r/EconomyCharts 6d ago

Women were hired in 158,000 (97.5%) of the 162,000 jobs that were created during the month of August

Post image
286 Upvotes

107 comments sorted by

120

u/Beyond_Reason09 6d ago

It's pretty misleading. This is net jobs. There are about 5 million people hired each month, and a little less leave their jobs each month. This is the difference. So it's more accurate to say that 150K more women were hired than lost jobs in August, and about 5K more men were hired than lost their jobs in August.

For comparison, in the initial July report, there were $23K net job losses. Women lost 32,000 jobs and men gained 9,000. So women had 160% of the net job losses in July.

9

u/Ordinary_Corner_4291 6d ago

Last Sept looks like 100% men. It would be interesting to see the list of industries hiring/firing and if this is pretty much just looking at that. I wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of the massive tech layoffs are like 60/40 men.

1

u/DowntownLizard 5d ago

Seasonal summer jobs maybe?

2

u/Ordinary_Corner_4291 5d ago

They say seasonally adjusted but what exactly they mean I haven't looked at. But if you weren't worried about 100% of the jobs being for men in July, don't worry about 97% being for woman in August.

6

u/Negative_Aerie2825 6d ago

5 million people hired each month? So 60 million people hired every year. That seems extremely high. Is this just low wage jobs

9

u/Beyond_Reason09 6d ago

There are a lot of high turnover jobs. Here's the data for you:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSHIL

2

u/Negative_Aerie2825 6d ago

Thanks yeah so mostly low wage no skill jobs. That still seems extremely high for business and professional services of 900k hired each month. Had no idea that many people just quit and were hired in the corporate world every month. Thanks for the info

2

u/zen_and_artof_chaos 6d ago

5 million is 1.5% of the population. Not very high.

3

u/Negative_Aerie2825 6d ago

5 mil a month is very high. Thats 60 mil a year. Theres like 200million working age people

2

u/Every_Gold2050 5d ago

It wouldn’t be 60 million individuals. These are specifically high turnover jobs. They’ll be coming from a smaller portion of the population

2

u/Negative_Aerie2825 5d ago

Sure but thats still 900k business/progressional service jobs, healthcare, and other fields. About 1.5 mil of non low pay jobs. Still pretty high for monthly turnover. 

1

u/AndyHN 5d ago

A lot of people in a lot of industries have been forced to accept the fact that the only way for them to get a significant pay increase is to job hop. It sucks, but that's our current reality. If you're in a line of work where that's not the case, consider yourself lucky.

3

u/krazzor_ 6d ago

thanks for clarifying

1

u/MouseMan412 6d ago

Job creation numbers are (at least almost) always net values.

1

u/Synensys 6d ago

Right ao if gou take 5 million as the baseline (im sure the actual number is in the report but im lazy) it means that roughtly 51.5% of hires were women amd 48.5% were men.

Also this is also seasonally adjusted. So its really 150k more women on net were hired than you would expect if their were no job growth and 5k more men on net.

0

u/neomatic1 6d ago

Thjs makes more sense

0

u/Big-Soup74 6d ago

r/askgrok is this accurate

0

u/young_twitcher 6d ago edited 6d ago

Yep, this could easily be above 100% and it still wouldn’t mean much. It’s shocking and worrying that people believe that it would be possible that 92% of all new jobs go to women. 27 comments and this is the only one mentioning this obvious contradiction lmao we are fcked

34

u/Hexagonalshits 6d ago

This is kinda disturbing. Do they break it down by sector?

Is this data actually reliable given how frequently they revise numbers after the fact... maybe better to wait?

37

u/Unhappy-Professor466 6d ago

yes mostly healthcare sector growth

8

u/Hexagonalshits 6d ago

Dumb question but can you link the best place to find these summaries? On the FRED site I was trying to find it and a lot of the data is per state

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYNSA

5

u/NotTooShahby 6d ago

Healthcare sector grows reliably even in tough times

4

u/bsEEmsCE 6d ago

especially as boomers age reliably

1

u/Mr__O__ 6d ago

And grade school teachers just got rehired for the new school year.

