UP539 March 10, 2009

UP539 March 10, 2009

One definition:Ronald L. Jacobs' definition in his paper "Understanding Workforce Development: Definition, Conceptual Boundaries, and Future Perspectives""...the coordination of school, company, and governmental policies and programs such that as a collective they enable individuals the opportunity to realize a sustainable livelihood and organizations to achieve exemplary goals, consistent with the history, culture, and goals of the societal context." )[Jacobs goes into more detail below:]"Workforce development has emerged to describe a relatively wide range of activities, policies, and programs. For example, many professionals involved in administering secondary vocational education programs, welfare-to-work and other public assistance programs, and regional economic development initiatives now use workforce development to describe their services. Several recent pieces of state and federal legislation use the term to describe various youth vocational training, adult training and retraining, and related employment initiatives. As a result of these legislative and policy changes, many stateshave included the term in the naming of various governmental coordinating boards, initiatives, and task forces (Grubb and Associates, 1999). The term also describes an extensive array of training and educational programs available to state of Ohio bargaining unit employees (Jacobs, Skillings, & Yu, 2001). Previously, such joint employer-union supported learning opportunities might have been viewed as an employee benefit. Finally, perhaps in response to these other changes, several graduate programs including our own at Ohio State Universitynow use workforce development instead of vocational-technical education as part of their programs name. Not surprisingly, there are fundamental differences when interpreting the meaning of workforce development. One view is that the term merely describes how one prepares to enter an occupation. That is, workforce development becomes a proxy for career and technical education. An alternative view is that the term harkens us to consider a different perspective on working and learning, broadly speaking. That is, the term signals a growing awareness that previous conceptualizations in this area are inadequate to address emerging challenges. Programs that might occur in schools, organizations, or agencies are, in fact, mutually dependent on each other when considered from a broader societal perspective.http://wiki.literacytent.org/index.php/Workforce_development

3

Supply-sidedemand-sideWorkers sell their labor power to employersEmployers buy labor power from workersWorkforce developmentEconomic developmentThe reasons for the disconnect between WD and ED are extremely complex and far too extensive to completely untangle here. However, three interrelated factors stand out as relevant to this research: organizationalinstitutional differences, differing goals and performance metrics, and self-perceptions and attitudes toward each other. Fitzgerald (2004) points out that in many local areas, WD and ED functions are separated by organizational structure and funding streams and may be undertaken by completely different institutions. At the most basic level, evolution in separate silos has led to disconnected thinking, less opportunity for collaboration, and inability to identify and pursue common interests. Another key disjuncture lies in the differing goals of WD and ED. Whereas WD has traditionally focused on the supply side of the labor market, ED has focused on the demand side. Furthermore, WD seeks to deal with a more complex set of social issues that present barriers to job seekers employability, whereas traditional ED has been less concerned with the human aspects of the market. 4

Supply-sidedemand-sideWorkers sell their labor power to employersEmployers buy labor power from workersWorkforce developmentEconomic developmentBringing jobs and local residents togetherLinking WD and ED:ED often creates jobs for outsiders a mismatchb etween jobs and local labor marketsLinking hopefully matches the two.WD: often by occupation/skillED: often by firms5

The role of career laddershttp://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/rth0511l.jpg6

HumorAnd a typical career ladderhttp://www.novellus.com/

7Career ladders: institutional and human capital laddersWithin and across firms, within and across regions, within (and across) occupationsRelate to specific vs. general human capital

Within firms doesnt always do it anymoreLarge corporations have them, but decliningBy seniority, by skill level, by performance, etci.e., the need to rethik career ladders in a changing economyCompare AFL and CIO (horizonal vs. vertical). A nd the response by organized labor for each of them..8

This article has attempted to establish that a successful long-term strategy for regional economic development is the accumulation of human capital. Human capital stimulates growth and development directly as well as indirectly. It directly contributes to knowledge growth and therefore to the knowledge stock of the region. Hence, the productivity of human capital in knowledge growth rises with the accumulation of knowledge stock. Output growth and economic development would be even more pronounced as entrepreneurs apply and diffuse the knowledge in a region. Human capital stock also provides the pool for the emergence of entrepreneurs. Indirectly, to the extent that human capital raises the productivity of other workers and capital, promotes agglomeration economies, and stimulates household investment in children due to lower fertility rates, it further contributes to growth and development.

9what should we invest in (i.e., sustain)?

NATURE (natural capital)

ECONOMY (capital) LABOR (humancapital)

SOCIETY (social capital)

Capital = creates the capacity to generate new capital in the future the ability to reproduce / sustain As mentioned before, a subsidy to capital is shortsighted. First, a subsidy to capital cannot be justified on efficiency grounds, as there is no clear evidence of market failure in the capital market. In addition, Romer (1990c) shows that a subsidy to capital has no effect on steady-state growth. On the other hand, Romer also shows that interest rate reduction has a positive effect on human capital stock devoted to knowledge production and, hence, on growth. Any public policy that encourages human capital stock andR&Dis in the long-term interest of a region, and the threat of interregional spillovers should not distract regional policy makers from initiatives that promote human capital stock of the region.

Planning / investing in/for people, planning for place, planning for firms.10

Efforts of community groups and local governments to gain jobs for a specific pool of unemployed workers often suffer from a limited and fragmented approach that does not give sufficient priority to the unique conditions, skills, and experience of the workers themselves. This article suggests a remedy. It documents the shortcomings of traditional frameworks for addressing the employment needs of specific pools of labor such as dislocated workers or segregated communities. In addition, the authors report on methods and strategies they are developing that enable policymakers and community groups to use skills and available training resources as an anchor for community economic development strategies. Three briefcase studies that illustrate different applications of the methodology and strategic approach are also presented.

