utah trendlines: jan-feb 2012

8/3/2019 Utah Trendlines: Jan-Feb 2012

1/28

Perspectives on Utahs Econom

January/February 201

Department of Workforce Services

A Look

Forward

The RecoveryNeeds toContinue

Are We Covered?A Look at Health InsuranceCoverage in Utah

Utah's Employmenis Growing

For Now

2012


2/282 January/Feruary 2012

Trendlines

jobs.utah.gov

Utah Department of Workforce Services

Executive Director

Kristen Cox

Workforce Research and Analysis

Rick Little, Director

Carrie Mayne, Editor

Contributors

Mark Knold

Lecia Parks Langston

John Mathews

Jim Robson

Nate Talley

Linda Marling Church

John Krantz

Michelle Beebe

Designer

Pat Swenson

Dear readers:

It is hard toturn on the television, opena newspaper, or browse the

Internet without nding a story aboutjob creation. How many jobs will thePresidents jobs bill create? How manycould be created with varying congres-sional proposals? In Utah, we are takinga dierent approach. Governor Herberthas announced his plan on 100,000jobs in 1,000 days. He did not say thathe or state government would createthe jobsonly that we would all work to-

gether to build a positive environmentfor job growth. That is precisely ourfocus at the Department of WorkforceServices (DWS).

The latest job numbers show thatUtahs economy is steadily improvingand growing at a higher rate than thenational average. While thats veryencouraging news, there are still manyjob seekers out there looking for work.Right now, there are more than 12,000jobs listed on the DWS website, jobs.utah.gov. These are real jobs that run

the gamut of occupations and wages.Again, good news, but there is also thereality that for every job listed theremay be scores of applicants and jobcompetition is erce. Our workforcedevelopment specialists are activelyengaged with employers around thestate who have made clear their needfor a qualied and diverse pool ofcandidates.

At DWS, among the many employmentrelated services we provide is a one-stop-shop, comprehensive toolkitfor jobseekers at jobs.utah.gov. Oncethere, a job seeker from any corner ofthe state can search any job title, skill,or key word in every imaginable careercategory. They will also nd direct linksto Utah employer websites and stateand national job banks. In addition tothese job search features, job seekerscan sign up to receive real time Twitterupdates as new jobs are added to aparticular career or occupation.

As I mentioned, its a competitivemarket and the Department of Work-force Services can assist job seekers inimproving their opportunities for suc-cess. With our repository of the latestlabor market information, online cus-tomers have the ability to determineeducational requirements, skill sets,

wage information, and how many ex-pected openings there are throughoutthe state for basically every eld ofemployment. We oer assistance inpreparing a resume that will get no-ticed and information on where to

access additional training for in-de-mand occupations. At jobs.utah.gov,job seekers who are thinking aboutchanging career paths or who havebeen out of the job market for an ex-tended period of time can determinehow their current job skills match upin todays labor market.

In addition to our online services,the Department of WorkforceServices oers a series of workshopsand seminars in employment centers

located throughout the state. These workshops include the innovativeWork Success program, which isan intensive two-week curriculum forthe long-term unemployed job seeker(the program does have eligibilityrequirements). Our employmentcounselors specialize in working withjob seekers of all ages and within everyskill level and can connect them to the

work placeits their job.

Our employment counselors and workforce development specialistsare dedicated to connecting Utahjob seekers with employmentopportunities that reect our localeconomies. We know that Utahsborders expand beyond the WasatchFront and that from Logan, to Loa,to LaVerkin each part of our greatstate has dierent needs and diverseeconomies. We are here to meet thoseneeds. Our job is helping you nd

yours. sincerely,

Kristen Cox, Executive Director,Department of Workforce Services

A Conversation About

Jobs in Utah


3/28

DWS-03-44-0112

Equal Opportunity Employer/ProgramAuxiliary aids and services are available upon request

to individuals with disabilities by calling (801)526-9240. Individuals with speech and/or hearing

impairments may call the Relay Utahby dialing 711. Spanish Relay Utah: 1-888-346-3162.

j.utah.gv/wi Trendline

4 Utah's Employment is GrowingWasatch Front and Statewide

6Are We Covered? A Look at Health

Insurance Coverage in UtahWhat's Happening

8Unemployment Insurance Benefts

Through the YearsEconomic Insight

10 Better? BarelyNational News

12 Degrees o FreedomInsider News

14 A New Approach to Measuring PovertyFor Your Inormation

16The Great Recession and Manuacturing

Jobs: United States and UtahThe Outlook

19 The Recovery Needs to ContinueThe Outskirts

22Hazardous Material Removal Workers:

Abating our Wasteul LiestyleOccupations

24

Dividing the Pie: A Look at HouseholdIncome Distribution in Utah

Economic News

26Waste Management &Remediation Services

Industry Highlight

27 Just the Facts...Rate Update

contentsA Look Forward

to 2012

pg. 6

pg. 24



The Utah employment picture isending the year on a high notethat is in relation to recent per-

ormance, not historical perormance.Employment growth is in the high2-percent range, and it stands a goodchance o moving higher as 2012 un-olds. This rate o growth ranks Utah inthe top ve states.

The weight o continuous population

growth seems to be the driving orcebehind these employment gains.There are enough negatives stillenveloping the national economythat the infuence it endows upon theUtah economy is negligible. Thereore,the growth must be homegrowninfuenced, and population growthseems to be the actor.

The labor orce population (age16 and over) continues to growin Utah, even across the recession

period to the present. Though somewere unable to get a job during thatperiodand others lost theirsthecollective weight o this labor orcepopulation still makes commerce

and the economy churn. Even peoplewithout jobs spend money (studentloans, unemployment insurance,dads wallet, etc.).

Utahs labor orce population isestimated to grow just below 2 percenteach year. In one year, that is notenough to lead a counter-drive againstnegative economic pressures (makingit grow when other actors would

counter or even hinder growth). Butput together our consecutive yearso such growth, and you suddenlyhave an accumulation o populationgrowth with some weight behind itenough weight to start to overwhelmthe economic negatives. Even a largeenough pool o less-than-normaleconomic spending will eventuallycoalesce into something o tangiblevalue.

This labor orce growth pressure does

need other economic support. It isbursting out now, but the rest o theeconomic actors at some point will haveto kick in to help keep this momentumgoing beyond just 2012.

waatch frnt and tatewide |y mark knld, chief ecnmit

Utahs Employment is GrowingThe growthseems to behomegrowninuenced,

and populationgrowth may be

the factor.


