Employment costs up 0.6 percent in first quarter

Associated Press
April 30, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Employment costs rose modestly in the first quarter, reflecting an acceleration in the cost of benefits such as pensions.

The Labor Department says that its Employment Cost Index rose 0.6 percent for the three months ending in March. It was the biggest quarterly gain since a similar 0.6-percent rise in the third quarter of 2008. Economists had expected a smaller 0.5-percent increase.

Even with the slight uptick, employment costs remain subdued, rising by just 1.7 percent for the 12 months ending in March as the worst recession in at least a generaration has kept a lid on employee compensation.

That 12-month gain is about half of the increase in compensation that workers were receiving before the recession struck. For the 12 months ending in December 2007, the employment cost index had risen by 3.3 percent.

With more than 8 million jobs lost over the past two years, employees have not had the bargaining power to demand higher wages.

The slight uptick in the first quarter reflected a jump in benefits which rose by 1.1 percent during the first three months of the year, compared to a 0.5 percent for the final three months of last year.

Analysts said much of the increase reflected larger contributions by employers to defined benefit pension compensation plans.

Wages and salaries, which make up 70 percent of employee compensation, actually slowed in the first quarter, rising by 0.4 percent, after a 0.5-percent gain in the fourth quarter of last year.

The slowdown in employment compensation over the past two years has helped keep inflation pressures low, giving the Federal Reserve the leeway to drive interest rates to the lowest levels on record and keep them there in an effort to jump-start the economy.

At its meeting this week, the Fed repeated its pledged to keep rates exceptionally low for an extended period, a pledge that economists means the central bank will not start raising rates until the end of this year at the earliest.

The 0.6-percent rise in the Labor Department's Employment Compensation Index for the first quarter followed five straight quarterly increases of 0.4 percent.

While low inflation gives the Fed leeway to worry more about growth, economists are worried that if incomes don't start rising at a stronger rate, households won't have the resources to boost personal spending, which accounts for 70 percent of total economic activity.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. In reality, Lilly is maintaining profit by cutting costs such as Indiana/US citizen IT workers by a significant amount with their Tata Indian consulting connection, increasing Indian H1B's at Lillys Indiana locations significantly and offshoring to India high paying Indiana jobs to cut costs and increase profit at the expense of U.S. workers.

  2. I think perhaps there is legal precedence here in that the laws were intended for family farms, not pig processing plants on a huge scale. There has to be a way to squash this judges judgment and overrule her dumb judgement. Perhaps she should be required to live in one of those neighbors houses for a month next to the farm to see how she likes it. She is there to protect the people, not the corporations.

  3. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/engineer/facts/03-111.htm Corporate farms are not farms, they are indeed factories on a huge scale. The amount of waste and unhealthy smells are environmentally unsafe. If they want to do this, they should be forced to buy a boundary around their farm at a premium price to the homeowners and landowners that have to eat, sleep, and live in a cesspool of pig smells. Imagine living in a house that smells like a restroom all the time. Does the state really believe they should take the side of these corporate farms and not protect Indiana citizens. Perhaps justifiable they should force all the management of the farms to live on the farm itself and not live probably far away from there. Would be interesting to investigate the housing locations of those working at and managing the corporate farms.

  4. downtown in the same area as O'malia's. 350 E New York. Not sure that another one could survive. I agree a Target is needed d'town. Downtown Philly even had a 3 story Kmart for its downtown residents.

  5. Indy-area residents... most of you have no idea how AMAZING Aurelio's is. South of Chicago was a cool pizza place... but it pales in comparison to the heavenly thin crust Aurelio's pizza. Their deep dish is pretty good too. My waistline is expanding just thinking about this!