same release, the company said that, as of March 1, 2024, The Body Shop US Limited has ceased operations," Chain Store Age reported.

A message on the company's U.S. website shared a simple message that does not appear to be the entire story.

"We're currently undergoing planned maintenance, but don't worry we're due to be back online soon."

That same message is still on the company's website, but a new filing makes it clear that the site is not down for maintenance, it's down for good.

The Body Shop files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy

While the future appeared bleak for The Body Shop, fans of the brand held out hope that a savior would step in. That's not going to be the case. 

The Body Shop filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States.

"The US arm of the ethical cosmetics group has ceased trading at its 50 outlets. On Saturday (March 9), it filed for Chapter 7 insolvency, under which assets are sold off to clear debts, putting about 400 jobs at risk including those in a distribution center that still holds millions of dollars worth of stock," The Guardian reported.

After its closure in the United States, the survival of the brand remains very much in doubt. About half of the chain's stores in the United Kingdom remain open along with its Australian stores. 

The future of those stores remains very much in doubt and the chain has shared that it needs new funding in order for them to continue operating.

The Body Shop did not respond to a request for comment from TheStreet.   

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super…

Published

on

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super Tuesday primaries have got it right. Barring cataclysmic changes, Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be the Republican and Democratic nominees for president in 2024.

(Left) President Joe Biden delivers remarks on canceling student debt at Culver City Julian Dixon Library in Culver City, Calif., on Feb. 21, 2024. (Right) Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump stands on stage during a campaign event at Big League Dreams Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nev., on Jan. 27, 2024. (Mario Tama/Getty Images; David Becker/Getty Images)

With Nikki Haley’s withdrawal, there will be no more significantly contested primaries or caucuses—the earliest both parties’ races have been over since something like the current primary-dominated system was put in place in 1972.

The primary results have spotlighted some of both nominees’ weaknesses.

Donald Trump lost high-income, high-educated constituencies, including the entire metro area—aka the Swamp. Many but by no means all Haley votes there were cast by Biden Democrats. Mr. Trump can’t afford to lose too many of the others in target states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Majorities and large minorities of voters in overwhelmingly Latino counties in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley and some in Houston voted against Joe Biden, and even more against Senate nominee Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas).

Returns from Hispanic precincts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts show the same thing. Mr. Biden can’t afford to lose too many Latino votes in target states like Arizona and Georgia.

When Mr. Trump rode down that escalator in 2015, commentators assumed he’d repel Latinos. Instead, Latino voters nationally, and especially the closest eyewitnesses of Biden’s open-border policy, have been trending heavily Republican.

High-income liberal Democrats may sport lawn signs proclaiming, “In this house, we believe ... no human is illegal.” The logical consequence of that belief is an open border. But modest-income folks in border counties know that flows of illegal immigrants result in disorder, disease, and crime.

There is plenty of impatience with increased disorder in election returns below the presidential level. Consider Los Angeles County, America’s largest county, with nearly 10 million people, more people than 40 of the 50 states. It voted 71 percent for Mr. Biden in 2020.

Current returns show county District Attorney George Gascon winning only 21 percent of the vote in the nonpartisan primary. He’ll apparently face Republican Nathan Hochman, a critic of his liberal policies, in November.

Gascon, elected after the May 2020 death of counterfeit-passing suspect George Floyd in Minneapolis, is one of many county prosecutors supported by billionaire George Soros. His policies include not charging juveniles as adults, not seeking higher penalties for gang membership or use of firearms, and bringing fewer misdemeanor cases.

The predictable result has been increased car thefts, burglaries, and personal robberies. Some 120 assistant district attorneys have left the office, and there’s a backlog of 10,000 unprosecuted cases.

More than a dozen other Soros-backed and similarly liberal prosecutors have faced strong opposition or have left office.

St. Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner resigned last May amid lawsuits seeking her removal, Milwaukee’s John Chisholm retired in January, and Baltimore’s Marilyn Mosby was defeated in July 2022 and convicted of perjury in September 2023. Last November, Loudoun County, Virginia, voters (62 percent Biden) ousted liberal Buta Biberaj, who declined to prosecute a transgender student for assault, and in June 2022 voters in San Francisco (85 percent Biden) recalled famed radical Chesa Boudin.

Similarly, this Tuesday, voters in San Francisco passed ballot measures strengthening police powers and requiring treatment of drug-addicted welfare recipients.

