IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

HRM Asia-- http://www.hrmasia.com/

ASIAN EMPLOYMENT LAW GUIDE
http://www.hrmasia.com/employment-law-asia/

[Click on country name below—NOTE date to which each guide is current]

Acknowledgment

This Guide was prepared by the Workplace Law & Advisory – Asia practice of Freehills International Lawyers, with assistance from the following firms:

Contacts:

George Cooper
Practice Leader
+65 6236 9941
george.cooper@freehills.com

Celia Yuen
Senior Associate
+65 6236 9972
celia.yuen@freehills.com

Note:     This Guide:

• is current to 31 March 2011;
• contains general introductory information only, without an assumption of a duty of care by Freehills or the other firms listed;
• does not contain legal advice; and
• is not intended to be, nor should it be relied on as, a substitute for legal or other professional advice.

If employers have workplace relations issues or requirements in particular jurisdictions, then Freehills Workplace Law & Advisory - Asia can assist, working with local counsel.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training (JILPT)

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF LABOUR STUDIES (2012)
http://www.jil.go.jp/english/ejournal/index.html

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

PERSONAL INCOME AND OUTLAYS, DECEMBER 2011 [30 January 2012]

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/2012/pi1211.htm

or

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/2012/pdf/pi1211.pdf

[full-text, 13 pages]

or

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/2012/xls/pi1211.xls

[spreadsheet]

and

Highlights

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/2012/pdf/pi1211_fax.pdf

Personal income increased $61.3 billion, or 0.5 percent, and disposable personal income (DPI)

increased $47.1 billion, or 0.4 percent, in December, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Personal consumption expenditures (PCE) decreased $2.0 billion, or less than 0.1 percent.  In November,

personal income increased $7.4 billion, or 0.1 percent, DPI decreased $4.1 billion, or less than 0.1

percent, and PCE increased $11.4 billion, or 0.1 percent, based on revised estimates.

Real disposable income increased 0.3 percent in December, in contrast to a decrease of less than

0.1 percent in November.  Real PCE decreased 0.1 percent, in contrast to an increase of 0.1 percent.

[TABLE]

Wages and salaries

Private wage and salary disbursements increased $29.1 billion in December, in contrast to a decrease

of $1.4 billion in November.  Goods-producing industries' payrolls increased $10.8 billion, in contrast

to a decrease of $6.5 billion; manufacturing payrolls increased $7.4 billion, in contrast to a decrease

of $6.2 billion.  Services-producing industries' payrolls increased $18.3 billion, compared with an increase

of $5.1 billion.  Government wage and salary disbursements increased $0.4 billion in December; government

wages and salaries were unchanged in November.

                                Other personal income

Supplements to wages and salaries increased $3.6 billion in December, compared with an increase of $1.6 billion in November.

Proprietors' income increased $1.1 billion in December, in contrast to a decrease of $1.2 billion in November.

Farm proprietors' income decreased $4.7 billion in December, the same decrease as in November.   Nonfarm

proprietors' income increased $5.8 billion in December, compared with an increase of $3.5 billion in November.

Rental income of persons increased $8.2 billion in December, compared with an increase of $8.6 billion in November.

Personal income receipts on assets (personal interest income plus personal dividend income) increased $9.3 billion,

in contrast to a decrease of $0.6 billion.

Personal current transfer receipts increased $13.2 billion in December, compared with an increase of $0.4 billion

in November.  Within personal current transfer receipts, government social benefits to persons were boosted in

December by retroactive social security benefit payments of $7.1 billion at an annual rate, resulting from a

recalculation of the earnings base underlying the benefits of recent retirees.

Contributions for government social insurance -- a subtraction in calculating personal income --  increased

$3.7 billion in December; contributions for government social insurance were unchanged in November.

AND MUCH MORE...including TABLES....

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Dublin Foundation)

European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO)

EIROnline: European Industrial Relations Links
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/relatedsites.htm

This is a list of websites which may be of interest to EIROnline users. The links are grouped by country, and within countries under the categories of 'employers', 'trade unions', 'government' and 'other'.

The aim is to list for each country:

• the central trade union and employers' confederations and their national affiliates;
• other national employers' and union organisations;
• the ministry of labour/employment or similar;
• and other agencies, institutions and centres with an impact on or interest in industrial relations.

At this stage, to keep the number of links manageable, we include very few regional or local bodies, though this policy will be subject to review. These 'rules' have been slightly relaxed for some countries or categories where websites are scarce.

There are also links to:

• the European Union institutions and related bodies;
• other European and international organisations;
• and European and international trade union and employers' organisations.

