Columbus Regional Workforce Analysis

Executive Presentation

February 2014

2

Project Objectives

Identify and evaluate the various labor sheds that are present in the 11-county region

Define, in detail, the size, key attributes, and workforce trends within each labor shed

Assess underemployment, unemployment, and those not in the labor force through analysis and workforce surveys

Define key deficits and surpluses within the local labor supply and the impact on key economic sectors

Assess the impact of organized labor in the region

Conduct employer interviews to understand their perspective of the regional workforce

Compare the Columbus Region nationally and to a select group of competitors (metro areas and national averages)

Through interviews with project stakeholders, SSG and Columbus 2020 identified the following objectives for the comprehensive workforce analysis:

3

Report Sections

Overview of Data Sources

Labor Shed Identification

Workforce Trends & Attributes

Underemployment & Labor Force Participation

Occupation/Skill-Set Surplus & Deficit Analysis

Organized Labor Climate

Competitive Benchmarking

Employer Interview Results

The comprehensive report is organized into eight sections. Those sections are highlighted below:

4

Overview of Data Sources

SSG’s Internal Data Sources

Primary Research

Employer Interviews

Online Workforce Survey

SSG gathered data from a variety of sources, all of which can be classified into four categories:

5

Labor Shed Identification

Franklin (represented by the light blue counties)

Marion-Logan-Union Morrow-Marion-Delaware-Knox Licking-Fairfield Pickaway

Labor sheds were identified and drawn using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from individual surveys, employer interviews and internal databases. SSG identified the following five labor sheds, all of which contain Franklin County.

6

Key Workforce Attributes

Labor Shed Population Population Growth Labor Force Labor Force

Participation

Median Household

Income

Franklin 2,698,952 2.23% 1,416,379 77.74% $48,277

Marion-Logan-Union 1,960,381 2.72% 1,045,188 78.24% $48,877

Morrow-Marion-Delaware-Knox 1,730,267 2.86% 929,043 79.19% $48,525

Licking-Fairfield 1,847,983 2.66% 986,465 78.21% $47,049

Pickaway 1,537,868 2.97% 826,492 78.52% $47,415

Each labor shed was profiled based on key workforce attributes. Those attributes included relevant demographic data, economic indicators, and occupation & industry trends. The following table provides a basic snapshot of each labor shed.

7

Education Attainment Trend

8

Readily Available Workers

SSG quantified the number of readily available workers in the region by using the following equation. The table below provides the results.

# of Those Not in Labor Force, but

willing to re-enter

# of Unemployed # of UnderemployedReadily Available

Workers+ + =

Candidate Classification #

Number of Underemployed Workers 217,008

Part-Time, Prefer Full-Time 76,487

Non Permanent, Prefer Permanent 49,805

Overqualified for Current Position 90,717

Unemployed Workers 65,651

Not Participating, But are Willing to Re-enter 43,968

Total 326,627

9

0.0%

50.0%

100.0%

150.0%

200.0%

250.0%

300.0%

350.0%

400.0%

450.0%

500.0%

Graduate Surplus/Deficit

Columbus National Average

Graduate Surplus & Deficit Analysis

The following graph shows the number of graduates in each program of interest relative to the corresponding entry-level jobs. A percentage over 100% suggests there are more graduates in the Columbus region than there are job opportunities.

10

The following graph shows the surplus (or deficit) of graduates in each program of interest relative to the corresponding entry-level jobs. A positive number suggests there are more graduates in the Columbus region than there are job opportunities.

