ETA News Release: Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Report (05/10/2012)

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: Department of Labor, Employment and Training Admin

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT

SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA

In the week ending May 5, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 367,000, a decrease of 1,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 368,000. The 4-week moving average was 379,000, a decrease of 5,250 from the previous week's revised average of 384,250.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.5 percent for the week ending April 28, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate of 2.6 percent.

The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending April 28 was 3,229,000, a decrease of 61,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 3,290,000. The 4-week moving average was 3,290,000, a decrease of 10,500 from the preceding week's revised average of 3,300,500.

UNADJUSTED DATA

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 338,418 in the week ending May 5, an increase of 4,942 from the previous week. There were 397,737 initial claims in the comparable week in 2011.


Read more: http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/eta20120924.htm

---

The number is pretty much unchanged this week, down by only 1,000.

Good morning, Freepers and DUers alike. It is time once again for the weekly unemployment insurance initial claims report.

Here for your viewing pleasure are this week's data, brought to you as a nonpartisan public service. This is just one example of the good work your civil servants are performing for you.

I can't recall when I started posting the number every week, but this has probably been going on for at least a year. I seriously do not care if the week's data make Obama look good, or Romney look good, or Chairman Mao look good, or anybody else. They are just numbers, and I post them without regard to the consequences.

You will also note that I welcome people from Free Republic to examine the numbers as well. They paid for the work just as much as members of DU did, so I invite them to come on over and have a look. "The more the merrier" is the way I look at it.

I do not work at the EDTA, and I do not know anyone working in that agency. I'm sure I can safely assume that the numbers are gathered and analyzed by career civil servant economists who do their work on a nonpartisan basis. Numbers are numbers, and let the chips fall where they may. If you feel that these economists are falling down on the job, drop them a line or give them a call. They work for you, not for any politician or political party. Maybe they're all voting for Romney. That's up to them.

The word "initial" is important. The report does not count all claims, just the new ones filed this week.

Note: The seasonal adjustment factors used for the UI Weekly Claims data from 2007 forward, along with the resulting seasonally adjusted values for initial claims and continuing claims, have been revised. These revised historical values, as well as the seasonal adjustment factors that will be used through calendar year 2012, can be accessed at the bottom of the following link: http://www.oui.doleta.gov/press/2012/032911.asp

That's a bad link right now. It has been bad for about a month and a half, too. Try:

http://www.oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/finance.asp

[marmar]

1. Seems like the previous week always gets revised upward the next week.....

...... and the current week looks better by comparison, until it gets revised up next week.

[dmallind]

2. It's the nature of this report

Not all data is available for the week by Thursday of the following week.

[Po_d Mainiac]

3. Funny about that, huh n/t

[dmallind]

4. Not really. How else would an incomplete unilateral survey be revised?

It's not like they are recording people as under or over 6' tall or exit polls in a contested election, where late data could go either way. They are recoding one thing. When they are informed of more, the number goes up. It's impossible for late data to reduce the number of initial claims, as there are no "negatives" to count.

[pinqy]

5. It's not impossible for the revision to be negative

Though it's unlikely. MOST of the revision is incomplete tallies, but sometimes there's no report and the numbers are imputed. If there is imputation, that could go either way, though again, it's unlikely to go down.