U.S. job cuts rise 6.1 percent in April - report

http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2004/05/04/rtr1358052.html

NEW YORK, May 4 (Reuters) - Layoffs in the United States rose 6.1 percent last month, after falling to their lowest level in nine months in March, a report said on Tuesday, signaling the April payrolls report due Friday may not be as strong as in March.

The outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. said employers announced 72,184 job cuts in April, up from the 68,034 in March, but still down 51 percent from April 2003.

The Challenger report lends weight to bond market expectations that the April jobs report due at the end of the week is likely to come in weaker than last month.

"Companies wait until the last minute to hire. They only hire if there is no other choice," John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, told Reuters. Hiring employees is expensive, and companies wait until they are sure the employees will be needed, he added.

...more...

Just yesterday here in Michigan.

These are peoples' lives that are being turned upside down.

:cry:

It sucks.

Absolutely nothing. They figured with profits up, hiring would skyrocket. Not in this economy. It's all about keeping costs down to make profits higher. Truth be told, I think by June or July things will start seriously tanking again. The effects of tax returns will wear off and housing/refis will be significantly lower as interest rates continue to rise.

Add to that the increasing cost of EVERYTHING due to oil prices and things will be severely hosed. I couldn't believe the prices at the grocery store last night.

As bad as it is to see people still losing their jobs, this is what is going to potentially put these idiots out of office. People will swallow just about anything these days, but when it hits them in the pocketbooks they start to wake up. Of course these people are assholes too.

we have a new law allowing anyone with a bachelors to become a teacher. No teacher training necessary. No classroom experience necessary. This is how we are now throwing work at people. As a teacher who worked extremely hard in my teacher training and in my post-graduate work I am pissed!

Do you have a link to that story? I had no idea. I've seen experienced teachers from other nations have to go through a lot of coursework to get certified in the U.S.

It sounds like we may have one more chance to shoot it down.

By Dave Harmon
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Saturday, February 28, 2004
In a narrow vote Friday, the State Board of Education wasn't able to block a rule to let college graduates bypass teacher training programs and learn on the job.
The board voted 8-7 to kill the rule, but that wasn't enough, because under state law the 15-member board needed 10 votes to reject it.
Many of the board members who opposed the rule said it was poorly written and didn't set any standards for how people who receive the new temporary teacher certificate will be trained.
"If we're going to do it, let's at least do it right," said board member Bob Craig of Lubbock. "As an attorney, if you brought this contract to me, I would tell you not to sign it. There are just too many loopholes."
Board member Alma Allen of Houston added: "Poorly prepared teachers produce poorly prepared students."
None of the members who supported the rule spoke during the discussion before the vote.
The rule, which twice has failed to pass the Legislature, has been the focus of a major political battle over teacher standards. Gov. Rick Perry and new Education Commissioner Shirley Neeley have championed the idea, siding with groups representing school districts and administrators who say it will help ease a teacher shortage.
Teacher groups, universities and many educators have fought the rule, contending that it cheapens the profession, opens classrooms to unprepared teachers who are likely to quit when they find themselves in over their heads, and includes neither money nor guidance for the school districts that will be training these new teachers.
Opponents have one last shot at defeating the rule when it goes back to the State Board for Teacher Certification for a final vote on April 2. That board is dominated by Perry appointees. The certification board approved it in a 5-4 vote in November, with one member abstaining and one seat vacant.
If the certification board gives the rule final approval, it will take effect this summer, opening classroom doors to people who want to teach but don't want to go through traditional training programs, such as those offered at universities and colleges and the alternative certification program.
Hanging over the debate is the federal No Child Left Behind Act, the sweeping education reform law signed by President Bush in 2002. The law requires that teachers of core subjects such as English and math be "highly qualified" by the end of the 2005-06 school year. That means having at least a bachelor's degree, showing competence in their subject area and being certified by their state.
But states can set their own standards for certification. In this case, Texas could count people with a temporary teacher certificate as "highly qualified." That would be welcome news to many schools that have hired teachers using so-called district teaching permits, which have even fewer minimum standards and therefore can't produce "highly qualified" teachers.
About 2,000 of the more than 4,200 teachers hired with those permits since 1995 are still teaching, according to the Texas Association of School Administrators.
Last year, a teacher quality report by U.S. Education Secretary Rod Paige said the No Child Left Behind Act "gives the green light to states that want to lower barriers to the teaching profession" for college graduates and people looking to change careers. The report said research found "little compelling evidence" that teacher certification standards had any impact on student achievement -- it was careful not to say that student teaching and other training isn't valuable.
In 2002, Texas and 43 other states had alternative routes to teacher certification. Several states -- including Alabama, Colorado and California -- have programs that bypass student teaching and other typical teacher training programs.
In California, a 2001 law let applicants become teachers by passing teaching tests and entering an internship program in which they learn on the job and get evaluated by classroom observers -- a good grade from the observer means getting a preliminary credential.
"We haven't had any problem with the program," said Dale Martin of the California Teachers Association.

It's a real eye-opener. These are the stories we don't hear much about.

nt

U.S. JOB CUTS rise 6.1 percent in April - report

allowed out before these numbers too could be cooked in a favorable light for our junta.

(my tin foil hat is in place)...but..I feel..they are being paid to do this...or promised something huge..just to help the job numbers before the election...I read here on DU that some companies are offering jobs with 6 month terms, to boost the job numbers. It's all too convenient.

Not to worry.

Don

...but employers announced 68,034 job cuts. Employers were cutting jobs, but new jobs were increasing. Someone needs to 'xsplain dis to me! Does a job cut figure of 72,184 imply that we should expect jobs to increase again by even more in April?:eyes: :crazy: :silly: :wtf:

out of that report. Be revising it down, the rise in April will appear larger than it is. SSDD.

Besides, Greenspin needs it tamed down to avoid a push for faster, higher interest rate hikes.

but took out mention of patience.

Why hasn't the BLS posted job losses/gains for April yet? Sounds like they won't be good for Chimpy.

if the numbers aren't good so it can get buried. The 308,000 new McJobs in March were trumpeted April 2. Here it is already May 4.

Unemployment will go down or remain steady.

I will say that there are some shreds of the Old Republic left in these institutions, IMHO, and the "institutional inertia" is what is slowing their trnsformation to Bueshevik Soviet-style 100% Lying Organization.

Many of the Imperial Executive Agencies have reached that point already.

Job gains are a bit like anticipatory investing. CEO's do not give the green light to hire unless they can see a rosy profits picture up ahead. They start hiring in anticipation, putting money into the hands of incrementally more employees and, viola!, we're locked in a virtuous cycle of an expanding economy again.

However, if the CEO's see a bleak future or even if they simply can't see the future, job growth stagnates, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Growth stagnates, profits are threatened -- and maybe defensive job cuts are made, locking us into a viscious cycle of negative growth again.

Offshoring and productivity growth factor in to this picture, but the key is the CEO-decision to engage in incremental hiring -- or not.

The bottom line is the lack of sustained, strong hiring represents the collective condemnation by the CEO's of this nation on our long term prospects as nurtured by pResident Bush. Even the rapid looneys such as David Smith (Sinclair) -- if they are not hiring, their collective intuition is that Bush is leading us to at best an uncertain future.

If they'd ever connect their business decisions to their ballot decisions, Bush will be toast!

Same thing as his daddy 12 years ago.