In retrospect, it appears the Floyd video, appearing after three months of COVID-19 confinement, sparked a frenzied, even crazed reaction, especially among the highly educated and articulate. One fatal incident was seen as proof that America’s “systemic racism” was worse than ever and that police forces should be defunded and perhaps abolished.

2020 was “the year America went crazy,” I wrote in January 2021, a year in which police funding was actually cut by Democrats in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Denver. A year in which young New York Times (NYT) staffers claimed they were endangered by the publication of Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) opinion article advocating calling in military forces if necessary to stop rioting, as had been done in Detroit in 1967 and Los Angeles in 1992. A craven NYT publisher even fired the editorial page editor for running the article.

Evidence of visible and tangible discontent with increasing violence and its consequences—barren and locked shelves in Manhattan chain drugstores, skyrocketing carjackings in Washington, D.C.—is as unmistakable in polls and election results as it is in daily life in large metropolitan areas. Maybe 2024 will turn out to be the year even liberal America stopped acting crazy.

Chaos and disorder work against incumbents, as they did in 1968 when Democrats saw their party’s popular vote fall from 61 percent to 43 percent.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The…

Published

on

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reviewed no data when deciding in 2023 to keep its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in place.

Doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in Washington in a file image. (Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

VA Secretary Denis McDonough said on May 1, 2023, that the end of many other federal mandates “will not impact current policies at the Department of Veterans Affairs.”

He said the mandate was remaining for VA health care personnel “to ensure the safety of veterans and our colleagues.”

Mr. McDonough did not cite any studies or other data. A VA spokesperson declined to provide any data that was reviewed when deciding not to rescind the mandate. The Epoch Times submitted a Freedom of Information Act for “all documents outlining which data was relied upon when establishing the mandate when deciding to keep the mandate in place.”

The agency searched for such data and did not find any.

The VA does not even attempt to justify its policies with science, because it can’t,” Leslie Manookian, president and founder of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, told The Epoch Times.

“The VA just trusts that the process and cost of challenging its unfounded policies is so onerous, most people are dissuaded from even trying,” she added.

The VA’s mandate remains in place to this day.

The VA’s website claims that vaccines “help protect you from getting severe illness” and “offer good protection against most COVID-19 variants,” pointing in part to observational data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that estimate the vaccines provide poor protection against symptomatic infection and transient shielding against hospitalization.

There have also been increasing concerns among outside scientists about confirmed side effects like heart inflammation—the VA hid a safety signal it detected for the inflammation—and possible side effects such as tinnitus, which shift the benefit-risk calculus.

President Joe Biden imposed a slate of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021. The VA was the first federal agency to implement a mandate.

President Biden rescinded the mandates in May 2023, citing a drop in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. His administration maintains the choice to require vaccines was the right one and saved lives.

“Our administration’s vaccination requirements helped ensure the safety of workers in critical workforces including those in the healthcare and education sectors, protecting themselves and the populations they serve, and strengthening their ability to provide services without disruptions to operations,” the White House said.

Some experts said requiring vaccination meant many younger people were forced to get a vaccine despite the risks potentially outweighing the benefits, leaving fewer doses for older adults.

By mandating the vaccines to younger people and those with natural immunity from having had COVID, older people in the U.S. and other countries did not have access to them, and many people might have died because of that,” Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine on leave from Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times previously.

The VA was one of just a handful of agencies to keep its mandate in place following the removal of many federal mandates.

“At this time, the vaccine requirement will remain in effect for VA health care personnel, including VA psychologists, pharmacists, social workers, nursing assistants, physical therapists, respiratory therapists, peer specialists, medical support assistants, engineers, housekeepers, and other clinical, administrative, and infrastructure support employees,” Mr. McDonough wrote to VA employees at the time.

This also includes VA volunteers and contractors. Effectively, this means that any Veterans Health Administration (VHA) employee, volunteer, or contractor who works in VHA facilities, visits VHA facilities, or provides direct care to those we serve will still be subject to the vaccine requirement at this time,” he said. “We continue to monitor and discuss this requirement, and we will provide more information about the vaccination requirements for VA health care employees soon. As always, we will process requests for vaccination exceptions in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies.”

The version of the shots cleared in the fall of 2022, and available through the fall of 2023, did not have any clinical trial data supporting them.

A new version was approved in the fall of 2023 because there were indications that the shots not only offered temporary protection but also that the level of protection was lower than what was observed during earlier stages of the pandemic.

Ms. Manookian, whose group has challenged several of the federal mandates, said that the mandate “illustrates the dangers of the administrative state and how these federal agencies have become a law unto themselves.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending