We can see that a figure of 13.8% is provided for January 2010; almost 14%. However, how does this stack up with the current official figure for March: 13.4%? (The recent revisions in the calculation have been flagged by Karl Whelan). Google Public Data directs to Eurostat for details about calculation: this is where the link leads. Unfortunately, the Eurostat monthly figures (seasonally adjusted) are different to the Google series; and the official CSO figures on seasonally adjusted standardised unemployment rates are a different series yet again. However, the differences are not massive between Eurostat and CSO; I suspect that Eurostat may be using some sort of harmonisation technique.
Here we are told by Eurostat that "quarterly LFS data are combined with monthly registered unemployment data by using a temporal disaggregation Denton model. For the most recent months (for which the LFS data are not yet available), the monthly benchmark factors are forecasted using seasonal ARIMA regression models. The provisional estimates are calculated by multiplying these factors by the available registered unemployment figures." Here Karl Whelan describes how the CSO's seasonally adjusted standardised unemployment rate extrapolates from the most recent QNHS data using Live Register figures on the number of people claiming benefits. Whelan also addresses the issue of whether the unemployment rate may be stabilising: "The most recent Live Register release reported an unemployment rate of 12.6% in February. A simple extrapolation from the QNHS release would suggest that this would be revised up to 13.3%. Overall, the picture has changed somewhat from one in which the unemployment rate appeared to be flattening to one where it still seems to be rising." He also notes that a decline in male participation may reflect discouraged former construction workers leaving the labour force. Also, by 2009:Q4, one third of the unemployed had been out of work for more than a year.
Nothwithstanding long-term unemployment becoming a more important factor, there is an advantage to being "over 25". It has already been suggested (in the States) that the recession is "causing much more job loss among the less educated than among college graduates... The brunt of the layoffs in this recession is falling on construction workers, hotel workers, retail workers and others without a four-year degree." This indicates that there is a general advantage (or greater chance of being "somewhat immune to the recession") in being more highly educated. There seems to be a similar effect for those who are aged 25 years and over. As I noted before, 1 in 3 men under the age of 25 are currently unemployed in Ireland. It is also helpful to look at the historical picture. First however, a data series must be chosen: based on the table below. Recent declines in the labour force, and broader measures of labour market distress, which would push the number higher than 13.4%, are ignored for now.
The Status Ireland visualisation of the seasonally adjusted standardised unemployment rate corresponds to the table above. However, I am drawn back to the Google visualisation, due to the flexibility of graphing options. By availing of the option to the restrict the age-group to less than 25 years, we get the graph shown below. We can see that the under-25 unemployment rate is currently *approximately* 32.4%, higher than it has ever been since data has been available. (Brendan Walsh shows that the national unemployment rate fluctuated in a band approximately between 5% and 10% from 1961-1981; subscription required for access). In the 1980's recession, the Google graph shows that the under-25 unemployment rate was previously in the region of 26.3%, at peak level. It seems that there is indeed some advantage to being "over 25" in the labour market; and now more than ever.
For completeness, it is shown here: in another Google graph, that the over-25 unemployment rate was previously in the region of 14.3%, at peak level during the 1980's recession. Now, it is in the region of 11.3% (three percentage points lower than its peak level during the 1980's). Finally, it is interesting to note that under-25 males are more affected by unemployment now than they were in the 1980's (compared to females).
