P. Polar 26/10/04
Published as: Understanding the jobless figures. Trinidad Express 28.10.04
Published as: Why T&T jobless rate has fallen. Trinidad Guardian 31/08/04
The Editor: The 7.8 % unemployment figure in the second quarter was the coup de grâce of the government’s 2004 Budget presentation. This is a dramatic fall from the first quarter of 2004 where the rate was 10.2 % is truly a remarkable achievement. Our Prime Minister boastfully stated that this was the lowest rate since the PNM came in to power and was about the same rate quoted by the IMF, based on the standard International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition. Bravo. It is good to know that the country is being run by such astute fiscal minds.
I did some of my own research and found a very interesting article, published in the Journal of Development Economics in February 2004 but available on the internet, entitled, Defining unemployment in developing countries: evidence from Trinidad and Tobago. The paper used data from the Central Statistical Office’s Continuous Sample Survey of Population (CCSP) which has been collecting data for decades. The paper states that Trinidad and Tobago uses a more flexible definition to calculate unemployment that the standard ILO definition.
According to the standard ILO definition, if you are working you are considered “employed”. Alternatively, if you not working, available for work and actively seeking work you are considered “unemployed”. However, if you are not working, available for work but not seeking work you are considered “out of the labour force”. Extremely disgruntled persons and adult full time students would be considered in this category.
Trinidad and Tobago’s definition of unemployment calculates the “unemployed” in a similar manner to the ILO definition. However, it adds another group of persons described as “those non-active job seekers that have looked for work during the 3 month period preceding the interview but who at the time of the interview did not have a job, but still wanted to work”. This “marginally attached” group describes those people who were not searching for a job, because during bad times, the probability of finding a job is low.
The authors of the paper applauded the Trinidad and Tobago’s definition since they believed that it more accurately reflected the unemployment rate in developing countries in comparison to the standard ILO definition. As a result, the unemployment rate by the Trinidad and Tobago definition has always been higher than the unemployment rate calculated by the standard ILO definition. It is my understanding that programmes such as CEPEP, YTEPP and HYPE, which targeted this marginally attached group was responsible for reduction in the unemployment rate and resulting in the similarity to the IMF figure.
I believe that too much emphasis has been placed on the unemployment figure, which, though important, is not the sole indicator of the labour market. There needs to greater discourse on the statistics with regard to this marginally attached group, in particular the youth element. I would like to recommend that a representative of the CSO be given the opportunity to engage in dialogue with the population, rather than enduring the simplistic ranting of some of our politicians.
It is important that innovative policies be developed to address the social needs of this marginally attached group so they can permanently join the ranks of the employed and not just made to disappear with temporary and sporadic measures which are designed to score political points.
Author's note: I don't have a problem with people having jobs because everybody has to eat. The reason this article was written is that many of the people who "hussle" to make a living ( agricultural workers, domestics, street vendors etc.) are leaving to take up the public works jobs because they are higher paying and less labour intensive. The really poor people, who need counseling and rehabilitation to return to the workplace, are still neglected.