Technical information: (202) 691-6392 USDL 09-0934
http://www.bls.gov/mls/
For release: 10:00 A.M. (EDT)
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 Wednesday, August 12, 2009
EXTENDED MASS LAYOFFS IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2009
Employers initiated 2,994 mass layoff events in the second quarter
of 2009 that resulted in the separation of 534,881 workers from their
jobs for at least 31 days, according to preliminary figures released
by the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. Both
the numbers of extended mass layoff events and associated separations
were record highs for a second quarter (with data available back to
1995). (See table A.)
Second quarter program highs in the number of separations were re-
corded in 7 of 18 major industry sectors, all four geographic regions,
and fourteen states. Separations due to business demand reasons (es-
pecially slack work/insufficient demand) set a second quarter program
high, while separations for financial reasons reached its highest sec-
ond quarter level since 2001. Thirty-eight percent of employers re-
porting an extended layoff in the second quarter of 2009 indicated they
anticipated some type of recall, this was down from 51 percent a year
earlier, and was the lowest proportion of anticipated recalls for a
second quarter in program history (with data available back to 1995).
Second quarter 2009 layoff data are preliminary and are subject to
revision. (See the Technical Note.)
The national unemployment rate averaged 9.1 percent, not seasonally
adjusted, in the second quarter of 2009, up from 5.2 percent a year
earlier. Private nonfarm payroll employment, not seasonally adjusted,
decreased by 5 percent (-5,607,000) over the year.
Industry Distribution of Extended Layoffs
Manufacturing firms reported 932 extended mass layoff events involv-
ing 166,240 separations in the second quarter of 2009. The number of
events in manufacturing reached a second quarter program high, while
associated worker separations for this industry sector were at its high-
est second quarter level since 1998 (with data available back to 1995).
Manufacturing industries were responsible for 31 percent of private non-
farm extended layoff events and related separations in the second quarter
of 2009. A year earlier, manufacturing made up 22 percent of events and
18 percent of separations. (See table 1.) The largest numbers of sep-
arations within manufacturing were associated with transportation equip-
ment manufacturing (57,136, mostly associated with automobile and light
truck manufacturing) and machinery manufacturing (18,096). Six of the
21 manufacturing industry sub-sectors reached second quarter program
highs in terms of the numbers of separations--printing and related sup-
port activities; plastics and rubber products; nonmetallic mineral pro-
ducts; primary metals; fabricated metal products; and machinery.
__________________________________________________________
| |
| Changes to the Extended Mass Layoffs News Release |
| |
| Effective with this release, changes have been made to |
|the tables and Technical Note. For further information on|
|these changes, see the note on page 6. |
|__________________________________________________________|
- 2 -
Table A. Selected measures of extended mass layoff activity
Period Layoff events Separations Initial claimants
2005
January-March .......... 1,142 186,506 185,486
April-June ............. 1,203 246,099 212,673
July-September ......... 1,136 201,878 190,186
October-December ....... 1,400 250,178 246,188
2006
January-March .......... 963 183,089 193,510
April-June ............. 1,353 295,964 264,927
July-September ......... 929 160,254 161,764
October-December ....... 1,640 296,662 330,954
2007
January-March .......... 1,110 225,600 199,250
April-June ............. 1,421 278,719 259,234
July-September ......... 1,018 160,024 173,077
October-December ....... 1,814 301,592 347,151
2008
January-March .......... 1,340 230,098 259,292
April-June (r) ......... 1,756 354,713 339,629
July-September (r) ..... 1,582 290,900 304,316
October-December (r) ... 3,582 641,578 765,019
2009
January-March (r) ...... 3,979 704,618 830,028
April-June (p) ......... 2,994 534,881 506,533
r = revised.
p = preliminary.
In the second quarter of 2009, seven major industry sectors reported
second quarter program highs in terms of the number of worker separa-
tions--mining; construction; wholesale trade; transportation and ware-
housing; real estate and rental and leasing; health care and social
assistance; and accommodation and food services.
Reasons for Extended Layoffs
Among the seven categories of economic reasons for extended mass lay-
offs, business demand factors accounted for 45 percent of the events and
38 percent of separations during the second quarter of 2009, this was up
from 32 percent of events and 23 percent of separations in the same per-
iod a year earlier. (See table 2.) Separations related to business de-
mand factors more than doubled over the year from 79,925 to 202,151, a sec-
ond quarter program high for this reason category. Within the business
demand category, employers citing slack work/insufficient demand/nonsea-
sonal business slowdown had the largest over-the-year increase in separa-
tions (+92,546),largely in transportation equipment manufacturing.