Graduate Surplus & Deficit Analysis - Continued

TRANSPORTATION AND MATERIAL MOVING

MECHANIC & REPAIR TECHNOLOGIES

PRECISION PRODUCTION

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, MARKETING, AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES

COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCES AND SUPPORT SERVICES

LEGAL PROFESSIONS

PHYSICAL SCIENCES

BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES

MATHEMATICS AND STATISTICS

ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGIES

HEALTH PROFESSIONS AND RELATED PROGRAMS

ENGINEERING

-5,000 -4,000 -3,000 -2,000 -1,000 0 1,000 2,000

-3,879

-2,860

-1,937

-1,285

-1,035

-119

-5

88

167

285

980

1,033

Graduate Surplus/Deficit

11

Competitive Benchmarking

MSA STATE TOTAL INDEX LABOR AVAILABILITY LABOR COST

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale AZ 117.3% 123.9% 101.9%Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta GA 115.8% 123.6% 97.5%Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford FL 114.8% 118.7% 105.6%Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater FL 113.3% 116.5% 105.8%Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach FL 112.3% 117.5% 100.3%Indianapolis-Carmel IN 111.9% 115.7% 103.0%Columbus OH 111.3% 116.0% 100.3%Pittsburgh PA 110.7% 114.4% 101.8%Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos TX 110.6% 115.9% 98.4%Salt Lake City UT 110.5% 114.3% 101.6%Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill NC-SC 109.3% 113.4% 99.6%San Antonio-New Braunfels TX 108.2% 108.7% 107.0%Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin TN 107.9% 109.3% 104.6%Oklahoma City OK 107.3% 106.0% 110.2%Cincinnati-Middletown OH-KY-IN 106.9% 110.2% 99.0%Louisville-Jefferson County KY-IN 100.8% 98.9% 105.1%

SSG constructed a custom national benchmark model that scores and ranks all 186 metropolitan statistical areas of the United States with a population greater than 250,000. The scoring is based on weighted workforce variables that measure Labor Availability and Labor Cost. The following table shows those communities that score above average in both Labor Availability and Labor Cost categories, as well as the six competitive markets previously identified by Columbus (in green).

A score of 100% in any category is considered average. The higher the index, the more favorable the score.

Labor Availability

Labor Scalability Target Occupation Presence Target Occupation Growth Education Attainment Target Age Groups Household Income Distribution Post-Secondary Graduates

Labor Costs

Median Household Income Cost of Living Housing Costs Target Occupation Wages

12

Competitive Benchmarking - Continued

MSALABOR

SCALABILITY

TARGET EDUCATION

ATTAINMENT

TARGET AGE GROUP

TARGET HOUSEHOLD

INCOME

COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY GRADUATES

MARKET COST INDICATORS

AVERAGE MARKET WAGES

Atlanta, GA 154.3% 109.3% 105.3% 100.9% 200.0% 95.4% 98.5%Austin-Round Rock, TX 138.4% 116.5% 110.9% 103.7% 121.1% 93.0% 100.6%Charlotte-Gastonia, NC-SC 136.5% 108.9% 104.3% 101.7% 116.9% 101.6% 98.8%Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN 108.5% 101.0% 99.0% 101.2% 134.9% 96.9% 99.9%Columbus, OH 115.8% 108.0% 104.6% 101.5% 152.6% 102.0% 99.6%Indianapolis-Carmel, IN 123.6% 104.3% 101.5% 98.5% 158.6% 107.1% 101.2%Louisvil le, KY-IN 94.7% 94.1% 99.7% 100.4% 74.2% 107.4% 104.1%Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL 153.5% 99.2% 100.1% 94.5% 190.1% 97.5% 101.4%Nashville, TN 117.3% 101.0% 104.5% 100.7% 115.5% 103.4% 105.0%Oklahoma City, OK 110.3% 98.1% 101.8% 99.6% 114.6% 108.1% 111.0%Orlando, FL 148.8% 104.3% 104.5% 98.2% 157.8% 108.4% 104.5%Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 150.5% 101.8% 100.3% 100.7% 200.0% 103.9% 101.0%Pittsburgh, PA 114.3% 104.1% 95.6% 98.4% 184.3% 103.6% 101.0%Salt Lake City, UT 115.7% 106.5% 104.6% 109.0% 129.1% 97.8% 103.2%San Antonio, TX 141.5% 94.0% 101.1% 101.3% 118.0% 108.7% 106.3%Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL 150.2% 99.9% 96.1% 97.5% 153.0% 108.9% 104.5%

The following table shows how the Columbus MSA scores against each competitive market in each sub category that measures Labor Availability & Labor Cost.

