Spanish unemployment at 21%, whats irelands real rate?

kelko1916

Spanish unemployment reached 21.29% for first quarter , a 14 year high. If irelands unemployment figures were calculated same as Spanish one would we be higher ?
Irish goverments have always lied about unemployment and emmigration so i guess it probably still does . Whats the real figure in Ireland ?

Trampas

how is spanish calculated?

Dymo

minimum wage in Spain is €3.60 per hour

andrew

As far as I know, all EU countries calculate their unemployment rate in the same way.

RichardAnd

I could be dreaming here but I think the spanish count students over 18 in their unemployment figures where we, as far as I know, do not.

The real figure of unemployment is hard to work out as it depends entirely upon what unemployment is taken to mean. For example, are people in training coursed unemployed, are disabled people unemployed and are part time workers unemployed?

As you can see, there are alot of variables in the equation.

Delancey

I understood that the method of calculating unemployment is uniform across the EU ?
What does differ are the various ways Governments massage the figures downwards , the UK for example uses ' disability ' to disguise unemployment particularly in regions , Ireland uses emigration and FAS schemes , Holland uses ' early retirement ' , etc.

There are those who say the US keeps it's unemployment figures low by locking up it's jobless - no other country in the western world has such a high proportion of its citizens incarcerated.

Anonymous1987

EU figure from Eurostat here. Note the following:

Eurostat produces harmonised unemployment rates for individual EU Member States, the euro area and the EU. These unemployment rates are based on the definition recommended by the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The measurement is based on a harmonised source, the European Union Labour Force Survey (LFS).
Based on the ILO definition, Eurostat defines unemployed persons as persons aged 15 to 74 who:
- are without work;
- are available to start work within the next two weeks;
- and have actively sought employment at some time during the previous four weeks.
The unemployment rate is the number of people unemployed as a percentage of the labour force. The labour force is the total number of people employed plus unemployed.
The numbers of unemployed and the monthly unemployment rates are estimates based on results of the LFS which is a continuous household survey carried out in Member States on the basis of agreed definitions. These results are interpolated/extrapolated to monthly data using national survey data and/or national monthly series on registered unemployment. The most recent figures are therefore provisional; results from the Labour Force Survey are available 90 days after the end of the reference period for most Member States.
Monthly unemployment and employment series are calculated first at the level of four categories for each Member State (males and females 15-24 years, males and females 25-74 years). These series are then seasonally adjusted and all the national and European aggregates are calculated.
Member States may publish other rates such as register based unemployment rates, or rates based on national Labour Force Surveys or corresponding surveys. These rates may vary from those published by Eurostat due to a different definition or methodological choices.
Current deviations from the definition of unemployment in the EU Labour Force Survey:
Spain, Italy and United Kingdom: Unemployment is restricted to persons aged 16-74. In Spain and Italy the legal minimum age for working is 16. Employment data used for Italy includes also those above 74.

Alternatively you could look at employment statistics here although keep in mind these should be adjusted for demographics, those in education etc. Brief description of what the employment statistic records below:

The employment rate is calculated by dividing the number of persons aged 15 to 64 in employment by the total population of the same age group. The indicator is based on the EU Labour Force Survey. The survey covers the entire population living in private households and excludes those in collective households such as boarding houses, halls of residence and hospitals. Employed population consists of those persons who during the reference week did any work for pay or profit for at least one hour, or were not working but had jobs from which they were temporarily absent.

Wheelie King

We are at something between 19%-21%

Anonymous1987

Wheelie King wrote: »

We are at something between 19%-21%

Care to elaborate how you arrived at that estimate?

Sugarfree

The Irish unemployment rate includes those on a three day week. It was discussed on newstalk recently about long term unemployed where 50% of people were long term unemployed i.e 50% of 430,000, the guest denied this and said the real rate was 300,000.

Anonymous1987

Sugarfree wrote: »

The Irish unemployment rate includes those on a three day week. It was discussed on newstalk recently about long term unemployed where 50% of people were long term unemployed i.e 50% of 430,000, the guest denied this and said the real rate was 300,000.

The 300,000 refers to people unable to find work, the 430,000 refers to people on the live register. The difference between these two figures is people working part-time while receiving some benefits on the live register. It would be incorrect to say 50% of those on the live register are long term unemployed when some on the live register are actually working part time, see the graph at the bottom of page 5. If you go to the bottom of page 9 of the same publication, a figure of 113,400 is given for those working part time and underemployed.

Delancey

Latest Government forecast is for unemployment to average 14.5% this year - anyone care to guess if this will prove accurate ?

Finnbar01

Delancey wrote: »

Latest Government forecast is for unemployment to average 14.5% this year - anyone care to guess if this will prove accurate ?

I think the figure would be higher. AFAIK people doing Fás courses are not included. During the boom (2006) something like 26,000 people were doing Fás courses. Now the figure is about 120,000. People returning to third level education would not be included either???

Also, people who are not allowed to sign on because their spouses are working or they were self employed would not be included.

I could be wrong though.

washman3

i would suggest that our true unemployment rate is 18-19% would you agree anonymous? have'nt been told the truth on any government figures for the last few years so they'll hardly start now.!!

andrew

washman3 wrote: »

i would suggest that our true unemployment rate is 18-19% would you agree anonymous? have'nt been told the truth on any government figures for the last few years so they'll hardly start now.!!

What do you mean by 'true' unemployment rate? All the figures given depend on how you define 'unemployed,' so it's not that the government's figures are wrong,they might differ from what you think is the case given your own definition of 'unemployed.'

washman3

true unemployment, as in "real" unemployment figures. my definition of an unemployed person is a person not in full time paid employment (say 39 hours) excluding students/disability/pensioners. FAS courses definately skew the real figure.

andrew

washman3 wrote: »

true unemployment, as in "real" unemployment figures. my definition of an unemployed person is a person not in full time paid employment (say 39 hours) excluding students/disability/pensioners. FAS courses definately skew the real figure.

