|
For release: March 9, 2007
Revised Employment Data for Memphis Metro Area Show
Greater Growth than Previous Estimates
MEMPHIS, Tenn.—Based on calculation by the
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, newly revised estimates for the
Memphis metro area indicate that employment growth in the Memphis
metro area was 13.7 thousand (2.2 percent) in 2005 and 9.3 thousand
(1.5 percent) in 2006. Pre-revision estimates of employment growth
for 2005 and 2006 were 11.5 thousand (1.8 percent) and 6.1 thousand
(1.0 percent), respectively.
By comparison, according to the latest estimates for the United
States over the same periods, payroll employment grew by 1.9 percent
in 2005 and 1.7 percent in 2006.
The Memphis MSA encompasses Fayette, Shelby and Tipton counties
in Tennessee; Crittendon County in Arkansas; and DeSoto, Marshall,
Tate and Tunica counties in Mississippi.
These calculations, by St. Louis Fed economists Michael R. Pakko
and Howard J. Wall, were done in response to annual benchmark revisions,
released Thursday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), for payroll
employment data for every metro area in the United States. Monthly
employment estimates going back to April 2005 were affected by these
revisions. In addition,
new population controls resulted in small revisions to the data
that go further back in time.
Memphis Employment Over Time and Across Industries
The charts below show total employment and its growth rate for the
Memphis metro area from 1999 through 2006. For the period covered
by the benchmark revisions, the effects on the level of employment
are uniformly positive: By the end of 2006 the revised data show
5.4 thousand more jobs than were previously estimated. Some fluctuations
in quarter-to-quarter revisions result in a pattern where some quarters
show higher growth and some show lower growth. Most of the net increase
in job growth over the revision period is concentrated during mid-2005
and at the end of 2006.


The table below shows the breakdown of employment changes by major
sector. In both 2005 and 2006, the upward revisions to the data
are broad-based:

In 2005, the only downward revisions were to Information Services,
Financial Activities, and Government. Fairly large upward revisions
were evident in nearly every other sector. In 2006, there were slight
downward revisions to Trade, Transportation, and Utilities; Education
and Health Services; and Government services. These were more than
offset by higher estimates for several categories, including Professional
and Business Services. Two of the weakest sectors for 2006—Manufacturing
and Financial Activities—were revised from initial estimates
of declining jobs to no net change.
Background: Jobs Data and Benchmarking
At any time, the most up-to-date estimates of payroll employment
in a metro area — the number of jobs — is provided by
the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program of the BLS. According
to the BLS, each month it surveys “about 160,000 businesses
and government agencies, representing approximately 400,000 individual
worksites,” from around the United States. Although the survey
covers hundreds of thousands of employers, these employers make
up only a small percentage of all businesses and worksites in the
country. (According to the BLS, there were more than 8.8 million
such establishments in the United States in June 2006.)
To calculate a comprehensive measure of metro area employment,
the BLS has to estimate the number of establishments in the area.
"This," said Pakko and Wall, "is the primary reason
for the sometimes-large revisions to the CES data: the difficulty
in estimating the number of establishments. When the economy is
in recovery, for example, new firms might be setting up and hiring
workers very quickly. The BLS doesn’t find out about the new
firms or jobs until the unemployment insurance records are updated,
which can take several months or more. This lag is compounded by
the fact that small firms, which provide the bulk of jobs, might
only need to provide unemployment insurance information once a year
rather than monthly or quarterly, as is required of larger firms.
To estimate the number of establishments, the BLS relies on the
Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). The QCEW is a tabulation
of employment information for workers covered by state and federal
unemployment insurance programs. Because of its comprehensive nature,
data from the QCEW cannot be produced as quickly as data from the
CES: Initial data are released 6 to 7 months after the end of a
quarter and are subject to subsequent revision. To fill in the blanks,
the BLS estimates the number of establishments using the QCEW as
a benchmark. Each year, the BLS establishes new benchmarks using
updated data from the QCEW. Because of the lags and revisions to
the QCEW data, the yearly benchmarking affects employment data from
the CES going back 21 months.
"This is why the estimates just released have affected the
yearly employment changes for 2005 and 2006," said Pakko and
Wall. "Note also that the estimates for job growth in 2006
will change again in March 2008 because much of the data for 2006
will be affected by the benchmark revisions that will occur then."
The following table provides the history of recent revisions to
the yearly employment changes for the Memphis metro area. The first
column of data is based on the first estimates of December employment,
which are released in the subsequent January. The second data column
is the estimate after the first benchmark revision, which happens
in the subsequent March, and the last column is the estimate after
the second benchmark revision, which occurs in March of the following
year:

"As these numbers make clear, our view of the economy can
change dramatically following benchmark revisions," said Pakko
and Wall. "For example, during the recession year of 2001 it
was initially estimated that employment declined by 6,100 jobs.
This figure was revised one year later to show a decline of only
1,400 jobs—only to be revised one more time to show more than
double the job loss that was initially reported. Employment in 2003,
on the other hand, looked initially to have fallen slightly, but
subsequent revisions turned the year into a rather robust one. Compared
to some of the changes in previous years, this year’s benchmark
revisions had relatively small net effects."
With branches in Little Rock, Louisville and Memphis, the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis serves the Eighth Federal Reserve District,
which includes all of Arkansas, eastern Missouri, southern Indiana,
southern Illinois, western Kentucky, western Tennessee and northern
Mississippi. The St. Louis Fed is one of 12 regional Reserve Banks
that, along with the Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., comprise
the Federal Reserve System. As the nation's central bank, the Federal
Reserve System formulates U.S. monetary policy, regulates state-chartered
member banks and bank holding companies, and provides payment services
to financial institutions and the U.S. government.
# # #
Back to top |