Thread: Part-time jobs account for 97% of 2013 job growth

This is how you destroy the middle class and promote government and Union workers, the only people getting full time jobs, to the top of the heap. then you redistribute the homes and wealth of the previous middle class to the newcomers. That is a fundamental change.

Part-time jobs account for 97% of 2013 job growth

AUGUST 5, 2013
BY ED MORRISSEY

Being on vacation last week meant that I missed the jobs report for July, which turned out to be as unremarkable as most of those in the four-plus years of the so-called economic recovery. The media reports I did catch while on the cruise focused mainly on the fact that the jobs added in July missed the expectations of analysts, and not on the fact that adding only 162,000 jobs meant another extension of stagnation, as the US economy needs ~150,000 jobs added each month just to tread water, thanks to population growth. That’s not even a decent maintenance number, let alone the kind of job growth needed to put the chronically unemployed back to work.

The media reports also missed another trend in job reports, one caught by a former chief of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and reported by McClatchy’s Kevin Hall this morning. Almost all of the job growth this year came in part-time work — and when we say “almost all,” we mean 97% of it:

The unemployment rate is measured by the separate Household Survey, and it fell two-tenths of a percentage point to 7.4 percent, its lowest level since December 2008. That’s due in part to slow growth in the labor force. The jobless rate is based on a sample of self-reporting from ordinary people across the nation, and it’s the Labor Department measure that shows a very troubling trend in hiring.

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,” said Keith Hall, a senior researcher at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center. “That is really remarkable.”

Hall is no ordinary academic. He ran the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the agency that puts out the monthly jobs report, from 2008 to 2012. Over the past six months, he said, the Household Survey shows 963,000 more people reporting that they were employed, and 936,000 of them reported they’re in part-time jobs.

“That is a really high number for a six-month period,” Hall said. “I’m not sure that has ever happened over six months before.”

And Hall says there has to be something driving that kind of trend, and thinks he knows what it is:

“There is something going on if such a large share of the hiring is part time,” Hall said. …

Hall speculated that the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, shorthanded as Obamacare, might be resulting in employers shifting workers to part-time status to avoid coming health care obligations.

“There’s been so much talk about the effects of Obamacare on part-time work,” he said. “This is such an unusual thing to see.”

Forbes’ Chris Conover wrote about this trend last week, before the BLS published the July jobs report:

Denialism may be too strong a term.^[1] But there seem to be a lot of people arguing that Obamacare has little or nothing to do with the rise in part-time employment. Some deny the rise is even happening, while others are content to deny that Obamacare is the culprit. Admittedly, it takes a little detective work, but if we systematically review the available empirical evidence in an even-handed fashion, the conclusion seems inescapable: Obamacare is accelerating a disturbing trend towards “a nation of part-timers.” This is not good news for America. …

Ratio of New PT Workers to New FT Workers Explodes in 2013. For the most part, an examination of metrics measured in millions (e.g., involuntary PT workers or total PT workers) masks what is really going on. A much better sense is given by comparing the changes in PT employment to the changes in FT employment. Because the monthly Current Population Survey are so volatile, it is easier to see what is going on by calculating an average monthly figure for each calendar year to get a sense of whether the number of PT or FT is rising or falling. We only have six months of data for 2013, but this method allows us to compare the average monthly count for the year to date with the average monthly count from prior years on an apples-to-apples basis. We can then calculate the ratio of new PT workers in an average month to new FT workers in an average month. Obviously this ratio will turn negative in years that either FT or PT workers have declined on average. So over the past decade, there’s only 4 other years with which to compare the 2013 experience.

What should immediately be obvious to even someone without a shred of statistical training is how deviant the 2013 experience is compared to the past. For every new FT job added to the economy, there were 4.3 PT jobs added! In most (non-negative) years, the ratio is the reverse: that is, there are typically 5 FT jobs added for every new PT job. Even in 2004—the year with the second-highest ratio during this time-frame–there were 2 FT jobs for every PT job, yielding a ratio of 0.5. Even if growth in PT vs. FT workers reverted to its historic pattern for the balance of 2013, the year’s average monthly ratio still would be four times as large as the 2nd highest ratio from 2004.