What about excluding people who aren't actively looking for work? And what about people who would be doing a FAS course even if the unemployment rate was lower? My general point is just that there's no such thing as the 'real' or 'true' unemployment figure, and so you probably won't be satisfied trying to search for one.

washman3

yes, can see your point. there can be many definitions of unemployed. as already pointed out even different countries have different definitions. my point was even if we had a formula i dont think we would be told the truth. just MY opinion.

PeterIanStaker

According to the latest spin the live register has decresed by 1600, so thats 1600 more emigrated or dead.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0505/liveregister.html

kelko1916

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

According to the latest spin the live register has decresed by 1600, so thats 1600 more emigrated or dead.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0505/liveregister.html

when i was over there at easter i was talking to 4 guys who i worked with previously , they are bricklayers and plasterers , all self employed previously , all not working now , none in recipt of any benifits , as their wives were working , or they had small farms etc . they are not in that 1600 either . the truth is nobody knows the real number i guess . one thing i see here is a large number of people who had returned to Ireland during the boom drifting back to US , very dissilusioned and in many situations , sadly very broke .

newman10

kelko1916 wrote: »

when i was over there at easter i was talking to 4 guys who i worked with previously , they are bricklayers and plasterers , all self employed previously , all not working now , none in recipt of any benifits , as their wives were working , or they had small farms etc . they are not in that 1600 either . the truth is nobody knows the real number i guess . one thing i see here is a large number of people who had returned to Ireland during the boom drifting back to US , very dissilusioned and in many situations , sadly very broke .

Have to agree. It would be very interesting if the self employed were added to the figures

RichardAnd

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

According to the latest spin the live register has decresed by 1600, so thats 1600 more emigrated or dead.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0505/liveregister.html

It's not spin. It's stating the CSO figures and makes no attempt to explain it one way or another. It probably is emigration but that's better than having those 1600 people staying here, at least they can make a live for themselves somewhere else.

PeterIanStaker

As far as I'm concerned its spin.

If they were honest they'd say X number of people have gotten jobs (big fat zero is my guess) and X number (1600?) have left.

RichardAnd

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned its spin.

If they were honest they'd say X number of people have gotten jobs (big fat zero is my guess) and X number (1600?) have left.

Yes but that's not what the report is saying. I'd like to have more detailed figures too but that report is only there to state a fact; the live register has fallen which is does. It's not spin, it's just the truth.

Anonymous1987

washman3 wrote: »

yes, can see your point. there can be many definitions of unemployed. as already pointed out even different countries have different definitions. my point was even if we had a formula i dont think we would be told the truth. just MY opinion.

You are confusing unemployment and underemployment though. A number of statistics and there breakdowns should be examined to get any real insight into the labour market. There is some confusing terminology though, see here. The live register figures are reported and the following is stated:

The total now stands at 439,200, while the unemployment rate fell slightly from 14.7% in March to 14.6%.

The unemployment rate being referred to is actually the standardised unemployment rate a measure based on the Live register and not intended to measure unemployment. In fact if you look at the actual report from the CSO here, their front page clearly states:

The Live Register is not designed to measure unemployment. It includes part-time workers (those who work up to three days a week), seasonal and casual workers entitled to Jobseekers Benefit or Allowance. Unemployment is measured by the Quarterly National Household Survey and the latest estimated number of persons unemployed as of the fourth quarter of 2010 was 299,000.

http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/current/lreg.pdf

The reporting common by all media outlets is either lazy and inaccurate reporting or else it is intended to grab attention offering journalists a more frequent supply of employment news than the quarterly released unemployment rate figures.

kelko1916 wrote: »

when i was over there at easter i was talking to 4 guys who i worked with previously , they are bricklayers and plasterers , all self employed previously , all not working now , none in recipt of any benifits , as their wives were working , or they had small farms etc . they are not in that 1600 either . the truth is nobody knows the real number i guess . one thing i see here is a large number of people who had returned to Ireland during the boom drifting back to US , very dissilusioned and in many situations , sadly very broke .

The QNHS is intended to measure this by taking a sample of the population and estimating those unemployed regardless of whether there are on the live register or not. However you're right emigration is not measured in the unemployment statistics and the report notes this.

ninty9er

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned its spin.

If they were honest they'd say X number of people have gotten jobs (big fat zero is my guess) and X number (1600?) have left.

One person has left our organisation this week to take up a new job and another is leaving in 2 weeks. This means we've got to hire replacements. Talk the economy down all you like, but it doesn't make you right. There is a shortage of qualified accountants in the country, shortages only exist where vacancies are going unfilled.

There are plenty of SME success stories in this country, take you conspiracy theories elsewhere.

southsiderosie

I would add that the Spanish unemployment figures are also somewhat misleading. Spain has much higher levels of black market economic activity than most other European countries (bar Italy), although the government seems to be cracking down on this. Andalucia in particular has historically had shockingly high official unemployment numbers (20-30%), but the real figures are more murky...but because they are the largest region, they skew the overall numbers. Therefore in Spain, the official unemployment rate is a better reflection of how many people are in the system rather than how many people have no access to work.

Solair

Spain also has equivalent programmes to FAS etc too so that figure is also massaged to get it as low as officially possible. Having lived in Spain recently, the situation on the ground is much worse than here in terms of unemployment, abandoned property, closed businesses and boarded up shops.

Ireland seemed relatively busy and optimistic compared to much of northern Spain!

I think the Spanish crisis has yet to crystallise!