EVALUATING THE 1995 BLS LABOR FORCE PROJECTIONS

Howard N Fullerton, Jr., Bureau of Labor Statistics

BLS, Office of Employment Projections, Washington, DC 20212-0001

KEYWORDS: Mean absolute percent error, index of

dissimilarity, growth rate errors

1. Introduction

The Bureau of Labor Statistic (BLS) has made

labor force projections since the late 1950s. They have

generally been for a 10 to 20 time span. These

projections by age and sex, since the late 1970s, by

race, and since the late 1980s, by Hispanic origin.

Beginning in 1968, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has

not considered the projection process complete until it

assesses the accuracy of its projections (Swerdloff

1969). Such evaluations help the developers of the

projections to better understand the causes of

projection errors and provide users with information

on the accuracy of specific components of the

projections.

This article examines the errors in the labor force

projections to 1995 and the sources of the errors. The

analysis compares projected and actual (most recent

Current Population Survey estimate) levels of the labor

force and the rates of labor force participation of

specific age groups for men and women, and for

whites and blacks and others. Where appropriate, the

accuracy of the six 1995 labor force projections are

compared with evaluations of BLS projections of the

1985 and 1990 labor force (Fullerton 1988 and 1992).

Each of the six labor force projections to 1995 are

identified by the year in which they were published.

One of the challenges in evaluating projections is

that the actual data are not strictly comparable to that

projected. For example, the projections to 1985 were

different from the actual 1985 numbers because of

changes in how undocumented workers were

estimated. Generally, some changes in the Current

Population Survey are introduced after each census.

The redesign after the 1990 census, implemented in

1994, was particularly extensive (Polivka and Miller

1994). Some changes affected the number of persons

counted in the labor force, by adjusting for the census

undercount. Other changes affected the proportion of

the population for some demographic groups counted

in the labor force. It is estimated that a slightly greater

proportion of women are and a higher proportion of

older persons are now placed in the labor force. It is

not possible to quantify the effect of these

improvements in the survey, so it is not possible to

know how much they affect projection accuracy.

2. Evaluation of the aggregate 1995 projections

Each of the six projections to 1995 had three

alternatives: high, moderate, and low. This analysis,

for the most part, focuses on the middle or “moderate”

growth projection in each series (Fullerton and

Tschetter 1983, and Fullerton 1980, 1985, 1987, 1989,

and 1991). (See table 1.) The following tabulation

shows the projections to 1995 (in millions) and the

numerical and the percent error made in each year the

projections were developed.

Projection for

1995 made in:

Labor force Error

Number Percent

(millions)

1980 127.5 -4.8 -3.6

1983 131.4 -0.9 -.7

1985 129.2 -3.1 -2.4

1987 131.6 -0.7 -.5

1989 133.2 0.9 .7

1991 134.1 1.8 1.3

1995 132.3

The overall error was greatest in 1980 and 1985;

the pattern of low but increasing error exhibited since

1987 is due to over projecting labor force participation

slightly for most groups. In the past, BLS projected the

male labor force too high and the female labor force

too low. As table 1 indicates, in every year except

1991, men’s labor force was projected too low.

Previous evaluations indicated that the error for

women’s labor force was greater than that for men and

that women’s labor force was projected too low. In

contrast to previous evaluations, this analysis shows

only the 1980 and 1985 projections had women’s labor

force too low and only the 1991 labor force projection

for women was worse than that for men. The two

years with the largest errors were years in which the

labor force for both men and women were too low.

Because whites make up about 85 percent of the

labor force, the numerical errors for this group should

be larger than for blacks and others; this was true for

every projection except that made in 1983. However,

because sampling variability, the relative error for

blacks and others should be greater than their share of

the labor force; this is also true.

Projections made for a longer time span should be

less accurate that those made a shorter span. We adjust
for different time spans by using annual growth rates.

The following tabulation displays the growth rates for

the total civilian labor force historically with the

projected annual rate and the actual annual rate of

change. All three rates are measured over the same

number of years. The historic rate is calculated over

the same number of years before the date of the

projection as 1995 is after the date of the projection:

Projection for

1995 made in:

Historical

rate

Projected

rate

Actual

rate

Error

(in percent)

1980 2.40 1.23 1.46 -.23

1983 2.42 1.36 1.42 -.05

1985 2.19 1.18 1.40 -.22

1987 1.95 1.24 1.30 -.06

1989 1.63 1.30 1.20 .10

1991 1.57 1.45 1.18 .27

The first two columns indicate that the Bureau

expected labor force growth to slow, especially in the

earlier projections. For example, in 1980, the labor

force growth was expected to drop from the historical

rate of growth, 2.4 percent a year, to 1.2 percent and in

1985 to drop from 2.2 percent yearly to 1.2 percent. In

fact, the labor force did slow dramatically, though not

by as much as BLS anticipated. Between 1989 and

1995 and between 1991 and 1995 however, the labor

force growth slowed even more than BLS anticipated.

