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

________________________________________________________________________

National Employment Law Project (NELP)

http://www.nelp.org/

Wage Theft Resources – (see links below)

“Winning Wage Justice,” a comprehensive guide outlining 28 state and city best-practice policies that community groups can implement to fight wage theft.  

Continuing our “Winning Wage Justice” series, NELP is pleased to share these new publications:

• A Summary of Research on Wage-and-Hour Violations in the United States
• Talking Points on the Need for Stronger Anti-Wage Theft Laws
• Choosing the Policy Options Right for Your Community
• Round-up of Recent State and Local Activity to Combat Wage Theft

*****************************

Release 31 January 2012
A defining feature of too many jobs in our 21st-century economy is wage theft. 

Wage theft occurs when workers are paid less than the minimum wage or another agreed-upon rate, work “off-the-clock” without pay, get paid less than time-and-a-half for overtime, have their tips stolen, have illegal deductions taken out of their paychecks, are misclassified as “independent contractors” instead of employees, or are simply not paid at all. 

It’s a trend that spans industries across the economy, including retail, restaurant, home health care, domestic work, manufacturing, construction, day labor, janitorial, security, dry cleaning, laundry, car wash, and nail salons.

And it’s a practice that hurts not only workers whose wages are short-changed, but local economies that are fueled by workers’ spending, and well-meaning businesses that are forced to compete with wage cheats that shave their operating costs by breaking the law.

Luckily, there’s another trend – a wave of grassroots energy and campaigns on the state and local levels to ensure that workers get paid the wages they're owed.  From California to Arkansas to Florida to Maryland, workers and their allies are organizing to pass – and defend – policies that help workers receive their lawful wages, level the playing field for law-abiding businesses, and boost the economy at the same time.   

To support these campaigns, in January 2011, NELP released “Winning Wage Justice,” a comprehensive guide outlining 28 state and city best-practice policies that community groups can implement to fight wage theft.  

Continuing our “Winning Wage Justice” series, NELP is pleased to share these new publications:

• A Summary of Research on Wage-and-Hour Violations in the United States
• Talking Points on the Need for Stronger Anti-Wage Theft Laws
• Choosing the Policy Options Right for Your Community
• Round-up of Recent State and Local Activity to Combat Wage Theft

Especially in today's economy, it's critically important to protect the fundamental right to be paid for the work that you do.  We hope these publications prove useful in your campaigns and your work!

________________________________________________________________________

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

________________________________________________________________________

U.S. Commercial Service

EUROPEAN UNION: TRANSFERRING PERSONAL DATA FROM THE EU TO THE U.S. [January 2012]

http://www.buyusainfo.net/docs/x_7956987.pdf

[full-text, 3 pages]

Summary

Data management is crucial to most companies’ operations.  The data often includes names, addresses and other

information on suppliers, customers or employees.  U.S. companies that receive this type of data from the European

Union (EU) need to be aware of strict EU-wide laws that establish how personally identifiable data can be collected,

stored, processed and transferred.

This report examines EU data protection provisions as they relate to data exports.  It sets out the obligations facing

U.S. companies in this area, and outlines the compliance options available to them.  It also provides an update on

changes to the cross-border data transfer regime currently under examination by the EU legislators – the European

Parliament and the Council of Member States. 

________________________________________________________________________

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)

EUROPEAN LEVEL

Social partners launch review of Working Time Directive [30 January 2012]

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2011/11/articles/eu1111051i.htm

On 14 November 2011, the EU-level social partners agreed to start negotiations to revise the Working Time Directive. This follows the Commission’s second stage of social partner consultation on this issue, launched in December 2010. The key issues under discussion by social partners representing Europe’s employers and trade unions include on-call working, the opt-out clause for the 48-hour week, and interpretations of European Court of Justice’s rulings on the Directive.

________________________________________________________________________

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)

Foundation Findings - Working time in the EU [31 January 2012]

 http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef1145.htm

or

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/45/en/1/EF1145EN.pdf

[full-text, 24 pages]

Author: Foundation

Summary: The number of hours worked per week continues to drift downwards, on average – the result of more people working part time, fewer people working long hours, and a fall in the collectively agreed working hours in many countries. Foundation Findings provide pertinent background information and policy pointers for all actors and interested parties engaged in the current European debate on the future of social policy. The contents are based on Foundation research and reflect its autonomous and tripartite structure.

________________________________________________________________________

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

________________________________________________________________________

Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

Comparing the Compensation of Federal and Private-Sector Employees [30 January 2012]

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12696

or

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/126xx/doc12696/01-30-FedPay.pdf

[full-text, 28 pages]

[excerpt]

Summary

How does the compensation of federal civilian employees compare with that of employees in the private sector?

Employees of the federal government and the private sector differ in ways that can affect compensation. Federal workers tend to be older, more educated, and more concentrated in professional occupations than private-sector workers.

CBO's study compares federal civilian employees and private-sector employees with certain similar observable characteristics (described below). Even among workers with similar observable characteristics, however, employees of the federal government and the private sector may differ in other attributes, such as motivation or effort, that are not easy to measure but that can matter a great deal for individuals' compensation. This analysis focuses on wages, benefits, and total compensation between 2005 and 2010.

