Correction: Friday’s jobs report wasn’t driven by part-time jobs

In a helpful fact-check at MarketWatch, Rex Nutting corrects a mistake that I -- and a number of other economic commentators -- made Friday: The employment gains on the Household Survey didn't come from part-time jobs. 

The mistake I made was looking at table A-8, the table that tracks part-time work among people who want full-time work, rather than A-9, which tracks part-time work overall. A-8 showed a spike -- which is why U6, the broadest measure of labor-market misery, the one that counts part-time workers who want to be full-time, didn't budge -- but A-9 didn't.

That's a lot of jargon, so here's the bottom line. The number of workers who are involuntarily part-time did rise sharply in September. But the number of part-time workers overall fell a bit. That is to say, the job gains on the Household Survey came from full-time work. Nutting even posted the following helpful graph.

business

wonkblog

Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Comments
Show Comments
Most Read Business

business

wonkblog

Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Next Story
Dylan Matthews · October 8, 2012

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.