5/28Trendline j.utah.gv/wi



what' happening |y lecia park langtn, ecnmit

I

t used to be that when I elded a question about health insurancecoverage in Utah, I had no data to oer. Thankully, those days are

gone. Due to new questions in both the American CommunitySurvey (ACS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS), Ihave plenty o data to share. The gures in this articletrace to two dierent sources. Statewide data derivesrom the Current Population Surveys AnnualSocial and Economic Supplement (2010).County-level estimates are model-based guresgenerated by the Census Bureau using amongother inputs, health insurance coverageestimates rom the American CommunitySurvey. (The sample size or the CPS is notsucient to provide county-level estimates.)

Covering all the BasesFirst, lets outline just what health insurance coveragemeans. The Census Bureau broadly classies healthinsurance coverage as private or government. Privateinsurance includes employer or union-provided coverageor coverage directly purchased by the individual.Government-provided insurance includes programssuch as Medicare, Medicaid, military, CHIP (ChildrensHealth Insurance Program), and state-sponsored healthplans. Individuals are considered insured i they werecovered by any type o health insurance or any part othe previous calendar year. Interestingly, research hasound that the CPS data tends to under-estimate health

insurance coverageperhaps because respondents answeror the current time-period rather than the past year.

Is Utah Covered?Roughly 86 percent o Utahns had some sort o healthinsurance coverage during 2010. That places us about in themiddle when all states are ranked. Plus, we make a slightlybetter showing than the United States average with 84 percento its population covered by insurance. O course, althoughmost o the population in Utah had some type o insurance

A look at Health Insurance Coverage in UtahCovered?Are We

Roughly 74 percent o Utahs population maintainedsome type o private insurance coverage during 2010.


7/28Trendline 7j.utah.gv/wi

coverage, 14 percent did not. The top six states or health

insurance coverageMassachusetts, Hawaii, Wisconsin,Maine, Vermont, and Minnesotashowed insured ratesbetter than 90 percent. States with the lowest coverage tendto be in the southern part o the countrySouth Carolina,Florida, Mississippi, Texas, and our neighbors, Nevada andNew Mexico all showed coverage rates less than 80 percent.

How are We Covered?Roughly 74 percent o Utahs population maintained sometype o private insurance coverage during 2010ar higherthan the national average o 64 percent. Most o thosewith private coverage66 percentwere insured under

employment-based programs. Again, this share proved arhigher than the national average o 55 percent.

Conversely, Utahns appeared much less likely to have sometype o government-provided health insurance than theirnational counterparts. In Utah, only 10-percent o thepopulation was covered by Medicaid (the ederal programor low-income people) compared to 16 percent nationwide.Utahns are also somewhat less likely to be covered byMedicare than their U.S. counterparts12 percent comparedto 15 percent. Thats undoubtedly because o Utahs smaller-than-average senior share o the population.

County CoverageThe health insurance coverage estimates by county havesome signicant dierences rom the statewide data outlinedpreviously. First, they are estimates rather than survey data.Second, estimates are or 2009 rather than 2010. And nally,the estimates do not cover those over the age o 65 (whenindividuals typically qualiy or Medicare).

Looking at the ranking o health-insurance coverage bycounty, no clear geographic pattern emerges. Some urbancountiesDavis and Utahshowed high levels o healthinsurance coverage (86 percent or higher). OthersSalt Lakeand Weberdisplayed coverage rates below the state average

o 84 percent. On the other hand, a ew less populatedcounties showed strong coverage shares. Coverage in Morgan,Carbon, Summit, Box Elder, Emery, and Sevier counties rankedabove the state average. Nevertheless, with the exceptiono Washington County, all the lower-tier counties weredecidedly rural. Much o the dierence in the rates o healthinsurance coverage undoubtedly relates to the availability oemployment-based health insurance. In general, jobs in low-coverage rural areasparticularly those with high levels opart-time or seasonal employmentmay be less likely to oerhealth insurance coverage.

2010 Utah Healthcare Coverage by Type*

2,0

268

351

108

386

1,922

252

65

67

384

Private

Medicaid

Medicare

Military

NotCovered

All Persons

Numbers in Thousands

Under Age 65

74%

66%

10%

10%

12%

4%

14%

64%

55%

10%

16%

15%

4%

16%

Private

Employment-based

Direct Purchase

Medicaid

Medicare

Military

Not Covered

Share of Total Population

Utah

U.S.

For more inormation about

health insurance coverage in Utah, see:

http://www.census.gov/did/www/sahie/index.html

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/index.html

2010 Health Insurance CoverageAll Person

*Individuals may be counted in more than one category i covered bymore than one type o health insurance.Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Current Population Survey.

2009 Estimated Percent of Population Under 65 yeWith Health Insurance Coverage*

*Includes publicly providedcoverage.Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

77%78%78%

79%80%80%80%80%80%

80%80%

81%82%82%

82%82%

83%83%

84%84%84%

85%85%85%

86%86%86%

86%87%

89%

San JuanGrandPiute

UintahDaggett

KaneRich

MillardBeaver

SanpeteWashington

WasatchDuchesne

IronWeber

GareldWayne

Salt LakeJuabState Total

SevierCacheEmery

Box ElderSummit

TooeleUtah

CarbonMorgan

Davis



ecnmic inight |y michelle eee, enir uine analyt

Through the YearsUnemployment Insurance Benefts

The Social Security Act o 1935created the ederal-state Unem-ployment Insurance (UI) system

and is still in place to this day. Utah,however, was one o seven states tolegislate state UI laws prior to ederalenactment. The goals o the programare: (1) stabilize the economy, and (2)alleviate personal hardship that stemsrom involuntary job loss. With the

exception o three states (AK, NJ, andPA), the UI program is unded entirelyby employer payroll taxes. Every dol-lar paid in unemployment benets isestimated to generate $1.60 in eco-nomic activity.

In September 2011, Utahs averageweekly benet amount was $308 oran average duration o 14.9 weeks.The national third quarter numbersshow an average weekly benetamount o $291 with an averageduration o 17.6 weeks. Compare

this to the third quarter o 2002,when Utahs average weekly benetamount equaled $275 or an average

duration o 13.4 weeks and the nationhad an average weekly benet amounto $257 or an average duration o16.1 weeks.