Where a link is marked (En) some or all of the information is in English and the link is, wherever possible, directly to this information.

This collection of European industrial relations links does not claim to be comprehensive, and there are numerous gaps - both because websites are scarce in many categories or countries, and because of ignorance on our part. The only way that these omissions can be corrected is if EIROnline users help us to fill them in. Suggestions for additions to the list should be sent to Camilla Galli da Bino, EIRO Information Officer. Also, please let us any know if any of the links do not work.

These links are for the information of EIROnline users, and EIRO takes no responsibility for the content of the websites involved. The inclusion or exclusion of any organisation is not to be taken as a sign of approval or otherwise

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization for States, 2011 Annual Averages [27 January 2012]
http://www.bls.gov/lau/stalt.htm

Six alternative measures of labor underutilization have long been available on a monthly basis from the Current Population Survey (CPS) for the United States as a whole. They are published in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' monthly Employment Situation news release. (See table 15.) The official concept of unemployment (as measured in the CPS by U-3 in the U-1 to U-6 range of alternatives) includes all jobless persons who are available to take a job and have actively sought work in the past four weeks. This concept has been thoroughly reviewed and validated since the inception of the CPS in 1940. The other measures are provided to data users and analysts who want more narrowly (U-1 and U-2) or broadly (U-4 through U-6) defined measures.

BLS is committed to updating these data on a 4-quarter moving-average basis. The analysis that follows pertains to the 2011 annual averages. Data are also available for the following prior time periods:

• Fourth quarter of 2010 through third quarter of 2011
• Third quarter of 2010 through second quarter of 2011
• Second quarter of 2010 through first quarter of 2011
• 2010 annual averages
• Fourth quarter of 2009 through third quarter of 2010
• Third quarter of 2009 through second quarter of 2010
• Second quarter of 2009 through first quarter of 2010
• 2009 annual averages
• Fourth quarter of 2008 through third quarter of 2009
• Third quarter of 2008 through second quarter of 2009
• Second quarter of 2008 through first quarter of 2009
• 2008 annual averages
• 2007 annual averages
• 2006 annual averages
• 2005 annual averages
• 2004 annual averages
• 2003 annual averages

The six state measures are based on the same definitions as those published for the United States:

• U-1, persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
• U-2, job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
• U-3, total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (this is the definition used for the official unemployment rate);
• U-4, total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers;
• U-5, total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers; and
• U-6, total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers.

Definitions for the economic characteristics underlying the three broader measures of labor underutilization are worth mentioning here. Discouraged workers (U-4, U-5, and U-6 measures) are persons who are not in the labor force, want and are available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They are not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the prior 4 weeks, for the specific reason that they believed no jobs were available for them. The marginally attached (U-5 and U-6 measures) are a group that includes discouraged workers. The criteria for the marginally attached are the same as for discouraged workers, with the exception that any reason could have been cited for the lack of job search in the prior 4 weeks. Persons employed part time for economic reasons (U-6 measure) are those working less than 35 hours per week who want to work full time, are available to do so, and gave an economic reason (their hours had been cut back or they were unable to find a full-time job) for working part time. These individuals are sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers.

Generally, all six measures of labor underutilization move together over time, including across business cycles. Similarly, states that have high unemployment rates tend to have high values for the other five measures; the reverse is true for states with low unemployment rates. Note that, in the table and in the comparisons below, the unemployment rates (U-3) that are shown are derived directly from the CPS, because this is the only source of data for the various components. As a result, these U-3 measures may differ from the official state unemployment rates for the same period. The latter are estimates developed from statistical models that greatly improve the reliability of the top-side labor force and unemployment estimates. Those models, developed by the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program, incorporate CPS estimates, as well as input data from other sources. The model-based estimates are accessible through the LAUS program homepage. The official model-based annual averages for 2011 will be released on February 29, 2012.

In 2011, Nevada again reported the highest rate for all six alternative measures of labor underutilization. Nevada’s rates ranged from a U-2 of 8.5 percent to a U-6 of 22.7 percent, including a CPS-based unemployment rate, U-3, of 13.1 percent. California had the second highest rate for all six measures, including a U-3 of 11.6 percent. The next highest U-3 rate, 11.1 percent, was recorded in Rhode Island, which also had among the highest rates for each of the other alternative measures.

North Dakota continued to record the lowest rates for all six measures. North Dakota’s rates ranged from a U-1 of 1.2 percent to a U-6 of 6.6 percent, including a U-3 of 3.6 percent. Nebraska and South Dakota had the next lowest U-3 rates, 4.5 and 4.9 percent, respectively, and also ranked among the lowest states for the remaining measures. Four other states had U-3 values of less than 6.0 percent in 2011: New Hampshire, 5.4 percent; Iowa and Vermont, 5.8 percent each; and Wyoming, 5.9 percent. These states also had among the lowest rates for all of the other alternative measures.

