Rogers Media uses cookies for personalization, to customize its online advertisements, and for other purposes. Learn more or change your cookie preferences. Rogers Media supports the Digital Advertising Alliance principles. By continuing to use our service, you agree to our use of cookies.
We use cookies (why?) You can change cookie preferences. Continued site use signifies consent.
Fewer jobs added than expected in October - Macleans.ca
There is upbeat news in this morning’s employment numbers for Canada, despite fewer new jobs being added in October than economists surveyed by Bloomberg had expected. Economists had forecast that about 15,000 jobs would be added during the month, but Statistics Canada reports that employment rose by just 3,000. However, digging deeper into the stats, full-time employment rose by 47,200, while less prized part-time jobs fell by 44,200. That continues a promising trend: over the past three months full-time work has grown by about 164,000, and part-time positions have shrunk by about 132,000. Bank of Nova Scotia economist Derek Holt touted “converting from part-time jobs to full-time jobs” as a positive sign of recovery.
More BS and baffle gab. Does antone know anyone who got a real job that pays anything like a living wage? Didn't think so. As a wise sage once said, there are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics. You can torture any set of numbers into saying whatever you want. I venture a guess those wonderful new "full time" jobs were at Walmart and Costco and other crappy minimum wage jobs as retailer ramp up for Christmas. They will all be out the door in January, having not even gotten enough hours for pogie as the Feds have declared the recession is over and have gutted the EI system to balance the books on the back's of the working poor.
I believe they do seasonal adjustments to the numbers, so it's not just Christmas hiring. I'm not trying to say the employment picture is rosy. It isn't. In fact, even when it was allegedly rosy a few years back, I found that higher paying jobs were indeed very difficult to come by. However, that does not lead to the automatic conclusion that Stats Can is cooking the employment numbers. The numbers are what they are. They don't tell the whole story, but by comparing them to past months and years, they give us a partial picture. A picture we wouldn't have if they Labour Force Survey were not done in 60,000 households each month.
More BS and baffle gab. Does antone know anyone who got a real job that pays anything like a living wage? Didn't think so. As a wise sage once said, there are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics. You can torture any set of numbers into saying whatever you want. I venture a guess those wonderful new "full time" jobs were at Walmart and Costco and other crappy minimum wage jobs as retailer ramp up for Christmas. They will all be out the door in January, having not even gotten enough hours for pogie as the Feds have declared the recession is over and have gutted the EI system to balance the books on the back's of the working poor.
wayne moores on
I believe they do seasonal adjustments to the numbers, so it's not just Christmas hiring. I'm not trying to say the employment picture is rosy. It isn't. In fact, even when it was allegedly rosy a few years back, I found that higher paying jobs were indeed very difficult to come by. However, that does not lead to the automatic conclusion that Stats Can is cooking the employment numbers. The numbers are what they are. They don't tell the whole story, but by comparing them to past months and years, they give us a partial picture. A picture we wouldn't have if they Labour Force Survey were not done in 60,000 households each month.
Raging_Ranter on
They were french hired by the civil service. Job gains will never mean the same, in fact job loses would be more progressive!
liminator on