Utah has worked to modernize its UIprogram and provide easier accessor claimants and employers. In thelast ve years, we have seen thepercent o claimants

ling

initial claims online increase rom 25percent to 66 percent. The percent oemployers ling quarterly tax reportsonline has increased rom 28 percentto 77 percent.

Utah has been ortunate to stay be-low national unemployment levels,


9/28jobs.utah.gov/wi Trendlinej.utah.gv/wij.utah.gv/wi

though we have certainly seen animpact rom the most recent reces-sion. Our initial claims ling reachedits highest level in over 25 yearsin December 2008, with 18,000-plus claims. This peak occurred vemonths ater the ederal govern-ment authorized payments rom theEmergency Unemployment Com-pensation (EUC08) program. The

12-month moving average peaked inNovember 2009 at just below 14,000,which is the same time that addition-al tiers became available on EUC08.Since then, we have maintained aairly steady decline in the numbero claims led, though our weeklynumbers have just started to pickup as a result o lay-os in the sea-sonal workorce.

Source: Utah Department o Workorce Services

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,00018,00020,000

Monthly 12-Month Moving Average

UI Claims Filed

The numbers o those fling online increased41 percent in the last fve years.

You can ollow this progression

every week on our blog at

http://economyutah.blogspot.com/.



natinal new |y mark knld, chief ecnmit

The national economy is goinginto the 2012 year as the enginethat might. The last ew months

o the year saw many economistspredicting a noticeable stumble in theU.S. economy, only to have the GrossDomestic Product (GDP) perorm betterthan they expected. It wasnt stellarU.S. GDP perormance, but it did beatthe gloomy predictions.

Yet the national economy is weakenough that the gloomy predictionswont go away, even with the economyhaving shown them wrong at the endo 2011the underlying eeling is thatthe perormance barely qualied asbetter. There are still a lot o clouds

and question marks hanging over thehorizon to keep these gloom-seersactive.

The biggest and most immediate isthe European debt situation. A Greecemeltdown would have made headlines,yet would have been contained. By nottaking any signicant action, this hasallowed anxieties to grow into otherlarger, more infuential countries like

Italy and possibly France. The morethe European-money people hesitateto address the issue, the more o achance these bigger states may becomesusceptible. Many economic orecastershave already built a Eurozone recessioninto their orecast, so i that happens itwill not be a surprise. A more uncertainquestion is how much would thataect the United States' economy. Herethe pundits are less certain and morevariable. Some see deep pain, others seeonly a glancing blow.

Thats not the only thing that could tripup the U.S. economy. A nuclear Iranhas suddenly risen to the oreront. Anykind o drastic military action against

this situation is bound to infame oilprices, and strong oil price climbsbring with them a high probabilityo disrupting the U.S. economyespecially a ragile U.S. economy suchas this one.

There are also internal issues. Thegovernment debt situation hovers overany long-term U.S. economic discussionThe budgetary supercommittee

Better?

Barely.


11/28

Forecast

Actual

Ocial recession

window

j.utah.gv/wi Trendline 1

Source: U.S. Bureau o Economic Analysis. Forecast is summarized as a general

expectation rom various economic orecasting groups.

U.S. Gross Domestic Product Change Quarterly2005Present

designed to evaluate U.S. debt reductionmade no recommendations. Politicaldisagreement and conrontation seemto be the current operating mode, evenreezing up a bipartisan panel. Nowonder observers ear that the desiredcompromise and cooperation are hardto see rom this vantage point. Thereis also the issue o whether the payrolltax cut will be extended, as well asunemployment insurance benets. Theexpiration o both have the potential oshaving points o o 2012 GDP growth.

At present they look menacing, but allo these clouds could turn out to beharmless or minimal. I none springup to be o major consequence upon

the U.S. economy, then the currentpositive economic momentum thatUtah is experiencing can continue tomove orward and build upon itsel. Itsdicult to nd anyone who thinks thenational economy will deliver a majorpositive surprise in 2012. Given theamount o clouds that observers pointto as trouble areas, i none develop, thatmight turn out to be the economyspositive surprise.

Although the GDP wasn't stellar, it didbeat gloomy predictions.



nider new |y nate talley, ecnmit

The relationships between peo-ples educational attainment,employment security, and earn-

ings are well documented. As indi-viduals gain more education, they areless likely to experience unemploy-ment and more likely to earn higherwages, on average. For many, a Bach-elors degree is the postsecondaryeducational pathway through whichthese economic advantages are se-cured. Approximately 29% o Utahspopulation age 25 and older has at-tained a Bachelors degree or higher.

Using data rom the Census BureausAmerican Community Survey (ACS),we can identiy how elds o studyare distributed among Bachelors de-gree holders in Utah.

Table 1 depicts the concentrationso grouped elds o study amongUtahns ages 25 and older who havea Bachelors degree. The ACS data

Table 1: Grouped Field o Bachelors Degrees

or First Major

Age 25 an Over in Uah 2010

Degree Holders

Estimate Percentage

Total: 465,141 100%

Science and Engineering

Computers, Mathematics and Statistics 20,475 4.4%

Biological, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences 29,230 6.3%

Physical and Related Sciences 13,697 2.9%

Psychology 21,448 4.6%

Social Sciences 34,771 7.5%

Engineering 31,549 6.8%

Multidisciplinary Studies 3,139 0.7%

Science and Engineering Related Fields 41,036 8.8%

Business 87,197 18.7%

Education 69,927 15.0%

Arts, Humanities, and Other

Literature and Languages 24,621 5.3%Liberal Arts and History 16,920 3.6%

Visual and Perorming Arts 16,914 3.6%

Communications 19,058 4.1%

Other 35,159 7.6%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 American Community

Survey, 1-Year Estimates, Table B15010

of FreedomDegreesStatistics continue to confrmthat education pays!


13/28Trendline 1j.utah.gv/wi

Table 3: Highest Wage or Salary Earnings by First Major

Age 25 an Over in Uah 2010 (Minimum 500 cae)

Wage

Estimate

Molecular Biology $144,647

Statistics and Decision Science $89,524

Biochemical Sciences $85,295

Zoology $81,464Microbiology $80,725

Physiology $77,667

Chemical Engineering $77,036

Chemistry $76,902

Computer Science $72,759

Pre-Law and Legal Studies $72,437

Table 2: Most Common First MajorsAge 25 an Over in Uah 2010

Degree HoldersEstimate

Elementary Education 26,795

Accounting 22,401

Business Management and Administration 21,981

Psychology 21,429

English Language and Literature 17,610

General Business 14,638

Nursing 14,547

General Education 14,083Family and Consumer Sciences 12,537

Computer Science 11,931

used to populate Table 1 representsone major per Bachelors degreeholder, although about 10% o thispopulation has earned more thanone degree.