The July report only confirms that trend. Only 92,000 full-time jobs were created, while 172,000 part-time jobs got filled (not net numbers). The only major influence in 2013 that differs from the preceding three years of the recovery is the impending ObamaCare mandate on employers, which the Obama administration will try to postpone for a year. The data shows that businesses have already begun to react by minimizing their risk and costs through part-time employment, thanks to the perverse incentives set up by the ACA, and that this will continue as long as the mandate exists.
Maybe that’s why it’s so difficult to find ObamaCare defenders these days — at least unpaid ones. OFA tried to stage a rally in Centreville, Virginia yesterday, but only one person bothered to attend, and even the organizer took a powder after less than a half-hour on the job:

That means gatherings like today’s in Centreville — although the slow start here is probably not what OFA organizers had in mind. After a scheduling snafu over the start time, a few people showed up and left before it actually started. Just one volunteer stayed to help work the phone bank for the health law, and the event’s organizer bolted after 20 minutes — although he was bound for another Obamacare event, a house party.

Another part-time worker, eh?
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/0...13-job-growth/

Jesse Jackson:”Black Middle Class” is Government Driven

by ADMIN on MARCH 12, 2011

Fred Sanford had an Aunt name Aunt Esther. She used to call Fred a “Fish Eyed Fool” when she was upset with him

Jesse Jackson is a fish eyed fool who admits on a black radio station that the black middle class is government driven. In other words the black middle class makes its strides economically living off the government. So does a bunch of whites, latinos and other ethnic groups. Another form of govenrment welfare…at least it can be said they work for their check.

Here is the rub. When the government goes south due to bankruptcy watch what happens to this particular middle class.

Just goes to show you how dependent the blacks are on the US taxpayers. Grow the government so taxpayers can subsidize a black middle class.

What is left to be said about this admittance by a fish eyed fool

http://www.holeinthehull.com/2011/03...nt-driven.html

Jesse Jackson made this remark during the chaos in Wisconsin and videos of it have been scrubbed. If anyone finds one please post it.

Government over-hiring minorities

In FY 2005 the feds fired or retired 4,179 white guys. At the same time, the feds managed to hire 6,238 new preferred minorities.

[June 14, 2006 -- Washington, DC] Today Adversity.Net released it's sixth annual report of federal over hiring of selected minorities. Our report is based upon the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's (OPM's) annual report to Congress "Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program" (FEORP).

Of course, OPM doesn't call it "over hiring" of minorities. They call it "meeting or exceeding affirmative action goals." According to the feds' own statistics, equal opportunity recruitment is almost all about blacks. To a far lesser extent, of course, it also benefits other preferred groups such as Hispanics, Asian Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans. But the overwhelming beneficiaries of "affirmative action" in the federal government are are, and have always been, blacks.

Adversity.Net supports all of our assertions in this article with the government's own statistics. In the interest of full disclosure, we have published all of our computations and assumptions, as well as the detailed government data which we used in arriving at our conclusions.See particularly Definitions and Computations

Synopsis:
The feds have over hired blacks by such an overwhelming margin in all 22 independent federal agencies that it is difficult to see the over-quota hiring of the other minorities.

Above: Top three independent agencies for Blacks vs. all other minorities.	For example, in the graphic to the left, while the EEOC hired Hispanics by 98% above their racial quota, that accomplishment is dwarfed by the 427% by which blacks were over hired by EEOC. Blacks were over hired at the Court Services and Offender Services agency by 841%. And at the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation by 405%.
Above: Top three executive departments for Blacks vs. all other minorities.	The situation is similar in the 18 federal executive departments. The Dept. of Education over hired blacks by 333% over their proportion in the available labor pool (which the feds call "the Relevant Civilian Labor Force", or RCLF.) The Dept. of Housing and Urban Development over hired blacks by 334% over their proportion in the available labor pool. And the Veterans Administration over hired blacks by 148%.

Anti-White-Male Bias:
The pattern of anti-white-male bias in favor of black preferences has been extremely consistent over the past several years during which we have analyzed the OPM's racial hiring data. While OPM has studiously avoided posting any explicit data about the impact of these policies upon non-preferred groups such as white males, OPM has not been able to keep itself from letting slip little semantic and statistical hints about it's anti-white and anti-white-male bias.
Here are the few anti-white, boastful, racial factoids we have gleaned just from the introductions and executive summaries of the past several years' OPM reports:

---

In FY 2005 ...The feds fired or retired4,179 white guys. But the feds hired 6,238 new minorities.