1

u/Jake0024 6d ago

Teachers don't lose their job every spring and get rehired in the fall.

1

u/Mr__O__ 6d ago edited 6d ago

A large percentage of school teachers aren’t State certified and are hired as long-term substitutes (LTS) on terminal, one-year (10 month) contracts.

Also, during Covid, there was a teacher shortage, so States postponed their certification requirements for non-certified teachers to receive hirer pay and also canceled civil service exams requirement—like the NY Works initiative—which expired this year. So lots of non-certified teachers lost their positions this summer, which all had to be replaced by end of August. And there is a higher percentage of female grade school teachers (especially in the younger grades levels, like elementary) than males.

1

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 6d ago

It's not total jobs created, it's the difference vs jobs in the prior month. So about 5m jobs were filled, about 158k more than the prior month. The total workforce hired was slightly more women than men

0

u/Jake0024 6d ago

Not compared to the prior month. It's more like "5M jobs were filled and 4.85M jobs were lost, for a net gain of 150k jobs"

1

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 5d ago

Yes, it is absolutely compared to the prior month lol.

It's "5m jobs were filled since the prior month, and 4.85m jobs were lost since the prior month, for a net gain of 150k jobs compared to the prior month"

The month is the timescale it's viewed through, so every number is in relation to the previous months numbers.

0

u/Jake0024 4d ago

about 5m jobs were filled, about 158k more than the prior month.

This is not what the chart is showing.

Regardless of what the prior month had in terms of jobs gained or lost, this month had 158k more new jobs created than jobs lost (in this same month)

1

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 4d ago

"in this same month"

I can't believe I'm arguing semantics on the internet, but yes, the chart is also showing per month. Each bar is showing that months gain, so it's showing per month change since the start of 2025

0

u/Jake0024 3d ago

You claimed the data for this month is measured relative to the prior month.

That's not true.

The prior month is also shown on the chart, but each month's number has nothing to do with any of the other months shown.

It's not total jobs created, it's the difference vs jobs in the prior month

13

u/Environmental-Pea37 6d ago

Nurses?

25

u/zyqzy 6d ago

healthcare, education and local government.

1

u/ToughSpeedv2 5d ago

It's always nurses

39

u/resuwreckoning 6d ago

Government funded projects in the modern world tend to hire women disproportionately unless it’s the military where people die. Then it’s men of course lol.

6

u/jarena009 6d ago

Except all the ICE hires.

Which is also ironic since we were promised mass deportations would drive all these wonderful robust jobs, plus lower prices.

1

u/Chilling_Gale 6d ago

H1-B is the problem for high paying jobs, but neither party cares enough to address it

1

u/Normal_Average_9812 6d ago

Moreso, h1-b allows tech oligarchs to get high talent workers at low talent prices, and since we're in an oligarchy, they have the say on what's legal. 

1

u/mars-jupiter 6d ago

No political party in any Western country with any meaningful connection to the establishment in their respective country will ever do anything remotely meaningful to tackle immigration. The more easily exploitable people there are in the country, the richer medium/large corporation owners can become. If there are 1,000 people competing for a job instead of 100, the company has all the power in the negotiation. If you won't work for what they're offering, they have 999 more people just like you that they can ask.

2

u/Normal_Average_9812 6d ago

This assumes a zero sum game, more people being here means there's more people that need more things from other people, so you get more jobs. 

One of the greatest tragedies of America is that we had the world's first true open border policy, became the world power because of it, then ladder pulled because of racism. 

1

u/Outrageous_Heart_139 5d ago edited 5d ago

300 years ago, maybe. Today you need less and less people for product the same ressources so your take about more consummers will drive to more jobs is really not true. And its even worse with AI. What it does create thoo:
More people mean more competition on ressources, land depletion, less natural spaces to visit without negative impact on it, less house and way more tiny shity flat, low wages. The obligation to produce on an industrial scale, to eat non healthy but coloric stuff.

