BLS Indicates US Construction Labor Market Not as Strong as Originally Estimated

According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) preliminary estimate of the upcoming annual benchmark revision to the establishment survey employment series, and additional analysis provided by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), the labor market may not be as strong as previously estimated.

Each year, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey employment estimates are benchmarked to full population counts of employment for the month of March, NAHB explains. It improves the accuracy of the CES all-employee series and provides an early look at adjustments to employment data.

According to the BLS’s preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision, total payroll employment for the 12-month period from April 2023 to March was lowered by 818,000, about 0.5% less than previously estimated. If the final benchmark revision is not far off the preliminary one, this preliminary estimate of the upcoming annual benchmark revision would be the largest downward revision since March 2009 (a reduction of 902,000).

In regard to the construction sector, employment was revised down by 45,000, 0.6% less than the initially reported 8.2 million jobs. The average monthly job gain for the sector was revised down by 17% to 18,000 jobs in the 12-month period through March.

During the period of the 2008 recession and the pandemic, construction employment was overestimated for three straight years, respectively. The current preliminary benchmark revision for the construction sector is the largest downward revision since March 2010.

NAHB notes that the existing employment data will not be updated with the release of the preliminary benchmark estimate. The data for all CES series will be updated when the final benchmark revision is issued in February 2025.


FEA compiles the Wood Markets News from various 3rd party sources to provide readers with the latest news impacting forest product markets. Opinions or views expressed in these articles do not necessarily represent those of FEA.