The executive summary to the OPM report states that in FY 2005 the federal workforce increased by only 2,059 but that federal minority hiring increased by 6,238. By our math, that means that 6,238 new minorities minus 2,059 new jobs = 4,179 whites were "unhired" by the feds in FY 2005. Stated another way: the feds hired 6,238 minorities and fired or retired 4,179 white guys. -- Source: FEORP FY 2005, Page 5 at para. 5

---

In FY 2004 ...56% of new fed jobs were filled by minorities. Only 44% of new fed jobs were filled by "whites".

Of the 37,595 new federal jobs created in FY2004 21,078 of them -- 56% -- were filled by minorities. Only 44% of new federal jobs in FY 2004 were filled by "whites". -- Source: FEORP FY 2004, Page 9 at para. 6

---

In FY 2003 ...While fed employment declined by 6,665 this year, the feds had a net gain of864 new minority employees. One suspects that means that there was a net loss of 5,801 whites.

"The permanent Federal Workforce ... declined by 6,665 from 1,515,345 in FY 2002 to 1,508,680 in FY 2003. "Despite the overall decrease ... the FY 2003 FEORP report shows that ... minorities in the Federal workforce increased from 470,827 (31.1 percent) in 2002 to 471,691 (31.3 percent) in 2003." [471,691 minus 470,827 = 864 more minorities. Editor] That means that 6,665 (the amount of the overall reduction) minus 864 more minorities = 5,801 whites (or white males) were "unhired" by the feds in FY 2003. -- Source: FY 2003 FEORP, p. 9 at para. 3

---

In FY 2001 ...In FY 2001 the feds created 12,310 new jobs. Fewer than 23 out of 100 of these new jobs (23%) were awarded to whites and/or other "non-minorities".

The OPM Director in 2002, Kay Coles James, introduced the FY 2001 report with the following statement: "The FY 2001 FEORP report shows that minority employment in the Federal workforce increased during the last year (up by 9,490, which is significant in the context of overall workforce growth of 12,310)." In other words 12,310 new federal jobs were created during FY 2001 but only 2,820 of this total -- 22.9% -- were filled by white males and/or other "non-minorities". That means that fewer than 23 jobs out of every 100 new Federal jobs were filled by non-minorities in FY 2001. -- Source: FY 2001 FEORP, p. 3

---

No where in this year's entire 50 page report does the OPM include any explicit data whatsoever regarding the hiring or promotion of white males by the feds. But by reading between the lines -- as in those little statistical slip-ups, above -- one can accurately infer that the feds' mission is to reduce the number of white males employed by the federal government.
"Women" as a Disadvantaged Group:
As always, the OPM's data regarding "women" is confounding, and one must presume that is deliberately so.
All of OPM's minority data pertaining to specific races (Hispanic, black or Native American, for example) include both women and men of that race. In context, that is a reasonable grouping of data.
However, what is unreasonable is OPM's separate category "women" which includes all women from all minority categories and "white" (non-minority) women. I believe this is due to the federal government's desire to further obfuscate the impact of "Federal Equal Employment Opportunity" upon whites regardless of gender.
Missing (Omitted) White Data:
What is more unreasonable, even unconscionable, is the fact that OPM continues to refuse this year, as in preceding years, to publish detailed data regarding either the growth or the shrinkage of the proportion of whites, and particularly white males, in the federal work force. That glaring omission leads a reasonable person to assume that the feds are trying to hide something ... such as the fact that they are systematically reducing the number of whites and particularly white males from government employment. If that is not the case, then why do they refuse to publish data pertaining to white employment?
Adversity.Net encourages our readers to thoroughly and critically examine all of the government's data, as well as our own computations, all of which we have openly published in these pages. If there are flaws in our analysis we encourage you to tell us about it.
For those of you who may remain skeptical about the government's true intentions regarding"affirmative action" (a.k.a. racial quotas), please be sure to see our Five Best Agencies for Minorities page, and also particularly our Blacks in the Federal Workforce page.
-- Tim Fay, Editor
http://www.adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/default.htm

This is from 2005 and the trend has continued. So, Jesse must know what he is talking about. Federal workers have full time jobs.