Extended mass layoffs stemming from financial issues sharply increased
from 120 events associated with 27,999 separations in the second quarter
of 2008 to 264 events and 68,017 separations in the second quarter of 2009.
Manufacturing accounted for the largest number of separations due to fi-
nancial issues, mostly in transportation equipment manufacturing.
- 3 -
Table B. Metropolitan areas with the largest number of initial claimants associated
with extended mass layoff events in the second quarter 2009, by residency of claimants
2008 II (r) 2009 II (p)
Metropolitan area Initial Initial
claimants Rank claimants Rank
Total, 372 metropolitan areas ........ 276,640 404,966
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif. ..... 27,159 1 31,813 1
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, Ill.-Ind.-Wis. .... 16,908 3 20,922 2
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island,
N.Y.-N.J.-Pa. ............................ 17,680 2 19,891 3
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, Mich. ................ 15,282 4 19,193 4
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Calif. ........ 9,852 6 14,031 5
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif. ..... 11,868 5 12,492 6
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, Calif. ........ 6,189 8 8,653 7
Peoria, Ill. ................................. 590 90 8,295 8
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, Pa.-
N.J.-Del.-Md. ............................ 7,198 7 7,903 9
Las Vegas-Paradise, Nev. ..................... 2,261 21 7,874 10
r = revised.
p = preliminary.
NOTE: The geographic boundaries of the metropolitan areas shown in this table are
defined in Office of Management and Budget Bulletin 09-01, November 20, 2008.
Movement of Work
Ninety-nine extended mass layoffs involved the movement of work and
were associated with 18,242 separated workers in the second quarter of
2009. A year earlier, there were 71 layoff events and 12,317 separations
associated with the movement of work. Movement of work layoffs accounted
for 4 percent of nonseasonal layoff events in the second quarter of 2009.
(See table 9.) Sixty percent of movement of work layoff events involved
the permanent closure of worksites--affecting 11,647 workers--compared to
9 percent of total layoff events.
Sixty-four percent of extended mass layoff events and 56 percent of
the laid-off workers related to the movement of work were from manu-
facturing industries. In comparison, manufacturing accounted for 31 per-
cent of events and separations in the total private nonfarm economy.
(See table 6.) Employers cited an organizational change or a business
demand reason in most extended layoff events involving movement of work.
(See table 7.) Among the regions, the largest proportions of workers
affected by movement of work were in the West (31 percent) and Midwest
(30 percent). (See table 8.)
The 99 extended layoff events with movement of work for the second
quarter of 2009 involved 137 identifiable relocation of work actions,
of which employers were able to provide more complete separations infor-
mation for 86 of the actions. (See table 9.) In these 86 actions, 91
percent involved work moving within the same company, while 79 percent
were domestic reassignments. (See table 10.)
- 4 -
Recall Expectations
Thirty-eight percent of employers reporting an extended layoff in the
second quarter of 2009 indicated they anticipated some type of recall,
down from 51 percent a year earlier and the lowest second quarter pro-
portion in program history (with data available back to 1995). (See
table 11.) Of those employers expecting to recall workers, 41 percent
indicated that the offer would be extended to all displaced employees,
and 79 percent of employers anticipated extending the offer to at least
half of the workers, the lowest proportions on record for a second quarter.
Seventy-seven percent of employers expecting to recall laid-off employees
intend to do so within 6 months. Excluding layoff events due to seasonal
work and vacation period, in which 95 percent of the employers expected a
recall, employers anticipated recalling laid-off workers in 22 percent of
the events.
Size of Extended Layoffs
The average size of a layoff (as measured by separations per layoff
event) in the second quarter of 2009 was 179, compared to 202 per layoff
in second quarter 2008. Three of 18 major industry sectors registered aver-
age layoff sizes of 250 or more workers per event in the second quarter--
accommodation and food services (256 workers), utilities (255 workers), and
professional and technical services (253 workers). Among the seven cate-
gories of economic reasons for extended mass layoffs, financial issues re-
corded the largest average size of layoff in the second quarter of 2009, at
258 workers per event. (See table 12.)
Layoff events continued to be concentrated at the lower end of the ex-
tended layoff-size spectrum, with 45 percent of events involving between 50
and 99 workers and 68 percent of events with less than 150 workers. Layoffs
involving between 50 and 99 workers accounted for 18 percent of all separa-
tions during the period, and layoffs with less than 150 separated workers
accounted for 32 percent. These proportions are up from 14 and 28 percent
respectively from a year earlier. Separations involving 500 or more workers
accounted for 31 percent of all separations in the second quarter of 2009,
down from 37 percent a year earlier. (See table 13.)