Just over one third o all Utah under-graduate degree holders majored in abusiness or education eld, which isnearly identical to the national statis-tic. In act, most o the grouped eldso study seen in Table 1 are similarlyrepresented among college graduateson a national scale.

Beyond grouped elds o study, wecan analyze the prevalence o, andearnings associated with, detailed

majors acquired by Utahns. For ex-ample, within the grouped eld obusiness, the most popular majorsare accounting, business manage-ment and administration, and gen-eral business studies. Likewise, earn-ings or those whose college careerswere in a business eld were highestin the majors o accounting, gen-eral business and nance. Tables 2and 3 refect the most common rstmajors and the highest wage or sal-ary earnings by rst major in Utah,during the year 2010. When viewingthese tables, however, consider thatnot all Bachelors degree holders areemployed in occupations that relateto their education, and at least some

are probably not employed at all. Fur-ther, many o the high wage earnersin Table 3 have attained educationbeyond their Bachelors degree, andit is their postgraduate education thatallows them to earn higher wages (orexample, health sciences are commonundergraduate majors o those whogo on to become medical doctors).

Whether youre evaluating a Bach-elors degree major by number o re-cipients, the earnings o recipients, orsome other criteria, rest assured thatthere are many majors rom whichto choose that oer a unique eld oknowledge and skill sets. Simply exer-cise your reedom to choose one.

Rest assured that thereare many majors romwhich to choose thatwill appeal to you and

your interests.



fr yur infrmatin | y jhn krantz, ecnmit

The Ocial Poverty Measure (OPM)

was designed in the early 1960s and

ocially adopted in 1969. But it was

never intended to be anything more than

a temporary solution to the problem o

measuring poverty. Not until the 1990s

did work begin on developing a newmethod or measuring poverty and only

this year did the Census Bureau publish

its initial set o supplemental poverty

estimates. The new supplemental poverty

measure addresses problems inherent in

the ocial poverty measure and provides

a new perspective on the numbers o

those in poverty based on age, race, and

ethnicity.

For each household size, the

OPM threshold is set by estimating

the minimum cost o a nutritionally

adequate diet and multiplying this

gure by three. But this measure has

several shortcomings: It does not take

into account public assistance benets

received, job-related expenses, child

support payments, and diferences in

prices around the country, just to name

the most important deciencies. The

new supplemental measure ofers an

improvement upon the ocial denition

by taking into consideration the

aorementioned shortcomings.

Looking at the OPM and the

supplemental poverty measure side

by side reveals several interesting

diferences. The ocial measure

overstates the percentage o children

under 18 in poverty by more than our

percentage points as compared with

the supplemental measure. At the other

end o the age spectrum, the ocial

measure understates the percentage o

people 65 and older in poverty by nearly

seven percentage points relative to the

supplemental measure. For all age groups,

the new supplemental poverty measure

puts the percentage o those in poverty at16 percent while the ocial measure puts

it at 15.2 percent.

The new and old measures o poverty

also difer by race and Hispanic origin.

For Whites, Non-Hispanic Whites,

Asians, and Hispanics o any race, the

supplemental measure places a higher

percentage in poverty relative to the

oicial measure. The only racial group

that saw a decrease rom the oicial

measure to the supplemental measure

was Blacks, who saw a decrease in the

percent in poverty by more than two

percentage points.

The supplemental poverty measure

addresses the need to have a poverty

measure that more accurately accounts

or the receipt o inancial and in-kind

resources and regional dierences in

the cost o living. However, the new

measure is not intended to replace

the OPM. The oicial measure is ound

explicitly in legislation that determineseligibility or various government

programs and is used or the purpose

o administering these programs.

Instead, the primary purpose o the new

measure is to provide more accurate

inormation about the economic well-

being o those with the lowest incomes,

measured at the level o the nation and

large regions.

Pverty by RComparing

white13.1%

white14.3%

PovertyA New Approach to Meauring


15/28jobs.utah.gov/wi Trendline 1Trendline 1

Pverty by Age:Comparing the New and Old Measures

Source: Current Population Reports (P60-241), U.S. Census Bureau.

d Hispanic origin:w and Old Measures

Under18Years22.5%65+Years9%

allpeople15.2%

nothispanic10% BLACK27.5%ASIAN12.1%

HISPANIC(ANYRACE)

26.7%

18-64Years13.7%

nder18Years18.2%

65+Years15.9%

allpeople16%

hite,nothispanic BLACK25.4%

ASIAN16.7%

HISP

ANIC(ANYRACE)28.2%

18-

64Years15.2%

OfficialPovertyMeasure

OfficialPovertyMeasure

Supplementalpovertymeasu

Supplementalpovertymeasure

11.1%

white,



the utlk |y jhn mathew, ecnmit

The Great Recession started in December2007 and ended in June o 2009. Thoseare the ocial dates. All industrial sectors

o the economy were impacted. To betterunderstand the eects o the business cycleon the manuacturing sector we need to putit in perspective - to set the stage, i you willManuacturing is a very important industry

because its where stu is made. Stu we useto make other stu; stu that we use o theshel; and stu we sell to other countries.

Manuacturing has evolved through theyears rom a primary cog in the industriarevolution to an important, but smallepiece o the economic pie. In the U.S. twoimportant phenomena have aected, andcontinue to aect, manuacturing. First is theshit in methods o production away romlabor intensive to capital (machine) intensiveprocesses. This happens largely throughtechnological advances. Because o technologymachines replace labor. For example, paintingcars in the automotive industry is now doneby robots instead o workers with sprayguns. Second, is the movement o domesticproduction to production o products outsidethe U.S. This movement was, and is, a resulto capitalistic orces. Goods will be producedwhere costs are minimized. Labor costoshore are less than in the U.S., resultingin the placement o production activities ormany o the more labor intensive processes towhere per unit labor costs are lower. In otherwords, the economy, through basic concept

o capitalism (prot and price mechanismsends work where it can be done at a lowercost. Consumers buy stu primarily based onprice, and the lower the price the more sold.