1.1 - Independent Federal Agencies: BLACKS % Overhiring of Blacks in Independent Federal Agencies (based on OPM's FY 2005 report) According to OPM's FY 2005 report, all 22 independent federal agencies exceeded their racial quotas for hiring blacks by dozens or even hundreds of percent in FY 2005! Next: Exec. Depts. Once again this year, the First Place prize in the federal quota competition goes to Court Services and Offender Services (CSOS) for employing 840% more blacks than their affirmative action "target" (quota). Once again this year, NASA came in dead last by exceeding its black hiring quota by a mere 44% Each of the remaining 20 independent agencies exceeded their racial quotas for hiring blacks in FY 2005 by a minimum of 44% (NASA) to 840% (CSOS). The five best independent agencies for blacks in FY 2005 turned out to be not so good for most of the other preferred racial and gender groups (Native Americans, Asian Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, and Women of all ethnicities including White). Just as last year, this year blacks were over hired to the greatest extent by (1st) the Court Services and Offender Services (CSOS) at 841%over their quota; (2nd) the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) at 427% over their black quota; (3rd) the Pension Benefit Benefit Corporation (PBGC) at 405% over their black quota; (4th) the Smithsonian Institution (SI) at 341% overtheir black quota; and (5th) the National Science Foundation (NSF) at 333% over their black quota. 1.2 - Federal Executive Departments: BLACKS Next: Data Tables OPM's FY 2005 report reveals that among the 18 federal executive departments, only the Department of the Interior failed to achieve its racial hiring goal (quota) for hiring blacks. Interior "under" hired blacks by -39%, i.e., they don't "look like America" because they hired 39% fewer blacks than are available in the civilian labor force. Oh my! All of the other 17 federal executive departments exceeded their racial quotas for hiring blacks by a minimum of +12% (Air Force) to an impressive +334% (Housing and Urban Development). % Overhiring of Blacks in Federal Executive Departments (based on OPM's FY 2005 report) The five best federal executive departments for blacks in FY 2004 turned out to be among theworst for most of the other racial/gender groups (women, Native Americans, Asian Pacific Islanders and Hispanics). Blacks were over hired to the greatest extent by (1st) the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) at +334% over their proportion in the civilian work force; (2nd) by the Dept. of Education at 333% over their proportion in the civilian work force; (3rd) by the Dept. of Labor at 176% more blacks than in the general population; (4th) by the Veterans' Administration (VA) at 148% more blacks than the general population; and (5th) by the U.S. Treasury Dept. at 146% more blacks than in the civilian work force.

