Weekly initial jobless claims rise 5,000
posted at 9:25 am on August 25, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
The level of weekly initial jobless claims rose slightly this week by 5,000 to 417,000. The change pushed the 4-week average up by almost the same amount to 407,500, thanks also to an upward revision of last week’s report:
In the week ending August 20, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 417,000, an increase of 5,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 412,000. The 4-week moving average was 407,500, an increase of 4,000 from the previous week’s revised average of 403,500.
The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.9 percent for the week ending August 13, a 0.1 percentage point decrease from the prior week’s revised rate of 3.0 percent.
The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending August 13 was 3,641,000, a decrease of 80,000 from the preceding week’s revised level of 3,721,250. The 4-week moving average was 3,701,000, a decrease of 19,500 from the preceding week’s revised average of 3,720,750.
Again, this could be just statistical noise, although the upward pressure seems to be moving the range back to the 420K level seen throughout most of the second quarter of the year. We are moving in the wrong direction again the past few weeks, but not by large swings. Nevertheless, we know that Reuters never expects bad news, even when it’s merely incremental, so this report was …
New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits rose more than expected last week, lifted by striking Verizon Communications workers, a government report showed on Thursday.
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 417,000, the Labor Department said, but still nowhere near levels that would signal a recession.
Striking Verizon workers filed 8,500 claims for jobless benefits last week, after submitting 12,500 applications the previous week, which covered the period for the August nonfarm payrolls survey.
That suggests that the strike would have a negative affect on the payrolls count, which will be reported on Sept. 2. The strike against Verizon has ended.
Well, if Reuters knew about the strike, then why is an increase in the claims filed “more than expected”?
We are making progress in one area of unemployment-data coverage. Reuters unexpectedly didn’t include any reference at all to its 400K myth this week after I challenged them to back up their claim with actual data. We’ll see if that’s a trend or merely an anomaly in the series.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Heckuva job, Barry.
kingsjester on August 25, 2011 at 9:27 AM
How do you get to apply for jobless benefits when you are on STRIKE??????????
search4truth on August 25, 2011 at 9:30 AM
Last week’s number was revised up by 4000 again.
forest on August 25, 2011 at 9:31 AM
I’m glad we are in a recovery – I’d hate to see what the numbers looked like if we were in a double dip…..
/
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 9:33 AM
Gosh. Can’t wait for Obamacare to kick in. That’s going to fix everything.
BacaDog on August 25, 2011 at 9:34 AM
I guess his plan of improving employment one caddie at a time is coming up a bit short, eh?
michaelo on August 25, 2011 at 9:34 AM
Someone needs to look into that. If that’s just an oversight by Reuters, no big deal. But if striking union workers are pulling down unemployment benefits, a bunch of people are in deep doo doo.
Doughboy on August 25, 2011 at 9:34 AM
Frankly Bloomberg News is even worse than AP on being shocked, shocked by negative economic reports. You’d think Bloomberg would have a better grip, being a so-called business news service.
doufree on August 25, 2011 at 9:35 AM
Damn earthquake
Mark1971 on August 25, 2011 at 9:37 AM
You would be surprised at what union workers can get away with. Just look at the NLRB suing Boeing, because the union didn’t get to decide where the planes get built.
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Maybe, but that means someone is allowing them to get away with this. Who’s sending them unemployment checks?
Doughboy on August 25, 2011 at 9:41 AM
Shut up, that’s why.
JohnTant on August 25, 2011 at 9:41 AM
Your government at work.
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Unexpectedly!!!11!1!
steebo77 on August 25, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Wow, this is starting to get depressing. God, I pray that Obama oes not win a second term. America cannot sustain another four years of this stuff.
RedSoxNation on August 25, 2011 at 9:46 AM
Have you seen who’s in the White House?
rbj on August 25, 2011 at 9:47 AM
Obama doesn’t care and will do whatever he’s told by the union bosses, but whoever is administering these programs and allegedly issuing unemployment checks and benefits to these striking workers will care when they get thrown under the bus.
