Skip to main content

UK employment figures all smoke and mirrors?

As the UK unemployment rate falls, Ed Miliband is right to point to the disparity in unemployment between the north and south. If there are signs of economic recovery, it clearly isn't uniform across the country.

The headline figure of falling unemployment masks the real problem for an economy that is still sluggish and for a patchy recovery.

The unemployment rate is highest in the North East (10.4%) and lowest in the South East (5.8%). The disparities are illustrated in an interactive map showing the distribution of people receiving job seekers allowance produced by the Office for National Statistics.

It is also a distinctive feature of this recession that increasing numbers are working part-time because they are unable to find full-time employment. In 2008, just 16.6% of the male workforce had part-time employment, now it is 32.6%. For women the percentage in part-time employment increased from 7.1% (2008) to 13.5% (2013).

Millions of hard-working but hard-pressed families have seen inflation outstrip any increase in earnings, a trend that is set to continue. A real feel-good factor may be hard to conjure.

The right wing think tank Centre for Policy Studies warns the Chancellor against complacency. It makes the points that the deficit is still 'extraordinarily high', unemployment is still 'way above its pre-crisis peak', productivity performance has been poor, and many underlying structural problems persist.

Postscript

A defining and continuing feature of this long recession is perhaps 'underemployment' rather than simply unemployment with a massive increase in those working part-time. There has been an unprecedented fall in earnings while inflation has increased. Many of those with part-time employment have been unable to increase their income by increasing hours worked.

The price of petrol has increased by 54% since 2008. Hard working families have seen the cost of living increase across the board. Changes in welfare funding means that the poorest and the disabled have born the brunt of the recession caused by the banking crisis.

See also:

The disgraceful falsehood of Mr Osborne's spending review
Failure to act on corporate tax avoidance is a disgrace.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As