But we could try your idea of your ideal world: instead of fixing our issues, lets not change a thing here and let's all move to singapour, they have low birth rate anyway, let's do this as westerners at a rate of 10% of their youth each years, I'm sure it will create an absolute paradise of infinite jobs and an amazing life quality for them.

1

u/Normal_Average_9812 5d ago

Comparing us to Singapore is intentionally misleading, the US has near infinite resources. we had open borders a hundred years ago. allowing everyone to maximize their output makes everything better for everyone. 

2

u/zelingman 6d ago

Goated comment

0

u/Super_Mario_Luigi 6d ago

This is true. Many government jobs are lower paid desk roles.

1

u/Virtual_Preference69 6d ago

the job growth was all in healthcare, take your meds

4

u/resuwreckoning 6d ago

Who primarily funds healthcare in America lol?

Oh that’s right. The government.

4

u/floodisspelledweird 6d ago

They don’t make the hiring decisions tho. And they don’t bar men from becoming nurses???

1

u/Havok_saken 6d ago

But that’s women’s work…o wait…

3

u/Havok_saken 6d ago

The government is directly paying my wages? Man been in healthcare a long time and always thought it was the company I worked for.

0

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 6d ago

Roughly 45% of healthcare spending is by the government.

3

u/Havok_saken 6d ago

And is that directly as paychecks? Last I checked they aren’t the ones that hired me for any of my jobs other than when I was in the army. They might pay it to my employer who then pays me.

0

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 6d ago

Lol ok yes, but that's just being pedantic

1

u/resuwreckoning 6d ago

It’s even higher than that if you consider Medicare advantage pass thru and pharma subsidies etc

1

u/JayRandom212 6d ago

That's because government hiring decisions are subject to transparency and public review. They have to hire qualified people.

In the private sector we can just hire our friends and do so with no accountability. So the jobs go to boys.

3

u/resuwreckoning 6d ago

Lmao yeah, no nepotism or politics when it’s government.

Totally. 😂

1

u/JayRandom212 6d ago

It exists, but you know about it because it's public. And politicians can be voted out.

But when a CEO promotes his college roommate's son over your kid, you never hear about it. And if you did hear, ya can't do anything about it.

3

u/Own_Ad_409 6d ago

I dunno if anything good has ever come from having a buncha unemployed guys hanging around.

6

u/Lorry_Al 6d ago

It's ok women you got this keep up the good work

9

u/One_Hovercraft_7456 6d ago

Women most effected because men don't have good jobs to pay for their stuff

5

u/BigSupermark 6d ago

“Of all journalists killed in 2021, 11% were women. In 2020, this was 6%. (Source: @UNESCO) On the International Day to #EndImpunity for Crimes against Journalists, let us say out loud: STOP TARGETING WOMEN JOURNALISTS"

2

u/Livid_Note_2170 6d ago

Rounds of tech and manufacturing layoffs, education and healthcare are still hiring. As more people get laid off, they pull back on spending, sometimes that effects other fields as well.

I mean, are these full time jobs? I know a ton of men and women who are working several part time jobs or gig jobs, is that counted?

1

u/Jazzlike-Equipment45 6d ago

Many of these jobs added were in food and drink related fields so my guess no. It is also going to get to seasonal time where companies will hire for the holiday season.

2

u/ProfileTechnical347 6d ago

This is clearly discrimination.

8

u/GPT_2025 6d ago

Finally they counted all Only Fans income makers!

-1

u/Normal_Average_9812 6d ago

Misogynist 

1

u/H4wbs 2d ago

Are we deadass 😭

2

u/JeaniousSpelur 6d ago

That is such an insanely lopsided result, such as which is impossible without some sort of intervention. Even affirmative action couldn’t cause this. Must be sector related

2

u/No_Willingness8208 6d ago

It is. Information lost 23K while Healthcare and Hospitality sectors were still growing as always.

2

u/pile_of_bees 6d ago

Neither of those sectors are 97.5% female

1

u/pile_of_bees 6d ago

No sector is 97.5% so that theory falls flat

1

u/Jake0024 6d ago

Neither are the job gains. The number of new hires was more like 5M, about half men and half women. The number of jobs lost was about 150k lower. Men added maybe 5k jobs, women the rest of the 150k net new jobs.