Manufacturing A Little BackgroundMuch has been said o the demise o themanuacturing industry in America. Amentioned above, technology and o-shoringhave aected the industry, but remember theU.S. produces more manuactured goods than

The Great Recession &Manufacturing Jobs

United States and Utah

Manufacturing is animportant piece of the

economic pie.


17/28j.utah.gv/wi Trendline 1

any other country. In terms o jobs, U.S.manuacturing employment peaked back in1979 when 19.4 million workers toiled in theindustry. In 2007 (pre-recession) the count oU.S. jobs in manuacturing was 13.9 million.Utah has ared much better as manuacturingemployment has been growing in the state,increasing rom 104,000 in the early 1990s

to 128,000 in 2007. Yet at the national andstate level, the industry accounts or anever-decreasing share o total employment.In manuacturings heyday nationally, one-quarter o all jobs ell in this sector. Now, thatslice o the jobs pie is about 9.0 percent. InUtah, manuacturings largest share o totaljobs was 18 percent back in the 1960s. By2007 it was down to 10 percent.

Beore analyzing the industry through therecent recession, lets add another dimensionto the review because it will come to play ina big way in the analysis. Manuacturing isthe industry where things are made. It is verydiverse, rom breakast cereal to steel girdersor buildings. This diversity is classied in astructure that denes what businesses do,i.e. the product they make. The rst broadclassication dierentiates the industry basedon how long the goods produced are expectedto last. Those goods with a three year or less lieare considered non-durable goods, examplesbeing ood, paper, chemicals, and textiles.Those with longer lie spans are considereddurable goods such as heavy equipment,computers, abricated metal, vehicles, etc.

What Happened to Manufacturing During theRecessionGenerally, when the business cycle peaks, aslide in economic activity characterized by aloss o demand or goods and services ollows.When the demand alls or goods produced bythe manuacturing companies, the demandor workers drops o and employers cut backthe number o workers. That means the losso jobs. For the 18 month period o December

United States Manufacturing Percent JobLoss by Sector in the Great Recession

December 2007-June 2009Source: U.S. Bureau o Labor Statistics.

Source: Utah Department o Workorce Services.

Utah Manufacturing Percent Job Loss by Sectorin the Great Recession

December 2007-June 2009

Total Manufacturing Jobs Lost = 16,700

Durable Goods Jobs Lost = 14,50Nondurable GoodJobs Lost = 2,20

Total Manufacturing Jobs Lost = 2 millioDurable Goods Jobs Lost = 1.5 millio

Nondurable GoodJobs Lost = 0.5 millio

WoodProducts

13%

Nondurable Goods13%

Misc.13% Furniture& Related

Products 21% TransportationEquip. 10%

Electrical equip. &appliances 0%

Computer & electronic

products 3%

Machinery 5%

Fabricated metalproducts 8%

Primarymetals

4%

Nonmetallicmineral

products10%

Wood Products 7%

NondurableGoods24%

Misc.3%

Furniture &Related

Products 7%

TransportationEquip. 19%

Electrical equip. &appliances 3%

Computer & electronicproducts 6%

Machinery8%

Fabricatedmetal

products13%

Primarymetals

5%

Nonmetallicmineral

products5%



the utlk cnt. |y jhn mathew, ecnmit

2007 through June 2009 the nation lost more than 2million manuacturing employees, or 15 percent o themanuacturing workorce. In Utah the recessions impactdropped manuacturing employment rom 129,400 to112,700, a nearly 13 percent decline.

Durable Goods Manufacturing Takes the Biggest HitAt the national level, 76 percent o the total 2 million lostmanuacturing jobs were in durable goods. Thats not anequal share as durable goods account or 63 percent omanuacturing employment, yet three-ourths o all losseswere in that group. On the other hand, only 24 percento job losses occurred in non-durable manuacturing.Hardest hit sectors in durable goods were transportationequipment, abricated metal, machinery, wood products,and urniture. Transportation equipment (auto industry)lost 23 percent o its jobs. The other sectors listed lostworkers because their products went to the constructionindustry, which in turn went south, due to little demandor building or urnishing homes.

In Utah, durable goods took an even harder hit thanthe nation. About 87 percent o all manuacturing jobs

lost during the recession were in durable goods. Thatmeans durable goods made up 14,500 o the total 16,700manuacturing jobs losta decline o 17 percent. Duringthe 18-month recession, the durable goods industrysectors with the most job losses were urniture andrelated products (-3,430), miscellaneous manuacturing(-2,180), wood product manuacturing (-2,110), andtransportation equipment (-1,700). Three o these ourare tied directly to the construction industry. Non-

durable goods manuacturing did lose about 2,200 jobs, arelatively small 13 percent proportion o the total 16,700job loss.

That Was Then. Whats Happening Now?June o 2009 seems like a long time ago. Its been longersince the recession ocially ended than the duration othe recession itsel. So whats happened to the economyand manuacturing? The numbers tell us that there hasbeen some improvement, but not by much, and notwidespread over all sectors. The recovery is takingplace but at a very, very slow pace. U.S. manuacturingemployment, on a moving year-over month comparison,has been positive each month since October 2009. Jobgrowth rates have been in a range rom 0.6 percent to1.9 percent.

The picture in Utah is brighter. Utahs economy isadding jobs at about a 2.2 percent pace (June 2011).Manuacturing job growth has been a little slower at2 percent through the rst hal o 2011. During the June 2010 to June 2011 period, 2,240 manuacturingjobs were added liting employment rom 111,490

to 113,730. Remember that 16,700 manuacturingjobs were lost during the 18-month recession. Utahsrecovery will be slow. Full recovery may take years, butit will happen.

For more inormation on the nation and the recessionseects on manuacturing see:

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/04/art5full.pdf

Utahs recovery will beslow. Full recovery maytake years, but it will

happen.


19/28jobs.utah.gov/wi Trendline 1

the utkirt | y jim rn, ecnmi

Over the last year or so, employment growth hasstrengthened in Utah as the recovery rom theGreat Recession continues. Lets take stock

o how Metro (1) Utah and Non-metro (2) Utah haveared in gaining back the jobs by industry lost duringthe recession.