In general, the alternative measures in any given state increase from U-1 to U-6, as they normally do at the national level. However, many states continued to have U-1 measures that exceeded their U-2 rates. This was the case in 18 states and the District of Columbia for 2011. The largest of these gaps was noted in the District of Columbia (-1.7 percentage points). As the economic recovery continues, consistent job growth results in declining U-2 rates and a narrowing of the gap between the two measures. At the national level, both U-1 and U-2 were 5.3 percent in 2011, as the gap has narrowed since early 2010.

Nevada, Michigan, New York, and South Carolina had the largest gaps between their U-3 and U-4 rates, +0.9 percentage point each. The conceptual difference between U-3 and U-4 is that the latter includes discouraged workers. Thus, the large gaps for these four states are a reflection of their relatively high degrees of would-be job-seeker discouragement. In contrast, North Dakota had the smallest gap between its U-3 and U-4 rates, +0.1 percentage point, indicating a relatively low incidence of discouragement.

In addition to the marginally attached, who are included in U-5, involuntary part-time workers are included in U-6. The larger the difference between U-5 and U-6, the higher the incidence of this form of "underemployment." California posted the largest gap between its U-5 and U-6 rates, +7.7 percentage points, followed by Nevada, +7.2 points. North Dakota registered the smallest difference between its U-5 and U-6 measures, +2.4 percentage points, indicating a comparatively low degree of underemployment.

The largest range across U-1 and U-6 among states was posted by California, +14.1 percentage points, followed closely by Nevada, +14.0 points. The next largest spreads were reported in Michigan and Washington, +12.7 percentage points each. North Dakota had the smallest range across its alternative measures, +5.4 percentage points. In general, states with lower U-3 rates had narrower ranges across their measures.

Overall, states experienced more declines than increases in the alternative measures relative to the prior 4-quarter average period, reflecting the moderate improvement in the national labor market. Thirty-four states showed improvement in U-1, the measure with the fewest number of declines relative to the prior period; the largest U-1 improvement occurred in Georgia (-0.6 percentage point). The measure with the most states registering decreases was U-6, where 39 states posted declines; the largest of these occurred in Utah (-1.0 percentage point). Utah posted the largest declines in the remaining measures, ranging from 0.5 percentage point in U-2 (tied with Georgia) to 0.9 point in U-5.

The U-1 measure increased in the greatest number of states, 10, plus the District of Columbia; U-4, at the other extreme, increased in only 4 states and the District of Columbia. The largest over-the-quarter increases recorded were: U-1, Arkansas and Hawaii (+0.2 percentage point each); U-2, Rhode Island (+0.2 point); U-3, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Nebraska, and Rhode Island (+0.2 point each); U-4, the District of Columbia and Indiana (+0.3 point each); U-5, the District of Columbia (+0.4 point); and U-6, Nebraska (+0.5 point).

Declines relative to calendar year 2010 were even more prevalent than declines relative to the prior 4-quarter average period. The measure posting the most decreases was U-2, where 49 states showed improvement over the year. The largest of these declines occurred in Oregon (-2.0 percentage points). U-6 registered the greatest number of increases among measures over the year, with six states and the District of Columbia posting increases. The largest of these increases occurred in the District of Columbia (+1.8 percentage points).

Many states with extreme measures, either high or low, maintained their general place in the rankings of alternative measures over the year. California, Florida, Nevada, Rhode Island, and South Carolina had rates among the 10 highest for each measure in both 2011 and 2010. Similarly, Iowa, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had rates among the 10 lowest for each measure in both years.

The alternative measures for states are analyzed on a 4-quarter average basis in order to increase the reliability of the CPS estimates, which are based on relatively small sample sizes at the state level, and to eliminate seasonality. Due to the inclusion of lagged quarters, the state alternative measures may not fully reflect the current status of the labor market.

For additional information on state estimates derived directly from the CPS, see notes on subnational CPS data.

Note: Some state rankings cited above include ties. Data are calculated from quarterly tables in which the components of each measure are rounded to the nearest hundred. As a result, these measures contain slightly more rounding error than that found in typical CPS annual average tabulations (in which rates are calculated based on unrounded data). Due to small state sample sizes, neither monthly nor quarterly state data from the CPS satisfy BLS publication standards.

The next issuance of the alternative measures of labor underutilization for states, covering the four quarters ending in March 2012, is tentatively scheduled for Friday, April 27.

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.