Bureau of Labor Statistics, Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, December 2013

Information Sheet: JOLTS Net Employment Change Compared to

CES Month-to-Month Employment Change

The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) measures hires and separations on a monthly basis. If 

separations are subtracted from hires, the difference represents an implied employment change. The Current 

Employment Statistics (CES) survey provides net employment change. The JOLTS implied employment change 

and the CES net employment change are conceptually similar and are expected to track well with each other 

over time. While this is true over the long term, the series can diverge from each other in the short term. The 

information below provides a brief overview of this issue.

It would seem logical that the implied employment change from JOLTS would match the CES over-the-month 

change on a monthly basis, but it often does not. Several reasons are outlined here.

A. The JOLTS program was not designed to measure over-the-month employment change while the CES 

survey was. Consequently, the JOLTS survey differs from the CES in its methodology and data elements 

collected.

B. Both the JOLTS and the CES programs are sample surveys and both are subject to sampling error. The 

two programs have differing levels of reliability because the CES collects data from far more 

establishments than the JOLTS program. 

C. The two surveys have differing seasonal patterns.

D. There are definitional differences between the two surveys:

 Reference period: The employment observation in CES targets the pay period that includes the 12th

of the month. The JOLTS hires and separations, however, are counted for the entire month. This 

means for example, that for weekly payrolls, JOLTS turnover occurring in the first half of the month 

is reflected in the mid-month CES employment observation, while JOLTS turnover occurring in the 

latter part of the month will not be reflected in the CES employment observation until the following 

month.

 Part-time and on-call workers: A potential source of difference between the two surveys can be 

traced to part-time and on-call workers. Depending on their schedules, these employees may move 

in and out of the employment count for CES while never changing their employment status for 

JOLTS because they are still on the employee roster. A part-time worker at a retail establishment is 

an excellent example of this issue. If the part-time worker is not working during the pay period that 

includes the 12th of the month, he or she does not appear in the CES employment count. Since the 

employee was not separated, the JOLTS implied employment change does not show a 

corresponding decrease.

 Working vs. employed: It is generally assumed that hires and separations are reflected in 

employment. However, a closer look at the data indicates this is not always the case. For example, 

employment levels at universities generally drop over the summer. The CES employment level 

shows the expected drop in employment over the summer because the CES employment level 

reflects people who worked or received pay for the reference pay period. The JOLTS data captures 

formal separations including employed students, visiting professors, etc., while employees that will 

return, such as professors and staff, are not counted in separations unless they have been formally
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, December 2013

separated. Because some permanent staff may not be working, they are not counted as employed 

by CES but they are also not counted as separated (or subsequently hired) by JOLTS. 

Detailed information for both of these programs can be found in the BLS Handbook of Methods.

Keeping in mind the differences between the two programs, it is easy to see why the implied employment 

change and net employment change do not match on a monthly basis. However, despite these differences, the 

two series track well over time with the bulk of the difference dissipating over the course of a year. The 

remaining divergence is addressed using the monthly alignment method. See “The CES/JOLTS Divergence: How 

to Apply the Monthly Alignment Method to Help Close the Gap”. The monthly alignment method – which aligns 

the JOLTS implied employment change with the CES 2nd closing preliminary net employment change – removes 

any remaining trend divergence while preserving the unique seasonal pattern of the JOLTS series. Because the 

seasonal pattern is preserved, the two series do not always track well from month to month. For more 

information see “Methodological Changes in the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey”.

In 2013, the JOLTS implied employment change and the CES net employment change diverged more than usual.

The source of this divergence was determined to be revisions to CES data between 2nd and 3rd closing. For 

operational reasons, JOLTS data are aligned monthly to CES 2nd closing data; revisions to 3rd closing CES data are 

not incorporated into JOLTS estimates until the annual benchmark process. Looking at CES revisions to the 

seasonally adjusted data for 2012 and 2013 we see that:

 In 2012 from January to September, the monthly 1

st to 2nd closing revisions summed to +100,000; 

the 2nd to 3rd closing revision was +55,000

 In 2013 from January to September, the monthly 1

st to 2nd closing revisions summed to +22,000; the 

2

nd to 3rd closing revision was +154,000

(Note that the above data reflects September 2013 data as October 2

nd and 3rd closing data are not available at 

this time.) 