3. Population projections

The two components of BLS labor force projections

are 1) age-race-sex specific labor force participation

rates, made by BLS, and 2) age-race-sex specific

population projections prepared by the Bureau of the

Census (U. S. Bureau of the Census 1977, 1982, 1984,

1989). Analysis indicates that population increase

underlies most of the labor force increase. (See, for

example, Fullerton 1993). The past two evaluations of

the labor force projections indicate that a major source

of error has been not accounting for undocumented

immigration in the population projections. Once the

Census Bureau began incorporating an estimate of

undocumented immigration into their population

projections, the labor force projection error dropped

significantly (Fullerton 1988, 1992). For this

evaluation, there is an additional complication, the

Current Population Survey estimates are adjusted for

the 1990 census undercount which none of the

population projections anticipated.

The following tabulation shows 1995 projections

for the civilian, noninstitutional population aged 16

and over for men and women (in millions) and the

errors associated with the total population projections:

Projection of

1995

population

made in:

Total Men Women Error of

Total

(percent)

(in millions)

1980 186 88 98 -6.3

1983 194 92 102 -2.4

1985 194 92 102 -2.4

1987 196 93 102 -1.4

1989 196 93 102 -1.4

1991 198 95 103 -.4

1995 199 95 103

The source of population projection error for the

ages of interest, 16 to 64, and for the time-span of

these projections is net immigration. For an analysis of

the effect of different assumptions embodied in the

population projections on various age groups in the

population in different time periods, see Long (1991).

The errors in the population projection declined as

the projection period gets shorter. For the projections

to 1995, the errors attributed to the population

projections are uniformly lower than in earlier

evaluations. Until 1989, the Bureau of the Census did

not incorporate estimates of undocumented immigrants

into the middle population projection series because

such persons were not included in current population

estimates. Once this was done, errors in the labor force

projections attributed to errors in population

projections dropped. The following tabulation shows

total labor force errors attributable to participation and

population errors (in millions):

Error attributed to:

Projection for

1995 made in:

Total labor

force error

Participation Populatio

n

(in millions)

1980 -4.8 11.7 -16.4

1983 -.9 10.0 -10.9

1985 -3.1 6.9 -10.0

1987 -.7 8.2 -8.9

1989 .9 10.0 -9.1

1991 1.8 8.9 -7.1

The most remarkable aspect of this tabulation is

that in each projection the participation rate and the

population errors offset each other. (See tables 2 and

3). There is no intrinsic reason why this should be. In

fact for some earlier projections, the errors did not

offset. The errors in the participation rate were derived

by multiplying the 1995 annual average civilian

noninstitutional population by the projected

participation rates. Any difference between the these
numbers and the 1995 annual average civilian labor

force is due to labor force participation rate error.

Comparing the error of the published projection with

the errors attributable to participation rate projections

yields the errors due to population projections. Not

only do the errors in the population projection drop as

the time horizon shortens, they shrink as a source of

labor force projection error, becoming smaller than

participation rate error by 1989.

Population projection errors were fairly evenly

divided between men and women. If we expect more

undocumented men than women, this is surprising. We

would expect a greater error for men. It is also

interesting to find that the number of those 60 to 69

were underprojected. Half the population error for

white men was due to ages 55 and over for the 1980

projection. For the 1991 projection the errors for

white men 60 and over exceeded the total error for

white men. (There were small offsetting errors at the

younger ages.) By race as a whole, the errors for

whites were 80 percent of total error in the 1980

projection. This increased to 85 percent by the 1991

projection. Errors by race were in proportion to their

population size.

4. Labor force participation rate error

Labor force participation rate error did not

decrease as the projection period decreased. (See table

2.) Errors by race were roughly proportional to their

share of the labor force. If anything, blacks and others

error was slightly lower than their proportion of the

labor force, especially for the earlier projections.

Projection errors by sex were not equally divided.

Men accounted for 54 percent of the labor force, but

from 38 to 45 percent of the error. Black and other

men were accurately projected in the earlier

projections to 1995. This may be attributed to chance.

Because the labor force participation rates of men have

not been changing as rapidly as that for women, it is

easier to project their activity. Projections of the white

women’s labor force participation rates consisted of

half the error in the 6 projections. Similarly, the

projection for black and other women accounted for 10

percent of the error, almost twice their proportion of

the labor force. Women’s labor force was more

dynamic and harder to project.

This analysis proceeded by multiplying the 1995

population estimate by the projected labor force

participation rates for the six labor force projections

and compare the resulting labor force with the actual

level; another approach would be to compare the

projected labor force participation rates with the

1995Current Population Survey estimates. (See table

4.)

5. Measures of errors in labor force participation

The later labor force projections were made for

more age groups and more race or Hispanic origin

groups than the earlier ones. For this analysis, 13 age

groups were reviewed for men and women, for whites

and blacks and others. If projections were made for

additional groups, the totals for those groups are

shown in table 1. The analysis of labor force

participation rates was conducted on sets of 52

detailed participation rates. The evaluation of the

projections to 1990 only reviewed 20 sets of labor

force participation rates. Much of the work of bettering

the labor force projections has come by providing

more detail by age and race or Hispanic origin, not by

increasing the sophistication of the projection.