---

1.1.1 - Independent Federal Agencies: BLACKS - DATA AND COMPUTATIONS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) UP: Indep. Agency Graphs Blacks Exceeded Their Relevant Civilian Labor Force Representation in All 22 Independent Federal Agencies Representation of Blacks in Independent Agencies - September 30, 2005 (RCLF percentages are unique to each agency based on agency specific occupations)Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005, p. 16 Down: Exec. Dept. Data Tables Independent Federal Agency: (A) % in Relevant Civilian Labor Force (RCLF) (affirmative action target) (B) % in Federal Workforce (FW) (actual % employed by agency) (C) Difference between target (col A) and actual (col B) (D) Rate of OVER (under)hiring selected minority group by agency NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 AID - Agency for International Development 8.7 29.5 +20.8 +239.1% Interpretation: Agency hired 239.1% more blacks than their proportion in the civilian labor force BBG - Broadcasting Board of Governors (formerly United States Information Agency) 8.8 20.9 +12.1 +137.5% CSOS - Court Services and Offender Services 8.6 80.9 +72.3 +840.7% EEOC - Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 8.4 44.3 +35.9 +427.4% EPA - Environmental Protection Agency 8.3 18.9 +10.6 +127.7% FCC - Federal Communications Commission 8.5 32.0 +23.5 +276.5% FDIC - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 8.5 17.1 +8.6 +101.2% FTC - Federal Trade Commission 7.9 21.8 +13.9 +176.0% GSA - General Services Administration 8.8 26.2 +17.4 +197.7% NARA - National Archives and Records Administration 9.0 29.4 +20.4 +227.7% NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8.1 11.7 +3.6 +44.4% NCUA - National Credit Union Association 8.5 12.7 +4.2 +49.4% NLRB - National Labor Relations Board 8.6 21.5 +12.9 +150.0% NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8.2 13.7 +5.5 +67.1% NSF - National Science Foundation 7.8 33.8 +26.0 +333.3% OPM - Office of Personnel Management 9.3 24.9 +15.6 +167.7% PBGC - Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 8.2 41.4 +33.2 +404.9% RRB - Railroad Retirement Board 8.1 33.4 +25.3 +312.4% SBA - Small Business Administration 8.7 26.2 +17.5 +201.2% SEC - Securities and Exchange Commission 8.7 18.2 +9.5 +109.2% SI - Smithsonian Institution 9.1 40.1 +31.0 +340.7% SSA - Social Security Administration 9.5 27.6 +18.1 +190.5% NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 1 -- Source: OPM "Annual Report to Congress; Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005 (October 1, 2004 - September 30, 2005). Page 16. Current link to original OPM report: http://adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/feorp2005.pdfNote 2 -- Our computation: Col (B) - Col (A) = Col (C) Note 3 -- Our computation: [Col (C) / Col (A)] X 100 = Col (D). This figure represents the % by which the agency has over (or under) hired blacks when compared to the % of blacks in the relevant civilian labor force. 1.2.1 - Federal Executive Departments: BLACKS - DATA AND COMPUTATIONS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) Down: Index Blacks Exceeded Their Relevant Civilian Labor Force Representation in 17 of 18 Federal Executive Departments Representation of Blacks in Executive Departments - September 30, 2005 (RCLF percentages are unique to each agency based on agency specific occupations) Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005, p. 15 Prev: Indep Agency Data Tables Federal Executive Department: (A) % in Relevant Civilian Labor Force (RCLF) (affirmative action target) (B) % in Federal Workforce (FW) (actual % employed by agency) (C) Difference between target (col A) and actual (col B) (D) Rate of over (under)hiring selected minority group by agency NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Agriculture - USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture 9.5 10.8 +1.3 +13.7% Interpretation: Agency hired 13.7% more blacks than their proportion in the civilian labor force Air Force - Department of the Air Force 9.8 11.0 +1.2 +12.2% Army - Department of the Army 9.7 15.8 +6.1 +62.9% Commerce - Department of Commerce 9.4 16.7 +7.3 +77.7% Defense Activities - (formerly listed as "DoD, Department of Defense") 9.9 19.6 +9.7 +98.0% Department of Homeland Security 9.2 15.6 +6.4 +69.6% Education - DOE, Department of Education 8.6 37.2 +28.6 +332.6% Energy - DOE, Department of Energy 8.1 11.2 +3.1 +38.3% HHS - Health and Human Services 10.3 18.9 +8.6 +83.5% HUD - Department of Housing and Urban Development 8.5 36.9 +28.4 +334.1% Interior - Department of the Interior 9.5 5.8 -3.7 -39.0% Justice - DOJ, Department of Justice (includes Office of Civil Rights - DOJ OCR) 9.9 17.5 +7.6 +76.8% Labor - DOL, Department of Labor 8.5 23.5 +15.0 +176.5% Navy - Department of the Navy 10.3 12.6 +2.3 +22.3% State - Department of State 10.0 17.1 +7.1 +71.0% Transportation - DOT, Department of Transportation 9.2 11.1 +1.9 +20.6% Treasury - Department of the Treasury (includes IRS) 9.9 24.4 +14.5 +146.5% VA - Department of Veteran's Affairs 9.9 24.6 +14.7 +148.5% NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 1 -- Source: OPM "Annual Report to Congress; Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005 (October 1, 2004 - September 30, 2005). Page 15. Current link to original OPM report: http://adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/feorp2005.pdfNote 2 -- Our computation: Col (B) - Col (A) = Col (C) Note 3 -- Our computation: [Col (C) / Col (A)] X 100 = Col (D). This figure represents the % by which the agency has over (or under) hired blacks when compared to the % of blacks in the relevant civilian labor force. Top More OPM FY 2005 Charts and Excerpts: FY 2005 OPM Report FY 2005 OPM Report FY 2005 OPM Report A. OPM FY2005 Minority Hiring MAIN INDEX Load/Reload B. Five Best Agencies for Minorities (1) Blacks (2) Hispanics (3) Asian - Pacific Islanders (4) Native Americans (5) Women (6)Definitions, Math END: (1) Blacks in the Federal Workforce FY 2005 http://www.adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/default.htm Home