Doughboy on August 25, 2011 at 9:49 AM
This is a serious question. Could someone please explain to me what these numbers really mean? The Dem talking point is that when Zero took office, the economy was losing 750,000 jobs per month. I’ve heard this line over and over, even from Jay Carney.
But if new jobless claims are over 400,000 per week, that’s about 1,600,00 per month.
What am I missing?
hamnj7 on August 25, 2011 at 9:50 AM
Edited for accuracy
Dollayo on August 25, 2011 at 9:51 AM
The New Jersey supreme court, among others, have said that striking workers are entitled to unemployment benefits. I believe that this is also the case in California and several other states.
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 9:51 AM
I wonder if more regulation might not help kick start this thing.
a capella on August 25, 2011 at 9:51 AM
A striking employee has voluntarily left his job, it is like quiting your job. A situation where unemployment benefits are not paid. Activist judges again?
Dasher on August 25, 2011 at 9:56 AM
Not to worry, unemployment benefits create jobs.
petefrt on August 25, 2011 at 9:56 AM
The amount of variation in the weekly data is consistent with typical statistical noise. This week’s figures, rather than being “more than expected”, are actually right on track with real world data trend-based expectations!
ironman on August 25, 2011 at 9:56 AM
Unemployment Insurance
Are workers who are on strike entitled to collect Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits?
It depends on the specific state law. A few states allow workers to collect UI if the strike is caused by an employer’s violation of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) or an employer’s breach of the collective bargaining agreement. Some states allow workers to collect UI if the employer has locked out the workers.
katablog.com on August 25, 2011 at 9:56 AM
I’m sure Barry, by executive order of course, gives all union employees unemployment.
katablog.com on August 25, 2011 at 9:57 AM
“Striking Verizon workers acted stupidly.”
(off mike) “What?! They are union workers??”
“Verizon acted stupidly.”
/PBHO
Khun Joe on August 25, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Another Story about Verison workers getting unemployment. This story just says they filed – don’t know if that means they got them for sure.
katablog.com on August 25, 2011 at 10:00 AM
So, I guess this is not a good time to point out that 5% of the population now receives SSDI payments each month?
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 10:01 AM
Yes, it is New Jersey, after all. Their logic was that if the company isn’t shut down during the strike, then the union employees are entitled to unemployment. Some logic.
Vashta.Nerada on August 25, 2011 at 10:02 AM
You don’t say.
ConservativePartyNow on August 25, 2011 at 10:04 AM
The other side of the equation; people getting hired. Since government is not the sole employer but is the sole provider of unemployment benefits, we don’t and can’t get weekly updates on the number of people hired. We only get an estimate of those employed on a monthly basis, and that’s not exactly good news either.
Steve Eggleston on August 25, 2011 at 10:04 AM
From one of my economic sources, Tom Blumer:
Steve Eggleston on August 25, 2011 at 10:09 AM
Next month the excuse will be the hurricane and earthquake…
Just more bad luck…
PatriotRider on August 25, 2011 at 10:13 AM
Obama and company have done for the economy what pantyhose did for foreplay.
TXUS on August 25, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Steve, thanks for the feedback. I must be a little slow on the uptake, though. I think you’re saying we have to look at the net difference; hired minus fired. No way hired (private or public) is large enough to offset the fired to be less than 750K, wuich is the DEM magic number.
So why don’t the REPs mention this?
hamnj7 on August 25, 2011 at 10:17 AM
To quote Madeline Kahn, it’s twoo, it’s twoo.
Yes, in several blue states, striking union workers, because they are not on the clock, may file for unemployment benefits. A nifty game to play every couple of years, especially since a common piece of a strike settlement is a package of strike-time pay recovery for those same union members.
“Hey, boys, you think it’s about time for another double-dip? Yeah, I thought so. Here’s the key to the closet, get out the signs.”