Peak wage and salary payroll employment occurred inDecember o 2007 in Utah, with signicant job lossesbeing recorded during 2008 and 2009. In 2007, the yearprior to the recession, there were on average 1,251,400payroll jobs in Utah. 0 these, 92 percent (1,154,000)were in Metro Utah and eight percent (97,600) in Non-metro Utah.

For the twelve months ending in June 2011, there wereon average, 1,193,300 payroll jobs in Utah or about58,100 ewer than the average or 2007. This is 4.6percent below Utahs peak employment prior to therecession. O this job decit, the Metro counties are53,150 or 4.6 percent below their 2007 employment

levels and the Non-metro counties are 4,950 jobs or 5.1percent below their 2007 job count.

This analysis compares 2007 to the twelve monthsending in June 2011; because when written in late Fall2011, the June job numbers by county were the mostrecent wage and salary payroll counts that had beenreported to Workorce Services.

I we divide payroll jobs into 24 separate industrycategories, a picture emerges detailing which industries

The Recvery (1) METRO COUNTIESBoxElder, Cache, Davis, Juab,Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit,Tooele, Utah, Washington,and Weber.

(2) NON-METRO COUNTIESBeaver, Carbon, Daggett,Duchesne, Emery, Gareld,Grand, Iron, Kane, Millard,Piute, Rich, San Juan, Sanpete,Sevier, Uintah, Wasatch, andWayne.

Need t

CntinueLooking at Utah's

Metro and Non-

Metro Countiesand how they

ared with gaining

back jobs lost

in the Great

Recession.



Nonarm Payroll Job Growth:June 2010 to June 2011

2.2%

7.6%

5.7%

5.6%

5.1%

4.7%

4.4%

4.0%

3.5%

3.5%

2.9%

1.9%

1.2%

1.1%

1.1%

0.9%

0.2%

0.0%

-0.3%-0.5%

-0.8%

-1.2%

-1.7%

-3.6%

-4.9%

-5.4%

-5.8%

-5.8%

-6.1%

-11.2%

Statewide

Duchesne

Beaver

Uintah

Summit

Tooele

Utah

Davis

Grand

Cache

Millard

Salt Lake

San Juan

Wasatch

Washington

Kane

Servier

Sanpete

IronWeber

Daggett

Garfield

Carbon

Box Elder

Morgan

Juab

Emery

Wayne

Rich

Piute

Metro County

Non-Metro County

Source: Utah Department o Workorce Services.

(1) METRO COUNTIESBoxElder, Cache, Davis, Juab,Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit,Tooele, Utah, Washington,and Weber.

(2) NON-METRO COUNTIESBeaver, Carbon, Daggett,Duchesne, Emery, Gareld,Grand, Iron, Kane, Millard,Piute, Rich, San Juan, Sanpete,Sevier, Uintah, Wasatch, andWayne.

are leading in providing greater job opportunities andwhich industries have not recovered their 2007 jobstatus (see industry table). For Metro Utah, the industriesthat have the most ground to make up to reach their2007 levels are construction, manuacturing, and retailtrade. The industries that are well above 2007 levels withmany new jobs are health care, private education, andpublic education. O the 24 industry groups or MetroUtah, eight have more jobs and 16 have ewer jobs than

in 2007.

In the Non-metro Utah counties, the industries withmore jobs or ewer jobs than in 2007 is also eight to16. Again those industries that still have the most jobsto make up in order to recover their 2007 levels are

construction, manuacturing, and retail trade. The mostnew jobs are ound in local government (excludingpublic education), health care, and administrativesupport (mostly temporary stang agencies).

Finally, i we look at total payroll job growth by county(see chart), 16 counties added jobs rom June 2010 toJune 2011 and 8 counties saw net job reductions. Thereis a mixture o both Metro and Non-metro counties that

show job increases and job losses.

Utahs economy is gradually gaining strength with manypositive indicators pointing to continuing improvement.I current trends continue, the state economy shouldsurpass the overall job count o 2007 in 2013.

the utkirt cnt. | y jim rn, ecnmit



Industry

Meropolian Uah Counie( 1) Job Non-Meropolian Uah Counie (2) Job

2007 2011 Change % Change 2007 2011 Change % Change

Annual

Average

Annual

Average (3)

2007 o 2011 2007 o 2011 Annual

Average

Annual

Average (3)

2007 o

2011

2007 o

2011

Total Wage and Salary Payroll Job 1,153,809 1,100,651 -53,158 -4.6% 97,613 92,635 -4,978 -5.1%

Health care & social services 101,550 113,893 12,343 12.2% 7,142 7,611 469 6.6%

Local government education 53,733 57,970 4,238 7.9% 7,618 7,684 66 0.9%

Private education services 30,612 34,723 4,112 13.4% 688 725 38 5.5%

Local gov. other than education 38,551 41,654 3,103 8.0% 8,238 8,988 750 9.1%

State government education 30,795 33,668 2,873 9.3% 3,228 3,219 -9 -0.3%

Proessional & technical services 62,665 64,507 1,841 2.9% 2,207 1,970 -236 -10.7%

Federal government 33,224 34,850 1,626 4.9% 2,300 2,439 139 6.0%

Mining 3,357 3,539 182 5.4% 7,677 7,431 -246 -3.2%

Arts, entertainment, recreation 16,779 16,721 -58 -0.3% 1,268 1,007 -261 -20.6%

Utilities 2,559 2,489 -70 -2.7% 1,554 1,543 -11 -0.7%Agriculture, orestr y, fshing, hunting 2,833 2,709 -124 -4.4% 1,650 1,724 74 4.5%

Accommodation & ood services 83,661 83,366 -295 -0.4% 11,114 10,958 -156 -1.4%

State gov. other than education 26,763 26,098 -665 -2.5% 2,416 2,342 -74 -3.1%

Other services, except government 32,684 31,086 -1,598 -4.9% 2,858 2,625 -233 -8.1%

Management o companies 20,107 18,403 -1,704 -8.5% 229 179 -51 -22.1%

Real estate, rental, leasing 17,216 15,269 -1,947 -11.3% 1,278 1,108 -170 -13.3%

Wholesale trade 44,724 42,643 -2,081 -4.7% 2,559 2,279 -281 -11.0%

Transportation & warehousing 42,430 39,828 -2,602 -6.1% 3,995 4,099 105 2.6%

Inormation 31,144 28,114 -3,030 -9.7% 1,304 1,197 -107 -8.2%

Finance and Insurance 54,227 49,677 -4,550 -8.4% 2,019 1,912 -106 -5.3%Administrative & waste services 73,400 67,999 -5,401 -7.4% 2,414 2,678 264 11.0%

Retail trade 135,130 126,209 -8,920 -6.6% 12,722 11,406 -1,316 -10.3%

Manuacturing 122,737 108,352 -14,385 -11.7% 4,959 3,772 -1,187 -23.9%

Construction 95,625 59,512 -36,113 -37.8% 7,825 5,460 -2,365 -30.2%

For non-metro counties, the industries that have the most jobs to recover their 2007 levelsare construction, manuacturing, and retail trade. The most new jobs are ound in local

government, health care, and administrative support.