2.1 - Independent Federal Agencies: HISPANICS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) % Overhiring of Hispanics in Independent Federal Agencies (based on OPM's FY 2005 report) According to OPM's FY 2005 report, 5 of the 22 independent federal agencies exceeded their racial quotas for hiring Hispanics by 19% to 98% Down: Exec Depts Again this year, the First Place prize among Federal independent agencies in the Federal quota competition for hiring Hispanics goes to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) which hired 98.5% more Hispanics than EEOC's racial quota for Hispanics. And again this year the Last Place prize among Federal independent agencies in the quota competition for Hispanics was the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) which hired 80.5% fewer Hispanics than their racial quota. Overall, the five agencies that over hired Hispanics by the widest margins were (1st) EEOC at 98% more Hispanics than in the general population; (2nd) the Small Business Administration (SBA) at 46% more Hispanics than in the civilian population; (3rd) the Social Security Administration (SSA) at 37% more Hispanics than in the U.S. work force; (4th) the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) at 30% more Hispanics than the available work force; and (5th) the Broadcast Board of Governors (BBG) which hired 19% more Hispanics than available in the U.S. workforce. Most other preferred groups were over hired to a lesser extent than Hispanics in these agencies with the exception of blacks. Blacks are not shown because their numbers are so large they distort the rest of this graph. 2.2 - Federal Executive Departments: HISPANICS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) Next: Data Tables OPM's FY 2005 report reveals that among the 18 federal executive departments, the newly formed U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was the clear winner in the Federal competition to hire as many Hispanics as possible. According to the OPM data, in FY 2005 the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security hired 100% more Hispanics than their proportion in the civilian labor force. For the second year in a row, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finished in a miserable last place for quotas: HHS "under hired" Hispanics by -61%below their racial quota. The Dept. of Commerce and the U.S. Navy receive honorable mention for "under hiring" Hispanics: Commerce missed their Hispanic quota by -60%, and the U.S. Navy missed their Hispanic quota by -61%. % Overhiring of Hispanics in Federal Executive Departments (based on OPM's FY 2005 report) Blacks are not shown because their numbers are so large they distort the rest of this graph. The five "best" executive departments for over hiring Hispanics were DHS, HUD, Labor, Justice and Treasury. (1st) the Dept. of Homeland Security over hired Hispanics by 101% over their proportion in the civilian labor force. (2nd) the Dep.t of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) over hired Hispanics by 9%. (3rd) The U.S. Dept. of Labor over hired Hispanics by about 1%. (4th) The U.S. Dept. of Justice missed their quota for Hispanics by -9%. (5th) The U.S. Dept. of the Treasury missed their quota for Hispanics by -18%. Perhaps the most striking feature of this graph is the large extent to which the other preferred groups (excluding blacks) were "under hired" by the same five agencies compared to Hispanics. What is it about these five agencies that seem to favor over hiring Hispanics over other preferred racial groups?