CHICAGO examples: start with the needs and skills of the unemployed.Use a target area, such as a neighborhood.

11

Nonfarm payroll employment continued to fall sharply in February (-651,000), and the unemployment rate rose from 7.6 to 8.1 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Payroll employ-ment has declined by 2.6 million in the past 4 months. In February, job losses were large and widespread across nearly all major industry sectors.Unemployment (Household Survey Data) The number of unemployed persons increased by 851,000 to 12.5 million in February, and the unemployment rate rose to 8.1 percent. Over the past 12 months, the number of unemployed persons has increased by about 5.0 million, and the unemployment rate has risen by 3.3 percentage points. (See table A-1.)

The unemployment rate continued to trend upward in February for adult men (8.1 percent), adult women (6.7 percent), whites (7.3 percent), blacks (13.4 percent), and Hispanics (10.9 percent). The jobless rate for teen-agers was little changed at 21.6 percent. The unemployment rate for Asians was 6.9 percent in February, not seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)12

NOTES: construction down notably; so is manu, edu/health up. Government steady.13Persons Not in the Labor Force (Household Survey Data) About 2.1 million persons (not seasonally adjusted) were marginally attached to the labor force in February, 466,000 more than a year earlier. These individuals wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. Among the marginally attached, there were 731,000 discouraged workers in February, up by 335,000 from a year earlier. Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The other 1.3 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in February had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.

1 Data refer to persons who have searched for work during the prior 12 months and were available to take a job during the reference week. 2 Includes thinks no work available, could not find work, lacks schooling or training, employer thinks too young or old, and other types of discrimination. 3 Includes those who did not actively look for work in the prior 4 weeks for such reasons as school or family responsibilities, ill health, and transportation problems, as well as a small number for which reason for nonparticipation was not determinedhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t13.htm15

Historical unemployment rates17

http://www.bls.gov/bls/auto.htmWhats happening in autos?18Total populationEmployedUnder 16unemployedNot in LFInstitutional pop or active duty Labor force Civilian non-institutional population Other concepts 1Labor force = employed + unemployedLabor force participation rates (LFPR) = labor force / civilian non-institutional populationCivilian non-institutional populationIncluded are persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged), and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces. (Current Population Survey)Unemployed: Persons aged 16 years and older who had no employment during the reference week, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed. Unemployment rate = unemployed / labor force

Source: http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1239/HTML/Decline in part due to aging population21Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings, monthly, January 2008 issue; Monthly Labor Review, November 2007; and unpublished data.

Table 788. Individuals Employed in Science and Engineering (S&E) Occupations as Share of Workforce, 2007. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2007 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

Table 788. Individuals Employed in Science and Engineering (S&E) Occupations as Share of Workforce, 2007. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2007 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

More urban places often have more S&E workers but not a constant relationship. Compare Vermont and Nevada.

26

The Spatial Division of Labor on a Regional ScaleANN ARBORMedian Family Income (1999): $71,293Percent of Families in Poverty (1999): 5%Occupation: Management, professionals (in percent, 2000): 61%Occupation: Production, transport, material moving (in percent, 2000): 4% YPSILANTIFamily Income: $40,793Families in Poverty: 17%Management, professionals: 30%Production, transport, material moving: 10% FLINTFamily Income: $31,424Families in Poverty: 23%Management, professionals: 21%Production, transport, material moving: 25% DETROITFamily Income: $33,853Families in Poverty: 22%Management, professionals: 22%Production, transport, material moving: 23% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P49, P50, and P51; BLOOMFIELD HILLSFamily Income: $200,000+Families in Poverty: 2%Management, professionals: 71%Production, transport, material moving: 2% 27How occupations map out regionally;Have the students read this and think

http://www.metroresearch.org/28Suburbs -- the majority of US residents, so time to break it down into subgroups.

http://www.metroresearch.org/The Spatial Division of Labor on a Regional Scale

ANN ARBORMedian Family Income (1999): $71,293Percent of Families in Poverty (1999): 5%Occupation: Management, professionals (in percent, 2000): 61%Occupation: Production, transport, material moving (in percent, 2000): 4% YPSILANTIFamily Income: $40,793Families in Poverty: 17%Management, professionals: 30%Production, transport, material moving: 10% FLINTFamily Income: $31,424Families in Poverty: 23%Management, professionals: 21%Production, transport, material moving: 25% DETROITFamily Income: $33,853Families in Poverty: 22%Management, professionals: 22%Production, transport, material moving: 23% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P49, P50, and P51; BLOOMFIELD HILLSFamily Income: $200,000+Families in Poverty: 2%Management, professionals: 71%Production, transport, material moving: 2% 29Suburbs -- the majority of US residents, so time to break it down into subgroups. Two data tables* BLS: OCCUPATIONAL PAY COMPARISONS AMONG METROPOLITAN AREAS, 2007 [two pages]

* BLS: Unemployed persons by occupation and sex, 2007-8 [1 page]

Answer these questions:1. What occupations seem to have the lowest and highest unemployment levels? Is there a difference by gender?

2. Are there geographic patterns in occupational pay? (e.g., big metro vs. small metro areas?).

3. Do metro areas in general seem to reward (i.e., have higher pay for) some occupations over others? (i.e., the metropolitan return on human capital.). If so, what is the pattern?