Annual Average Number o Utah Jobs in Metropolitan and

Non-metropolitan Counties: 2007 and or the 12 Months Ending June 2011


22/28



consists o 40 hours o ormal training. Workers involvedwith nuclear waste take about three months o courseslearning government regulations as mandated by theNuclear Regulatory Commission.

Any occupation with hazardous in its title is just that.Because there is increased public awareness concerninghazardous waste, more o it is being removed. Bureau oLabor Statistics reports that in 2010 there were sixty-onework related deaths in this eld, down rom eighty-eightin 2008.

This occupation has a our star rating which means it hasa good employment outlook and relatively high wages.It is expected to experience about average employmentgrowth with a moderate volume o annual job openings.The need or replacements, rather than rom business

expansion, is projected to make up the majority o jobopenings in the coming decade. Openings will expanddue to increased calls or eco-riendly power production.

As a society, Americans create lots o waste, thats a given.With the help o hazardous waste removal workers, weare able to hide the evidence. For awhile.

Occupational Wages Published June 2011(data rom May 2010) or Hazardous Materials Removal Workers

Area NameHourly

Inexperienced

Hourly

Median

Annual

Inexperienced

Annual

MedianTraining Level

Ogden-Clearfeld

MSA$9.13 $10.88 $18,990 $22,630

Moderate-term OJT

(1-12 months)

Salt Lake City MSA $13.50 $16.50 $28,080 $34,330Moderate-term OJT

(1-12 months)

United States -- $17.92 -- $37,280 Moderate-term OJT(1-12 months)

Utah $9.72 $14.64 $20,210 $30,450Moderate-term OJT

(1-12 months)

Resources http://jobs.utah.gov/jsp/wi/utalmis/oidoreport.do

http://www.studentscholarships.org/salary/214/hazardous_materials_removal_workers.php

https://www.osha.gov/dep/atcat/dep_atcat.html

http://www.bls.gov/

http://www.epa.gov/

http://geowords.org/ensci/13/13.htm



Source: ACS 2010 1-Year Estimates, Census Bureau

Share o Total Household

Income in Utah byQuintiles 2010

ecnmic new | y jhn krantz, ecnmit

Anger and rustration among those who perceivethe current distribution o wealth and income inthe United States as unjust have recently ound

expression in the Occupy Wall Street movement. These

sentiments have resonated with individuals acrossthe country leading to the organization o aliatedmovements in several cities, including the OccupySalt Lake City eort. While many o the protesters areundoubtedly motivated by a variety o dierent reasons,the slogan We are the 99% suggests that there is at leastsome belie that the distributions o wealth and incomeare issues o primary concern. With this topic recently andrequently making the headline news, it is an opportunetime to look at the acts concerning income distributionin Utah.

A common approach or examining income inequality isto rank households by total income and separate them

into quintiles. I household income were distributedwith perect equality throughout society, each quintilewould receive 20 percent o the total household income.Regardless o whether it is measured at the level o thenation, state, county, city, or census tract, nowhere withinthe United States is household income distributed withperect equality. In act, household income inequalityollows a general pattern that holds true at both thenational and state levels: The share o aggregate householdincome received by each o the bottom three quintiles isless than 20 percent, while the upper two quintiles eachreceived more than 20 percent. In Utah, the bottom 20

percent o households received 4.2 percent o aggregatehousehold income with the second and third quintilesreceiving 10.2 percent and 16 percent, respectively. Thetop 40 percent o households received nearly 70 percent

o all household income with 23.4 percent going to theourth quintile and 46.1 percent going to the top 20percent o households.

What causes household income inequality? While thisquestion may appear simple to answer, it is not. No singlecause accounts or all income inequality and there isconsiderable disagreement over many o the proposedcauses. While no attempt is made here to validate anyo these explanations, the rise in household incomeinequality has been variously attributed to the declineo labor unions, the increase in dual-earner households,a movement away rom a progressive tax system, aninfux o lower-skilled immigrants, a growth in demandor highly-educated and highly-skilled labor, a lack odemand or lower-skilled workers resulting rom labor-saving technologies, and partisan-based public policies, toname only a ew.

Looking at the data or Utah, several relationships betweenhousehold income and demographic characteristics areclearly discernable. Larger households are associated withhigher household incomes. Income rom capital is alsorelated to household income. While the relationship isnot strictly increasing or all quintiles, larger percentageso individuals who receive income in the orm o interest,

A Look at HouseholdIncome Distributionin Utah

Dividing the Pie:16%

Middle 20%

23.4%4th Quintile

46.1%Top 20%

10.2%2nd Quintile

4.2%Bottom 20%



dividends, or rent are associated with higher levelso household income. The last set o demographiccharacteristics considered here concerns the levels oeducational attainment by quintiles. In the bottom 20percent o households, just over 19 percent o individualsage 25 or older do not have a high school diploma andonly 13 percent have a bachelors degree or higher. Atthe other end o the spectrum, among those 25 or olderwho live in the top 20 percent o households, only 3percent do not have a high school diploma and nearly 46percent have a bachelors degree or higher. While theserelationships might be expected, the percentages orthose with an associates degree or some college acrossquintiles are somewhat unexpected. Individuals 25 orolder with an associates degree or some college makeup between 34 to 39 percent o each quintile and thereappears to be no systematic relationship to householdincome. This appears to suggest that the extremes o theeducational attainment hierarchy (i.e., very low or veryhigh levels o education) are more important as potentialpredictors o household income than intermediate levelso education.