---

2.1.1 - Independent Federal Agencies: HISPANICS - DATA AND COMPUTATIONS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) UP: Indep Agency Graphs Hispanics Exceeded Their Relevant Civilian Labor Force Representation in 5 of 22 Independent Federal Agencies Representation of Hispanics in Independent Agencies - September 30, 2005 (RCLF percentages are unique to each agency based on agency specific occupations)Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005, p. 22 Down: Exec Dept Data Tables Independent Federal Agency: (A) % in Relevant Civilian Labor Force (RCLF) (affirmative action target) (B) % in Federal Workforce (FW) (actual % employed by agency) (C) Difference between target (col A) and actual (col B) (D) Rate of OVER (under)hiring selected minority group by agency NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 AID - Agency for International Development 6.5 3.2 -3.3 -50.8% BBG - Broadcasting Board of Governors (formerly United States Information Agency) 7.5 8.9 +1.4 +18.7% Interpretation: Agency hired 18.7% more Hispanics than their proportion in the civilian labor force CSOS - Court Services and Offender Services 6.6 3.8 -2.8 -42.4% EEOC - Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 6.5 12.9 +6.4 +98.5% EPA - Environmental Protection Agency 6.7 5.1 -1.6 -23.9% FCC - Federal Communications Commission 6.4 3.1 -3.3 -51.6% FDIC - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 7.3 4.1 -3.2 -43.8% FTC - Federal Trade Commission 6.5 2.4 -4.1 -63.1% GSA - General Services Administration 9.1 5.2 -3.9 -42.9% NARA - National Archives and Records Administration 7.7 1.5 -6.2 -80.5% NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration 6.7 5.3 -1.4 -20.9% NCUA - National Credit Union Association 6.7 4.1 -2.6 -38.8% NLRB - National Labor Relations Board 6.6 7.5 +0.9 +13.6% NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.5 4.5 -2.0 -30.1% NSF - National Science Foundation 6.0 2.3 -3.7 -61.7% OPM - Office of Personnel Management 7.2 4.1 -3.1 -43.1% PBGC - Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 6.4 2.9 -3.5 -54.7% RRB - Railroad Retirement Board 6.2 4.5 -1.7 -27.4% SBA - Small Business Administration 7.4 10.8 +3.4 +46.0% SEC - Securities and Exchange Commission 7.0 4.4 -2.6 -37.1% SI - Smithsonian Institution 9.7 3.9 -5.8 -59.8% SSA - Social Security Administration 9.1 12.5 +3.4 +37.4% NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 1 -- Source: OPM "Annual Report to Congress; Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005 (October 1, 2004 - September 30, 2005). Page 22. Current link to original OPM report: http://adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/feorp2005.pdfNote 2 -- Our computation: Col (B) - Col (A) = Col (C) Note 3 -- Our computation: [Col (C) / Col (A)] X 100 = Col (D). This figure represents the % by which the agency has over (or under) hired Hispanics when compared to the % of Hispanics in the relevant civilian labor force. 2.2.1 - Federal Executive Departments: HISPANICS - DATA AND COMPUTATIONS (Web Posted 06/14/06 -- © Adversity.Net 2006) Down: Index Hispanics Exceeded Their Relevant Civilian Labor Force Representation in 3 of 18 Federal Executive Departments Representation of Hispanics in Executive Departments - September 30, 2005 (RCLF percentages are unique to each agency based on agency specific occupations) Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2005, p. 21 Prev: Indep Agency Data Tables Federal Executive Department: (A) % in Relevant Civilian Labor Force (RCLF) (affirmative action target) (B) % in Federal Workforce (FW) (actual % employed by agency) (C) Difference between target (col A) and actual (col B) (D) Rate of OVER (under)hiring selected minority group by agency NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Agriculture - USDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture 9.8 5.8 -4.0 -40.8% Air Force - Department of the Air Force 9.9 7.4 -2.5 -25.2% Army - Department of the Army 10.8 6.8 -4.0 -37.0% Commerce - Department of Commerce 9.3 3.7 -5.6 -60.2% Defense Activities - Formerly listed as "DoD, Department of Defense" 9.9 5.6 -4.3 -43.4% Department of Homeland Security 9.2 18.5 +9.3 +101.1% Interpretation: Agency hired 101.1% more Hispanics than their proportion in the civilian labor force Education - DOE, Department of Education 6.6 4.1 -2.5 -37.9% Energy - DOE, Department of Energy 7.6 6.2 -1.4 -18.4% HHS - Health and Human Services 9.3 3.6 -5.7 -61.3% HUD - Department of Housing and Urban Development 6.6 7.2 +0.6 +9.1% Interior - Department of the Interior 10.8 5.0 -5.8 -53.7% Justice - DOJ, Department of Justice (includes Office of Civil Rights, DOJ OCR) 9.6 8.7 -0.9 -9.4% Labor - DOL, Department of Labor 6.8 6.9 +0.1 +1.5% Navy - Department of the Navy 11.4 4.4 -7.0 -61.4% State - Department of State 7.5 4.7 -2.8 -37.3% Transportation - DOT, Department of Transportation 8.9 5.9 -3.0 -33.7% Treasury - Department of the Treasury (includes IRS) 9.5 7.8 -1.7 -17.9% VA - Department of Veteran's Affairs 9.5 6.8 -2.7 -28.4% NOTES: Note 1 Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 1 -- Source: OPM "Annual Report to Congress; Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program FY 2004 (October 1, 2004 - September 30, 2005). Page 21. Current link to original OPM report: http://adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/feorp2005.pdfNote 2 -- Our computation: Col (B) - Col (A) = Col (C) Note 3 -- Our computation: [Col (C) / Col (A)] X 100 = Col (D). This figure represents the % by which the agency has over (or under) hired Hispanics when compared to the % of Hispanics in the relevant civilian labor force. Top More FY 2005 Charts and Excerpts: FY 2005 OPM Report FY 2005 OPM Report FY 2005 OPM Report A. OPM FY2005 Minority Hiring MAIN INDEX Load/Reload B. Five Best Agencies for Minorities (1) Blacks (2) Hispanics (3) Asian - Pacific Islanders (4) Native Americans (5) Women (6)Definitions, Math END: (2) Hispanics in the Federal Workforce FY 2005 http://www.adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/default.htm