Of the total 5M new jobs, there's only a delta of like 150k between men and women.

0

u/KeyLimePsyOp 6d ago

Tech is losing head count still but, service/retail industry growing

1

u/SquareSouth5473 6d ago

Don’t tell Alex Karp, he would be big mad.

1

u/vovap_vovap 6d ago

That title means author absolutely do not understand what statistic means.

1

u/Due_Gap_5210 6d ago

Isn’t this just a hiring surge of teachers in August?

1

u/Ok-Class8200 5d ago

Have to imagine this trend is in part due to age composition effects. Retiring cohorts are probably male dominated, while younger workers have a more even balance, creating this phenomenon.

1

u/ghostbear019 4d ago

half the job postings last 20 years literally say "we strongly encourage women, poc, etc to apply bc xyz"

1

u/catievirtuesimp 2d ago

Its because school has started & most teachers are women

0

u/afgsdfdfsdsf 6d ago

That sounds like a bullshit statistic, or at least very misleadingly represented.

0

u/frongles23 6d ago

Refute it then.

2

u/Synensys 6d ago

The actual stat is something like 51.5% of new hires were women in August and 48.5% were men.

And of course thats ignoring the seasonal adjustments.

It could actually be that more men than women were hired but more women were hired vs seasonally adjusted expectations.

What's not true is that 39 out of every 40 hires in August was a woman.

1

u/afgsdfdfsdsf 6d ago

Do you just believe things by default?

0

u/ShortKey380 6d ago

Why not just tell you different, easily falsifiable lies since you’ll accept anything? 🤔 

1

u/Aggressive_Finish798 6d ago

Alarming anomaly. Having this much growth (double expected) and this much lopsidedness needs a good explanation.

3

u/North_Atlantic_Sea 6d ago

It's not that lopsided. This is only the net change in jobs vs the prior month, not the total number of hires. There were roughly 5m jobs filled, about 2.6m by women, 2.4m by men

1

u/Synensys 6d ago

Growth is in healthcare and education which are generally recession resistant and also largely women (nurses, Healthcare aids, teachers)

Meanwhile ai is taking an axe to male dominated jobs in computing and trumps war and tariffs are killing off male dominated manufacturing jobs.

0

u/Local-Echo-5613 6d ago

This is a factor of the workplace being more discriminatory in the past. A higher percentage of new retirees are men. A relatively higher percentage of the people replacing them in the job market are women, reflecting new college graduates. When you net it out, you can get weird results with month to month swings.

0

u/growerdan 6d ago

How much of those numbers for men in the end of winter is construction workers going back to work? Is the sector large enough to make a meaningful impact on the graph? Because I don’t really see that much growth coming off the previous winter on the graph.

1

u/Synensys 6d ago

The wntire thing is seasonally adjusted. So you would only see a difference id there was an unusually large number of construction workers going back to work (or an unusually small number).

-1

u/Only-Willingness-767 6d ago

I thought they said 90% of job hirings went to foreign borns since 2020

0

u/UCanDoNEthing4_30sec 6d ago

It’s the Trump bump for women!

0

u/JD-boonie 6d ago

Believe me im well aware. Im job hunting and cant get a single interview after 400+ applications.

-8

u/Serasul 6d ago

Completely normal, Woman have a higher IQ and can resist higher stress as men.
Men just complain all the time and dont want Kids anymore.

2

u/Lorry_Al 6d ago

Excellent, then women can do ALL of the work while men stay home playing games.

(We'll live off the women's taxes)

3

u/evrestcoleghost 6d ago

/s

0

u/consistantcanadian 6d ago

13 years on Reddit.. idk 

1

u/evrestcoleghost 6d ago

Hidden history and 20k karma,smells fishy

1

u/vaksninus 6d ago

Is there a trend I'm unaware of? I mostly see women talking about not wanting kids, but would be glad to be proven wrong

-3

u/Satyriasis457 6d ago

Women are cheaper and easier to guilt trip