How unequal is household income in Utah as compared

with other states? In a recent report by the Census Bureau,Utah was ound to have the lowest income inequalityamong the 50 states.1 Moreover, the report ound that SaltLake City had the lowest household income inequalityamong metropolitan areas with populations o 1 millionor more and West Jordan city had the lowest inequalityamong large places with populations o 100,000 or more.The lower income inequality in Utah can be appreciatedby comparing mean household incomes by quintileswith the United States. For the bottom three quintiles,Utahs average household incomes are $3,000 to $4,500higher than the national averages. And the top 20

percent o households in Utah receive $14,000 less thanthe top 20 percent o all households in the country onaverage. Only or the ourth quintile o households doesUtah have roughly the same average household incomeas compared with the nation.

Why does Utah have the lowest household incomeinequality in the nation? While this question is justas dicult to answer as the more general question owhat causes income inequality, a partial answer can beprovided. According to the previously mentioned Census

Bureau report, three o the six variables that exhibited thestrongest relationships to household income inequalitywere the raction o households with two or moreworkers, the raction o households with no workers, andthe raction o persons 25 or older with less than a highschool diploma. For each o these three variables, Utah isconsiderably dierent than the nation. Only 20 percento all households in Utah have no workers as comparedto 27 percent or the US. Furthermore, 41 percent o thehouseholds in Utah have two or more workers whileonly 33 percent o households nationwide have twoor more workers. Finally, Utah has a lower percentageo individuals 25 or older with less than a high school

diploma relative to the nation: 9.4 percent as comparedto 14.4 percent.

A comprehensive explanation o why Utah has the lowesthousehold income inequality in the country may requirean examination o dozens o variables. Nevertheless, itappears that two o the most important reasons or Utahslow measure o inequality are a relatively high minimumstandard o education and a comparatively high numbero workers per household.

1The report can be found at http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-16.pdf

Bottom20%

2ndQuintile

Middle20%

4thQuintile

Top20%

Average Household Size 2.29 2.68 3.09 3.55 3.66Individuals ReceivingInterest, Dividend, orRental Income (15+)

7.0% 9.4% 11.7% 11.3% 17.1%

Educational Attainment(25+):Less Than High SchoolDiploma

19.3% 14.1% 9.4% 6.9% 3.2%

High School Diplomaor GED

31.1% 31.4% 26.1% 22.0% 17.1%

Some College orAssociate's Degree

36.4% 35.3% 39.3% 38.1% 33.8%

Bachelor's Degree or

Higher13.3% 19.2% 25.2% 33.0% 45.8%

Average Household Incomeof the Quintiles 2010

Source: ACS 2010 1-Year Estimates, Census Bureau

!""#$%&'$14,402

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000$300,000

$350,000

Top 20%$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000$300,000

$350,000

Bottom20%

Middle20%

4thQuintile

Top 5%

United States Utah

2ndQuintile

Selected Household Demographicsby Quintiles or Utah
http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-16.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-16.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-16.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-16.pdf



ndutry highlight | y lecia park langtn, ecnmit

All joking aside, the waste man-agement and remediation ser-vices industry plays a vital role

in our economy. Firms categorized inthis industry are engaged in the col-lection, treatment, and disposal owaste materials. They can haul wastematerials, recycle waste materials,or provide remediation services (thecleanup o contaminated buildings,mines, soil, or water). Utah rms

in this industry do everything romcrime-scene cleanup to radioactivewaste disposal.

In Utah, the waste managementand remediation services industryaccounts or roughly 4,100 jobsabout 93 percent o them in theprivate sector. Judging by the 7.4percent increase in private-sectorwaste management employmentduring 2010, this industry is certainlycleaning up in the labor market.Interestingly, private-sector jobs pay

substantially better than those in thepublic sectorperhaps because o thenature o the private sector work.

For more inormation about the waste managementand remediation services industries, go to:

http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag562.htm

Employment 4,100

Private Sector 3,800

% Change from 2009 7.4%

Public Sector 300

% Change from 2009 -3.8%

Average Monthly Wage

Private Sector $4,296

Percent o Utah Total Average Wage 132.8%Public Sector $3,022

Percent o Utah Total Average Wage 93.4%

NUMBER OF PRIVATE SECTOR FIRMS 223

LARGEST FIRMS

EG&G Deense Materials, Inc.

Energy Solutions, LLC

Waste Management o Utah

Allied Waste Services o North America

Ace Disposal, Inc.

Clean Harbors, Inc.

UTAH WASTE MANAGEMENT/REMEDIATION SERVICESINdUstRy QUICk FACts 2010

Source:UtahDepartmentofWorkforceServices.

Wate Management & Remediation serviceIts a dirty job, but somebodys got to do it.


27/28

Beaver 6.9 %Box Elder 7.9 %Cache 4.7 %Carbon 7.0 %Daggett 5.3 %

Davis 6.0 %Duchesne 5.3 %Emery 7.6 %Gareld 11.5 %

Grand 10.2 %

Iron 8.1 % Juab 8.8 %Kane 7.6 %Millard 5.2 %Morgan 5.6 %

Piute 7.0 %Rich 5.6 %Salt Lake 6.1 %San Juan 11.4 %Sanpete 8.2 %

Sevier 7.0 %Summit 5.9 %Tooele 6.9 %Uintah 4.5 %Utah 6.3%

Wasatch 7.4 %Washington 8.0 %Wayne 11.5 %Weber 7.3 %

Nvemer 2011seanally Adjuted

Unemplyment Rate

Next Issue:Watch for these features in our

November 2011Unemployment Rates

Changes FromLast Year

Utah Unemployment Rate 6.4 % Down 1.7 points

U.S. Unemployment Rate 8.6 % Down 1.2 points

Utah Nonarm Jobs (000s) 1,227.8 Up 2.5 %

U.S. Nonarm Jobs (000s) 132,959.0 Up 1.2 %

October 2011 ConsumerPrice Index RatesU.S. Consumer Price Index 226.4 Up 3.5%

U.S. Producer Price Index 191.9 Up 5.7%

Source: Utah Department of Workforce Services

j.utah.gv/wi Trendline 2

rate update |wrkfrce infrmati

Theme:Utah's Workorce and

Outlook or Grads

Industry Highlight:Inormation

Occupation:Computer Systems

Analyst

just

thefacts...


28/28

Presorted Standard

US Postage

PAID

SLC, UT

Permit # 4621

Utah Department of Workforce Services

Workforce Research and Analysis Division

140 E. 300 S.

Salt Lake City, UT 84111

utah trendlines: jan-feb 2012

Documents