by Calculated Risk on 5/03/2013 08:30:00 AM

From the BLS:

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in April, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 7.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. ...
...
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised from +268,000 to +332,000, and the change for March was revised from +88,000 to +138,000. With these revisions, employment gains in February and March combined were 114,000 higher than previously reported.

The headline number was somewhat above expectations of 153,000 payroll jobs added.  Also employment for February and March were revised higher.

Click on graph for larger image.

NOTE: This graph is ex-Census meaning the impact of the decennial Census temporary hires and layoffs is removed to show the underlying payroll changes.

The second graph shows the unemployment rate.

The unemployment rate decreased to 7.5% in April from 7.6% in March.

The unemployment rate is from the household report and the household report showed a sharp increase in employment, and that meant a lower unemployment rate.


The third graph shows the employment population ratio and the participation rate.

The Labor Force Participation Rate was unchanged at 63.3% in April (blue line). This is the percentage of the working age population in the labor force.

The participation rate is well below the 66% to 67% rate that was normal over the last 20 years, although a significant portion of the recent decline is due to demographics.


The Employment-Population ratio increased to 58.6% in April (black line) from 58.5% in March. I'll post the 25 to 54 age group employment-population ratio graph later.


The fourth graph shows the job losses from the start of the employment recession, in percentage terms, compared to previous post WWII recessions. The dotted line is ex-Census hiring.

This shows the depth of the recent employment recession - worse than any other post-war recession - and the relatively slow recovery due to the lingering effects of the housing bust and financial crisis.

This was still fairly weak job growth, but somewhat better than expectations, especially considering the upward revisions to the February and March employment reports. I'll have much more later ...