13

Employer Interview Summary

Labor Criteria Rankings

General applicant flow for available positions 3.2

Availability of skilled workers 2.7

Availability of unskilled workers 3.6

Worker productivity 3.8

Worker reliability 3.6

Soft skills 3.1

Worker reading, writing, and math skills 3.4

Teamwork skills 3.7

Flexibility/adaptability to change 3.5

Critical reasoning skills 3.1

Education attainment of applicants 3.5

Experience level of applicants 3.1

Employee turnover 3.6

Employee absenteeism 3.5

Employee attrition 3.6

Employment Size Responses

Less than 50 1450 to 99 10100 to 249 20250 to 499 10500 or More 16

County Responses

Delaware 5Fairfield 5Franklin 26Knox 4Licking 5Logan 3Madison 3Marion 4Morrow 4Pickaway 5Union 7

SSG interviewed 71 employers in the 11-county region. Despite the use of a questionnaire, the interviews conducted by SSG were designed to be more informal, free-flowing and relaxed, especially with high-ranking executives. Typically, most interviews lasted between 45 minutes to one hour. In addition to other qualitative and quantitative measures, the respondents were asked to rank the categories in the table at right on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being most favorable. The table shows the average scores.

14

Organized Labor Assessment

Charlotte, NC

Nashville, TN

Atlanta, GA Orlando, FL Austin, TX Phoenix, AZ Salt Lake City, UT

Tampa, FL Indianapolis, IN

Cincinnati, OH

Oklahoma City, OK

Columbus, OH

Louisville, KY

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

4.1% 4.2% 4.9% 5.2% 5.7% 5.8% 6.0% 6.8% 7.4%9.9%

11.5%

14.1% 14.4%

3.6% 2.6% 3.9% 2.8% 2.6% 3.5% 3.8% 3.6%5.6%

6.8%5.4%

8.9%

11.8%10.5%

14.2%11.3%

25.1%

20.3%21.7%

18.1%

30.5%

23.3%

34.4%36.6%

43.4%

33.6%

Unionization Rates by MSA

Total Union Rates Private Union Rates Public Union Rate

The following graph shows the unionization rates, both public and private, for each competitive MSA as identified in the Competitive Benchmarking Section.

15

Organized Labor Assessment - Continued

Completely support

union membersh

ip

Usually

would su

pport union m

embership

No opinion on union membersh

ip

Usually

would not s

upport union m

embership

Strongly oppose

union membersh

ip0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

13% 14%

37%

21%

14%

32% 32%

20%

8% 8%12% 14%

37%

22%

15%

Opinion of Organized Labor

Total Population Union Members Non-Union

The data in the graph below was generated from responses to the online workforce survey. SSG asked all participants their attitude towards unions. 74% of respondents have no opinion of or do not support unionism.

16

Key Findings & Conclusions

Challenges:

Lack of vocationally trained workforce (post-high school); Employers are shouldering the burden

The post secondary education system isn’t keeping up with the demand for IT talent, Precision Production, Maintenance & Repair Talent, and Logistics

Negative perception of career potential in the Advanced Manufacturing and Logistics industries

There is an $10.00/hr. wage threshold for unskilled workforce talent

There will be as many people exiting the workforce as there will be entering the workforce in the next 10 years

There is a generational divide present in the workforce

The region’s organized labor statistics vary greatly from the attitudes of the workforce and opinions of employers

Market wages are slightly above average compared to the competitive locations

Opportunities

The labor force in the region is relatively fluid and staffing a qualified workforce at market wages is feasible throughout the region.

There is a wage gap of $14.00 - $16.00/hr. and a salary gap of $43,000-$47,000 among the underemployed

It would take a wage of $17.00 - $19.00/hr. or a salary of $50,000-$54,000 to entice the majority of those not in the labor force to re-enter

The workforce characteristics strongly supports each of the target industries

Abundance of engineering talent in the region

Throughout the course of the project, SSG identified the following challenges and opportunities present in the Central Ohio region.

For additional information please contact:

Site Selection Group, LLC8300 Douglas Ave.Suite 700Dallas, TX 75225(214) 271-0580www.siteselectiongroup.com