Contents

CBO

Summary vii

The Federal Workforce 1

Size of the Federal Workforce 1

Agencies and Occupations 2

Differences Between the Federal and Private-Sector Workforces 2

CBO’s Approach to Analyzing Compensation for Federal and Private-Sector Workers 5

Comparison of Wages in the Federal Government and the Private Sector 6

Average Wages 6

The Distribution of Wages 8

Comparison of Benefits in the Federal Government and the Private Sector 8

Comparison of Total Compensation in the Federal Government and the Private Sector 10

Appendix A: CBO’s Analytic Approach 13

Appendix B: Wage and Benefit Systems for Federal Employees 15

Tables

S-1. Average Hourly Compensation of Federal Employees Relative to That of Private-Sector Employees, by Level of Educational Attainment ix

1. Characteristics of the Federal and Private-Sector Workforces 4

2. Federal and Private-Sector Wages, by Level of Educational Attainment 6

3. Federal and Private-Sector Benefits, by Level of Educational Attainment 10

4. Federal and Private-Sector Total Compensation, by Level of Educational Attainment 11

Figures

S-1. Average Compensation for Federal and Private-Sector Employees, by Level of Educational Attainment viii

1. Trends in Government and Private-Sector Employment Since 1980 2

2. Federal Civilian Employment, by Branch and Department, Fiscal Year 2010 3

3. Differences in Education and Occupations Between the Federal and Private-Sector Workforces 5

4. Distribution of Federal and Private-Sector Wages, by Level of

Educational Attainment 9

________________________________________________________________________

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

________________________________________________________________________

EMPLOYMENT COST INDEX - DECEMBER 2011 [31 January 2012]

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.nr0.htm

or

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/eci.pdf

[full-text, 21 pages]

and

Supplemental Files Table of Contents

http://www.bls.gov/web/eci.supp.toc.htm

Compensation costs for civilian workers increased 0.4 percent, seasonally adjusted, for the 3-month

period ending December 2011, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Wages and salaries

(which make up about 70 percent of compensation costs) also increased 0.4 percent, and benefits (which

make up the remaining 30 percent of compensation) increased 0.6 percent.

Civilian Workers

     Compensation costs for civilian workers increased 2.0 percent for the 12-month period ending

December 2011, the same as the increase a year earlier in December 2010. Wages and salaries increased

1.4 percent for the current 12-month period. In December 2010 the increase was 1.6 percent. Benefit

costs increased 3.2 percent for the 12-month period ending December 2011. In December 2010, the

increase was 2.9 percent.

Private Industry Workers

     Compensation costs for private industry workers increased 2.2 percent over the year, compared to the

2.1 percent increase for the previous 12-month period. Wages and salaries increased 1.6 percent for the

current 12-month period.  The increase for the 12-month period ending December 2010 was 1.8 percent.

The increase in the cost of benefits was 3.6 percent for the 12-month period ending December 2011,

higher than the December 2010 increase of 2.9 percent. Employer costs for health benefits increased

3.5 percent for the 12-month period ending December 2011, lower than the December 2010 increase of

5.0 percent.

     Among occupational groups, compensation cost increases for private industry workers for the

12-month period ending December 2011 ranged from 1.7 percent for service occupations to 2.4 percent

for production, transportation, and material moving occupations.

Among industry supersectors, compensation cost increases for private industry workers for the current

12-month period ranged from 1.0 percent for leisure and hospitality to 2.8 percent for manufacturing.

State and Local Government Workers

     Compensation costs for state and local government workers decelerated over the year. In December

2011, the increase for the 12-month period was 1.3 percent. In December 2010, the increase for the

12-month period was 1.8 percent. Values for this series—which began in June 1982—have ranged from

the current period’s 1.3 percent to 9.6 percent. Wages and salaries increased 1.0 percent for the

12-month period ending December 2011. A year earlier the increase was 1.2 percent. Prior values for this

series, which also began in June 1982, ranged from 1.0 percent to 8.5 percent. Benefit costs increased

2.1 percent in December 2011, down from the December 2010 increase of 2.9 percent. Prior values for

this series, which began in June 1990, ranged from 1.2 percent to 8.3 percent.

________________________

The Employment Cost Index for March 2012 is scheduled to be released on

Friday, April 27, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).

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

________________________________________________________________________

Fact Sheet | Hispanic Women | January 2012

Workplace Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities to Women of Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity [30 January 2012]

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/osar0015.htm

or

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/osar0015.pdf

[full-text, 3 pages]

[excerpt]

From 2005 through 2009, a total of 216 Hispanic or Latino1 women were fatally injured on the job--an average of 43 fatal injuries per year. Over the same period, Hispanic or Latino women accounted for 11 percent of all fatal occupational injuries incurred by women, roughly the same as Hispanic women’s share of all women’s employment. Fatal work injuries to Hispanic or Latino men have declined 29 percent since 2006, while fatal work injuries among Hispanic or Latino women have remained at about the same level.

Of the 216 fatal work injuries involving Hispanic or Latino women from 2005 to 2009, 116 (or 54 percent) involved women who were born in a country other than the United States. From 2005 to 2009, the states with the greatest numbers of fatal injuries involving Hispanic or Latino women were California (23 percent of fatal injuries to Hispanic or Latino women), Texas (15 percent), and Florida (8 percent).

In 2009, Hispanic or Latino women incurred 37,310 nonfatal injuries and illnesses requiring days away from work, accounting for 30 percent of injuries to Hispanic or Latino2 workers and 4 percent of all private industry injuries. Ten percent of all women workers who incurred occupational injuries and illnesses were Hispanic or Latino. Injuries to Hispanic or Latino women occurred primarily in the health and social assistance (28 percent) and leisure and hospitality industries (20 percent) in 2009.

Fatal injury data reported are for all ownerships (private sector, state, local, and federal government), whereas nonfatal injury and illness data are for private industry only, so data are not directly comparable.

AND MUCH MORE...including CHARTS....

________________________________________________________________________

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

________________________________________________________________________

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.