The JOLTS data for 2013 through September reflect only the cumulative +22,000 1st to 2nd closing CES revisions; 

data do not reflect the cumulative +154,000 2nd to 3rd closing revisions. When the annual JOLTS benchmarking 

process incorporates the CES 3rd closing data, the JOLTS data will reflect the 2nd to 3rd closing revisions.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, December 2013

*2013 CES over-the-month change data reflects 2nd closing employment levels and 1st closing for the most 

recent month.

Year

JOLTS 

Hires

JOLTS 

Separations

Implied JOLTS Emp. 

Change (HiresSeparations)

December CES 

Emp. Level 

(Except 2013)

CES over-the-year 

Emp. Change (DecDec)

 JOLTS Implied Emp. 

Change minus CES 

Emp. Change

Difference as a % 

of Dec. CES Emp.

2000 133,405

2001 62,948 64,765 -1,817 131,591 -1,814 -3 -0.0023%

2002 58,583 59,190 -607 131,045 -546 -61 -0.0465%

2003 56,451 56,487 -36 131,120 75 -111 -0.0847%

2004 60,367 58,340 2,027 133,129 2,009 18 0.0135%

2005 63,150 60,733 2,417 135,655 2,526 -109 -0.0804%

2006 63,773 61,565 2,208 137,786 2,131 77 0.0559%

2007 62,421 61,162 1,259 138,929 1,143 116 0.0835%

2008 55,128 58,627 -3,499 135,321 -3,608 109 0.0805%

2009 46,357 51,532 -5,175 130,242 -5,079 -96 -0.0737%

2010 48,607 47,646 961 131,199 957 4 0.0030%

2011 49,675 47,626 2,049 133,292 2,093 -44 -0.0330%

2012 51,991 49,676 2,315 135,560 2,268 47 0.0347%

2013 (through Oct) 46,300 43,554 2,746 137,540 1,980 766 0.5569%

^October 2013^ 

1st Closing

JOLTS Implied Employment Change, 12-month sum vs. CES Net Employment Change, not seasonally adjusted (in thousands)

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Monthly cumulative total difference by year, total nonfarm

S {(JOLTS monthly hires-separations)-(CES over-the-month change*)}, not seasonally adjusted

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, December 2013

*2013 CES over-the-month change data reflects 2nd closing employment levels and 1st closing for the most 

recent month.

Year

JOLTS 

Hires

JOLTS 

Separations

Implied JOLTS Emp. 

Change (HiresSeparations)

December CES 

Emp. level, SA 

(Except 2013)

CES over-the-year 

Emp. Change (DecDec)

JOLTS Implied Emp. 

Change minus CES 

Emp. Change

Difference as a % 

of Dec. CES Emp.

2000 132,580

2001 62,767 64,458 -1,691 130,823 -1,757 66 0.0504%

2002 58,642 59,236 -594 130,291 -532 -62 -0.0476%

2003 56,514 56,538 -24 130,353 62 -86 -0.0660%

2004 60,339 58,309 2,030 132,372 2,019 11 0.0083%

2005 63,167 60,755 2,412 134,856 2,484 -72 -0.0534%

2006 63,785 61,709 2,076 136,927 2,071 5 0.0037%

2007 62,291 61,165 1,126 138,042 1,115 11 0.0080%

2008 55,090 58,542 -3,452 134,425 -3,617 165 0.1227%

2009 46,387 51,544 -5,157 129,373 -5,052 -105 -0.0812%

2010 48,637 47,651 986 130,395 1,022 -36 -0.0276%

2011 49,644 47,530 2,114 132,498 2,103 11 0.0083%

2012 51,946 49,840 2,106 134,691 2,193 -87 -0.0646%

2013 (through Oct) 44,376 42,776 1,600 136,554 1,863 -263 -0.1926%

^October 2013^ 

1st Closing

JOLTS Implied Employment Change, 12-month sum vs. CES Net Employment Change, seasonally adjusted (in thousands)

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Monthly cumulative total difference by year, total nonfarm

S{(JOLTS hires-separations) - (CES over-the-month change *)}, seasonally adjusted 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013