‘N’ we can tell this bloke to bugger off ‘n’all

First, claimant unemployment – a measure of all of those who are unemployed and claiming social security benefits – has risen by 1.6 million in two months, to 2.8 million. This is the highest level since 1993, 1.2 million higher than the last recession and the largest increase since unemployment benefits were created nearly 100 years ago. Even in the first year of the Great Depression, unemployment only rose by one million.

That is from this bloke:

Tony Wilson is director of the Institute for Employment Studies

So, bugger off. ‘N’ all.

So, why? Because he’s using the number of people laid off. Which, when population has changed over the past century, is horribly misleading. UK population in 1930 was about 45 million. Today it’s more like 67 million. Further, the number of women working as a percentage of all women was rather lower then, no? Meaning that the workforce was very much smaller.

Thus 1 million unemployed now is not the same as 1 million unemployed then. Yet he compares and contrasts.

So, bugger off. ‘N’ all.

12 thoughts on “‘N’ we can tell this bloke to bugger off ‘n’all”

  1. I have often wondered why journalists don’t give percentages rather than just raw numbers, is it because they are stupid or think their readers are?

  2. Not to to mention that the definition of unemployed has changed. So comparing now with any time before 1986 ( or somethibg) is pointless. I am a NEET and not registered anywhere, how many are like me out there

  3. Britain seems to be afflicted with an endless supply of worthless 3rd sector fuckholes leaching off the public teat and spraying around the same lefty, statist, moar tax shite as all the others. Frankly, I preferred Wilson when he was in charge of Factory Records.

    This ‘institute’ claims to be non-political, but its board of trustees is the usual bunch of Common Purpose drones and of course its director is writing in the Guardian. One of the many things a real Tory government ought to do is to stop funding fake charities and appoint people to the Charities Commission who will close down those which are overtly political.

  4. ‘Here’s what the government must do’

    I can translate: “Here’s how the government can exploit this situation.”

    ‘Rising unemployment has also been accompanied by a collapse in job vacancies – from about 800,000 before the coronavirus crisis to just 320,000 in the single-month estimate for May. Putting this together with the unemployment data, this means that there are now 8.5 unemployed people competing for every job opening, compared with just 1.5 before this crisis began’

    Note that 320,000 are still not being filled. With 5X the number of candidates. There’s more at play here than just numbers.

  5. @ Anon
    Percentages or raw numbers, it largely depends on what suits their scare story. If it is a case of, say, a rise from 1 to 5, then it’s a 500% rise. Or, as in this instance, raw numbers from different bases are de rigeur.

  6. “Note that 320,000 are still not being filled.”

    Not necessarily *not being filled*. Normal churn always requires a certain number of vacancies to be “on the register” so to speak?

    Bloke gets job, resigns, his old job is available. Average (brief) time the job is left vacant / total number of people working / average national staff turnover?

  7. Bloke in North Dorset

    My son’s pre lockdown job has just gone pfft, as he expected so he spent the past few weeks looking for new jobs. He’s had 3 offers, not brilliant and the one he accepted will need him to make OTE to exceed median wage.

    He’d rather do that than claim unemployment benefits. There’s jobs out there if people really want them.

  8. @ PF
    Good to have someone better than myself to explain things
    @ Gamecock
    While many (in some businesses most) vacancies are filled by internal promotions an awful lot of UK vacancies have to be publically advertised in order for the employer to comply with anti-discrimination legislation. [Under Tony Blair all public sector vacancies were advertised in “The Guardian” (thereby funding the most anti-Conservative newspaper which was otherwise heading for bankruptcy and pushing all would-be public sector workers into buying and, potentially, reading the propaganda sheet).] Usually a job vacancy is advertised when an individual hands in his/her notice.
    So the number of job vacancies listed far exceeds the number of jobs that the unemployed can even apply for, let alone win.
    I should also mention that the vacancy continues from the advertisement until an applicant has read it, applied, been interviewed and accepted and had his credentials verified (and, often, passed a medical).
    That the number of vacancies dropped by 60% when most of them were filled by someone already in another job suggests that hardly any new vacancies were declared apart from those resulting from someone quitting to take up a new job and many of the latter were temporarily left unfilled and unadvertised.

  9. Poverty is relative for comparison purposes nowadays, but unemployment figures are absolute when comparisons are made. Despite the fact that poverty in the UK means having a standard of living in the top 10% of people in the world and unemployment means much less difficulty than ever before, unless one has been impecunious.
    No wonder people have stopped listening to the news and experts when it appears every fact has been filtered to fit someone’s agenda. And the same people with agenda bemoan the fact that people have stopped respecting them.


  10. The Government really ought to stop using the Graun as its main outlet for job ads. Just create a single website with all state jobs in it. That website could take ads across all newspapers in the early days to promote itself, then anyone looking for a state sector job will know where to go. And the Graun loses its state support.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *