Recent revisions to U.S. employment data indicate that job growth over the past year was significantly weaker than initially reported. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), approximately 900,000 fewer jobs were created in 2024 and 2025 than earlier estimates had suggested. This adjustment marks the largest annual revision in recorded history, highlighting challenges in tracking a rapidly evolving labor market.
The BLS conducts routine benchmarking each year, aligning preliminary monthly figures with more comprehensive quarterly administrative records tied to unemployment insurance systems. These updated records offer a fuller picture of employment trends, though they arrive with a time lag. Analysts had anticipated a downward adjustment, as early signs from the quarterly data already pointed to overestimated payroll gains.
Julia Coronado, president of MacroPolicy Perspectives, noted that shifts in immigration patterns have played a notable role in the discrepancy. Previously, hundreds of thousands of new immigrants entered the workforce each quarter, boosting labor supply. More recently, net immigration has declined, reducing the pool of available workers and contributing to slower job growth—now estimated at around 70,000 per month for the year ending in March.
The revised figures were particularly pronounced in sectors such as leisure and hospitality, retail, and wholesale trade. These industries are inherently difficult to measure due to high concentrations of small businesses, seasonal hiring, and part-time roles. As a result, sampling methods used in monthly surveys may have overstated employment levels.
Despite the lower job creation numbers, the unemployment rate remains stable and relatively low, suggesting that labor demand has not collapsed. Independent metrics, including ADP private payroll data and other employment indicators, support this nuanced view: while momentum has weakened, the labor market has not entered a crisis phase.
Coronado also addressed concerns about political interference following the recent dismissal of the BLS commissioner by President Trump after a disappointing monthly report. She emphasized that BLS statisticians operate with integrity and professionalism, free from partisan influence. Instead of questioning the agency’s credibility, she argued, policymakers should consider increasing funding to improve data accuracy in an increasingly complex economy.
— news from PBS
— News Original —
Revised job numbers raise new concerns about economic slowdown
Geoff Bennett: n nWelcome to the “News Hour.” n nNew data showed the U.S. job market was much weaker than initially reported for much of last year during President Biden ‘s term and some of this year under President Trump. More than 900,000 fewer jobs were added in 2024 and 2025 than previously expected. n nThe Bureau of Labor Statistics issues these revisions every year, but this year ‘s change is the biggest revision on record. And it comes after President Trump fired the BLS commissioner last month after a weaker-than-expected monthly jobs report. n nFor a closer look, we ‘re joined now by Julia Coronado, president of MacroPolicy Perspectives. n nIt ‘s always great to have you on the program. n nSo we knew the labor market was softening, but these revisions suggest the slowdown started earlier and was more severe than we thought. What ‘s your reaction and what factors do you see driving the weakness? n nJulia Coronado, MacroPolicy Perspectives: n nSo let ‘s keep in mind we get this timely measure of jobs every month from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and it ‘s based on a sample of firms. And then there ‘s a quarterly almost a census of employment that comes with a lag. n nAnd we knew a downward revision was coming because we could see some of that quarterly data. And every year they benchmark this. So just to kind of — this is a normal process they go through every year. We knew that the numbers were a bit overstated. n nAnd one of the challenges right now is that we have had this major swing in immigration from hundreds of thousands of new people entering the labor market every month, every quarter to one where we ‘re actually losing immigrants on balance. And that I think is part of the — one contributing factor to the big swing from several hundred jobs being created every month to what now looks like more like 70,000 jobs created every month in the year ending in March. n nJulia Coronado: n nSo again, we get this quarterly census of employment. It ‘s based on the administrative data that underpins the unemployment insurance system that covers pretty much every worker in the country. So we do want to know on a quarterly basis how many people are working in the economy. And it ‘s really strong, comprehensive data. n nBut, again, it ‘s not timely. And we really want to know in real time, so we have this monthly jobs report. So we could see as that quarterly data came in that the payroll numbers that we look at every month were a little bit stronger than — each month than what that quarterly data suggested. n nAnd now we have other measures like ADP private payrolls. We have got several metrics of independent data. And then, of course, we have the unemployment rate, which is what tells us whether a lot of people who want to work are not finding jobs. Excuse me. And that ‘s not affected by this benchmark revision. n nThe unemployment rate still is our best measure of weakness. And what that is telling us right now is that there ‘s a little bit of weakness creeping in, but that even though job creation was a bit smaller over the prior year, unemployment was still pretty low. n nJulia Coronado: n nSo most of the downward revisions came in the private sector, and they were concentrated in leisure and hospitality and retail, and then some in wholesale trade as well. n nSo there were a few sectors where there were some concentrated, very large downward revisions. Those can be some of the hardest to measure because they feature small — lots of small firms and a lot of seasonal and part-time employment. And so those were the areas where we saw the biggest downward revisions. n
Julia Coronado: n nThere ‘s a lot of pressure on the institution right now. We — I certainly see those accusations as completely unfounded. I have worked with the statisticians at the BLS for decades. They are dedicated public servants. There is no evidence of political bias. n nThey work very hard to maintain high data quality even as their budget gets cut. So, I don ‘t think that ‘s a fair critique of the agency. I think the economy, a big, dynamic economy like the U.S. is just really hard to measure. And if they want some more accurate data, then perhaps we should consider funding the BLS better and allowing them to better meet the challenges of measuring this economy.