Written By:
James Henderson - Date published:
12:16 pm, November 19th, 2012 - 9 comments
Categories: jobs -
Tags:
A closer look at the Household Labourforce Survey reveals startling facts: in the four years since the ‘brighter future’ began, in which time the adult population grew by 156,000, the number of fulltime jobs went down by 700. The number of part-time jobs is up a little – 25,000 – but 31,000 more part-timers want full-time work. All up, 1 in 6 Kiwis are looking for work.
Here’s the table for Kiwis who are working or looking for work (it’s all adults over 15 except half a million retirees, 230,000 students, 170,000 stay-at-home parents, and a few others)
September Quarter | 2008 | 2012 |
In full-time work | 1,686,000 | 1,686,000 |
Part-time not wanting more hours | 416,000 | 410,000 |
Part-time and underemployed | 82,000 | 113,000 |
Unemployed and on dole | 24,000 | 50,000 |
Unemployed not on dole | 70,000 | 120,000 |
Jobless but not unemployed | 86,000 | 124,000 |
In 2008, people on the dole, other unemployed, jobless, and underemployed was 1 in 9 of all those in the job market. That’s up to 1 in 6. The number of people who have as much work as they want has actually fallen by 6,000 while the number looking for work has ballooned by 145,000.
The failure to create fulltime work in particular also shows up in the number of unemployed who are looking for fulltime work – four years ago, that was 56,000. Today, it has nearly doubled to 108,000.
Remember, the recession ended 3 and a half years ago. And we’re still going backwards. Remember, we were promised 170,000 more jobs, and have haven’t appeared.
In a day or two, I’ll have a look at the demographics and regions worst hit by National’s jobs failure.
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
What does “Jobless but not unemployed” actually mean? Seems like a bit of a contradiction.
I guess they are partners in one income households and therefore ineligible to receive assistance.
Pretty daft definition of ‘unemployed’ then if it doesn’t include people who don’t have jobs.
“Remember the recession ended 3 and a half years ago”
So, the global economic recession (2008-2012) that is still ongoing has no impact on our economy?
Thats a strange claim to be trying to make……
Left logic.
The ‘technical’ definition of a recession is two quarters of negative growth in a row. We haven’t had two quarters of negative growth in a row for 3 1/2 years now, so the recession has ‘technically’ ended, even if in practice it obviously hasn’t.
By partner was unemplyed for twelve months but never sought govt assistance therefore she doesnt show in official stats.
You don’t have to seek government assistance to show up in the official stats.
In any event, the stats are compiled from the quartery household survey, which is simply a sample of some number of households (don’t know how many, but I’d guess around 2,000). The results of that survey is than extrapolated out to attempt to represent the entire population.
So strictly speaking, unless you answer the survey, you’re not included in the official stats.
Well statistics are fudged daily by National, when reality doesn’t suit them they create their own. Disraeli’s ‘lies, damn lies and statistics’ quote is correct when put against how it treats statistics.