Freelancer on August 25, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Mission accomplished.
hawksruleva on August 25, 2011 at 10:22 AM
Barry’s outline of some ideas to fix this will fix this. Clearly.
Then again, if those don’t, surely he’ll plan some more outlines of ideas.
He won’t rest until this is fixed and, TBC, golfing and biking pretty much involves constant motion, so no wise cracks.
Dusty on August 25, 2011 at 10:38 AM
So when does Barry start blaming the hurricane? You’d think he and Krugman would be happy if it creates all kinds of damage. That will create jobs and get the economy moving again.
GarandFan on August 25, 2011 at 10:39 AM
Time for another 18 holes…
No doubt the Whiner-n-Chief would be more worried about his position if he did not have so many allies in the press that are helping produce unbelievable results like this:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/25/with-pessimism-growing-on-economy-more-americans-still-blame-bush-over-obama/
…8 years of the “buck stops at the Presidents desk” when Bush was in office.
….and now three years into the Obama disaster and “it’s not my fault” is the storyline now….
..democrats controlled the House and Senate since 2006…..
Obama came in with more power in 2009(White House,filibuster proof Congress)
than any President in modern History….Republicans control the House for 6 months since in 2011 and they get the majority of the blame.
This is what happens when Republican leadership sits on the sidelines while letting the democrats and their allies in the press frame the narrative.
Unbelievable…..
Baxter Greene on August 25, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Awww, did they put on their big boy pants?
RDE2010 on August 25, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Slight correction from Tom Blumer, who did the initial calculations before the coffee kicked in:
Steve Eggleston on August 25, 2011 at 11:02 AM
The contradictions are maddening:
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/25/with-pessimism-growing-on-economy-more-americans-still-blame-bush-over-obama/#ixzz1W3IdAznE
We still have 51 percent (don’t know what the demographics are) blaming Bush….one man…for the terrible economy….then you get this:
So super genius “Independent” Penny(that voted democrat and states she will do so again next year) here says that “he is only one man” ..”he can only do so much” ……
…but yet they have no problem blaming “one man” Bush for the economic condition of this country 3 years into poor,poor, wittle Obama’s magic term.
…stuck on stupid.
…and right in line with the talking points you hear parroted from the MSM right now.
….and no single person has been more destructive to the private sector than Obama genius.
Baxter Greene on August 25, 2011 at 11:03 AM
Unexpectedly, of course!
rjoco1 on August 25, 2011 at 11:09 AM
There was a recent cartoon where, upon graduation, an Ivy League university was handing out unemployment forms in lieu of diplomas. The only problem with that scenario is that you need a have had a job BEFORE you become eligible for unemployment.
If there is any poetic justice in this grim mess, I guess it would be that a vast majority of recent college graduates (now unemployed), in a “feel good moment”, voted for Obama because it was the “decent” thing to do-you know- the history of slavery and all. I guess these folks now have the same feeling as a drunk bar patron who wakes up in the morning in bed with an 80 year old hag.
MaiDee on August 25, 2011 at 11:10 AM
WTF? You can get unemployment while going on strike? UI is supposed to be for people who are laid off. Not people who voluntarily don’t show up for work.
angryed on August 25, 2011 at 11:20 AM
We did not qualify for unemployment benefits when on strike.
Herb on August 25, 2011 at 11:41 AM
The Verizon strike ended without them reaching an agreement BUT BEFORE the union had to start sending out $300 a week checks (around $10 million/wk). Some union ya got there. Ya put in 1.3 -1.75% of base pay ~ 1,000 a year, work for years without striking, and then when you do go on strike, they send you back to work before you get anything so that the union leaders can protect their horde of money.
And now we learn that some put in for unemployment monies.
journeyintothewhirlwind on August 25, 2011 at 12:48 PM
With the earthquake and now the Hurricane, I guess these will be highlighted as the reason why the unemployment rate will go up this month. Just wanted to get a jump on the “press”. (or is that “pull”?)
djaymick on August 25, 2011 at 5:05 PM