Initial Claimant Characteristics
A total of 506,533 initial claimants for unemployment insurance were
associated with extended mass layoffs in the second quarter of 2009. Of
these claimants, 15 percent were black, 15 percent were Hispanic, 41 percent
were women, 34 percent were 30 to 44 years of age, and 21 percent were 55
years of age or older. (See table 3.) Among persons in the civilian labor
force for the same period, 11 percent were black, 14 percent were Hispanic,
47 percent were women, 33 percent were age 30 to 44, and 19 percent were 55
years of age or older.
- 5 -
Geographic Distribution
Among the 4 census regions, the West (173,840) and the Midwest (171,053)
recorded the highest numbers of separations due to extended mass layoff
events in the second quarter of 2009. All regions reported second quarter
program highs in terms of the numbers of worker separations (with data avail-
able back to 1995). (See table 4.) Among the 9 census divisions, the high-
est numbers of separations during the second quarter of 2009 were in the
Pacific (141,608) and East North Central (133,588). (See table 4.) Five
divisions reported second quarter program highs in terms of the numbers of
separations--the Middle Atlantic, East South Central, West North Central,
Mountain, and Pacific.
California recorded the largest number of worker separations (116,207),
followed by Ohio (42,578) and Illinois (42,325). (See table 5.) After ex-
cluding the impact of seasonal reasons, California still reported the highest
number of job cuts (104,761). Fourteen states reported second quarter pro-
gram highs in terms of numbers of separations--Alabama, Arkansas, California,
Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North
Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.
Eighty percent of the initial claimants associated with extended mass lay-
off events in the second quarter of 2009 resided within metropolitan areas,
about the same as a year earlier (81 percent). Among the 372 metropolitan
areas, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif., reported the highest number
of resident initial claimants (31,813) associated with extended mass layoff
events in the second quarter of 2009. Next were Chicago-Naperville-Joliet,
Ill.-Ind.-Wis., with 20,922 resident claimants, New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island, N.Y.-N.J.-Pa., with 19,891 resident claimants, and Detroit-Warren-
Livonia, Mich., with 19,193 resident claimants. In the second quarter of 2009,
Peoria, Ill., and Las Vegas-Paradise, Nev., entered the list of the 10 metro-
politan areas with the most resident initial claimants associated with extended
mass layoffs, replacing Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, Fla., and St. Louis,
Mo.-Ill., which were on the list in the second quarter of 2008. (See table B.)
Note
The quarterly series on extended mass layoffs cover layoffs of at least
31-days duration that involve 50 or more individuals from a single employer
filing initial claims for unemployment insurance during a consecutive 5-week
period. Approximately 30 days after a mass layoff is triggered, the employer
is contacted for additional information. Data for the first quarter are pre-
liminary and subject to revision. This release also includes revised data for
previous quarters. Data are not seasonally adjusted, but survey data suggest
that there is a seasonal pattern to layoffs. Thus, comparisons between consec-
utive quarters should not be used as an indicator of trend.
For additional information about the program, see the Technical
Note.
_____________________________
The report on Mass Layoffs in July 2009 is scheduled to be released
on Friday, August 21.
- 6 -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Changes to the Extended Mass Layoffs News Release |
| |
| Effective with this release, the following changes have been |
| implemented: |
| |
| -- The original tables B-D were dropped, as this information |
| is replicated within tables 2, 10, and 11, respectively. |
| |
| -- Table E has become the new table 11. This table has been |
| expanded to show the recall expectations of employers dis- |
| aggregated by whether extended layoff events were due to |
| seasonal/vacation factors or nonseasonal factors. |
| |
| -- Table F has become table 13. |
| |
| -- Table G has undergone a conceptual change and has become a |
| new table B. Previously, this table reflected a concept of |
| "worksite location," where the numbers of extended layoff |
| events and associated separated workers were displayed by the |
| metropolitan statistical area where the event occurred. The |
| concept of "worksite location" has been replaced by a "sepa- |
| rated worker residence" concept, where the number of initial |
| claimants associated with extended layoffs will be displayed |
| by the metropolitan statistical area where the separated |
| workers reside. This conceptual change will result in more |
| complete information on layoffs in metropolitan areas. |
| |
| -- The original table 6 has been dropped from the news release |
| as there was often only a small amount of layoff activity in |
| the IT-producing industries. The table will be provided as |
| a supplemental table on the Mass Layoff Statistics Web site |
| at http://www.bls.gov/mls/#tables. The original tables 7-11 |
| have been renumbered as tables 6-10. |
| |
| -- A new table, table 12, has been added to the release display- |
| ing the average size of layoff events by industry and by rea- |
| son for layoff. |
| |
| -- The explanatory language in the body of the news release re- |
| garding movement of work data has been transferred to the |
| Technical Note. |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