The median error in labor force participation for

each of the 52 errors per projection period ranged from

0.3 percentage points for the 1983 projection to 2.0 in

the 1987 projection. (See chart 1.) However, none of

the medians were significantly different from zero. (A

median error of zero indicates that half the errors were

above and half were below zero.) The range of median

errors was much greater than for the projections

analyzed for 1990. This reflects the use of smaller age

groups and accounting explicitly for race.

Projection for

1995 made in:

Median of

error

Mean

absolute

deviation

1980 1.22 5.6

1983 0.33 4.7

1985 1.00 3.8

1987 2.05 3.6

1989 1.81 2.8

1991 1.67 2.0

Despite the greater median of the errors, the spread

of the errors, the mean absolute deviation or MAD,

was less. The greatest over projection for the 1995

labor force was 16.7 percentage points (for white

women 18 and 19 years of age, made in 1980). The

lowest under projection, 10.6 percentage points (white

men 65 to 69, made in 1985), was less than half the

comparable error made in 1990. Generally speaking,

the more aggregated the groupings, the smaller error

we would expect. This suggests that there may have

been a modest improvement in the projections over

those made for 1990.

Another summary of the error often given for a

wide variety of projections and forecasts is the mean

absolute percentage error or MAPE. This measure

attaches more significance to errors in the smaller

groups.
Projection for

1995 made in:

Mean absolute percentage

error

Level Participation

rates

1980 11.6 11.7

1983 11.2 12.7

1985 10.2 14.3

1987 9.4 11.7

1989 6.4 6.4

1991 4.2 4.0

The MAPE’s for the level or overall projections

show a satisfying decrease through time. The errors

due to the population projection display the same

patter. These measures indicate the importance of the

population projection to the overall labor force

projection error and that as time passed, the projection

of the smaller groups improved. This also confirms the

impression of lower spread of errors that the analysis

using the median and the box-plot presents.

The MAPE’s for the labor force participation rates

show errors rising through the 1985 projection and

then declining, with the MAPE for participation rates

less than the MAPE for the overall projection. This

pattern gives weight to the errors in the groups with

lower participation, younger and older segments of the

population. The analysis of the labor force errors due

to participation based on comparing the labor force

derived by combining the projected labor force

participation rates with the actual population gives

different information on the errors. The overall

projection was fairly good because those groups with

high attachment to the labor force were accurately

projected. The groups with low attachment to the labor

force (with low participation rates) were less

accurately projected.

6. Errors in participation by age, sex, and race

As the discussion above shows, we know that the

errors in labor force participation were greatest for

young and older persons. For the 1980 projections,

errors tended to be higher for young women than

young men, while for the remaining projections, errors

were generally greater for young men. Errors for

young white men tended to be greater than for young

black men, but white rates were over projected and

black rates under projected in the early years. After

1983, rates for both groups of men were over

projected. For young women, white rates were

generally less accurate than young black women.

Rates for both groups of young were likely to be too

high. Over projection of labor force participation in

the 1980 labor force projection extended into ages 25

to 29 for both groups of women.

The projected labor force participation for older

people provided another source of error. Generally, the

rates were projected too low. In part this error is due to

the change in the CPS, which now counts more older

persons in the labor force. However, for white men,

this under projection of participation extended down to

ages 50 to 54. The more recent labor force projections

have had significantly lower errors for older people.

The following tabulation shows the best and worst

projection for each projection:

Projection for

1995 made in:

Greatest

over projection

Lowest

under projection

1980 16.7 -10.0

1983 12.6 -10.4

1985 9.3 -10.6

1987 7.8 -8.4

1989 6.5 -4.2

1991 4.8 -5.1

When the error in the participation rate is 5.1

percentage points and the participation rate for the

group was 59 percent in 1995, the error is almost 9

percent. One may take the position that the percent

error and not the percentage point error is a better

measure of the accuracy. The 1980 labor force

projection’s greatest percent error was 34 percent, for

white men ages 16 and 17. This was lower than the

greatest percent error for other years. Generally, the

1980 projection was not the year with the lowest error.

The projection for 1985 had the greatest percent error,

60 percent, for black men ages 70 and over. The

groups that had the highest percent error had low labor

force participation rates. So, they also have high

percent errors. This set of projections had most of their

errors in either the youngest or oldest members of the

labor force.

Compared with the labor force projections to 1990,

the relative errors are larger, the greatest relative error

was 32 percent, made in 1973. The increase in relative

errors may reflect the greater variability because of the

smaller groups being projected. The error was for

black women aged 65 to 69, such a small population

group was not evaluated last time.

7. Composition errors

For some users of the projections, the key question

is not “what is the level,” or “how fast,” but what

proportion of the labor force is comprised of a

particular group. This may be measured by the index

of dissimilarity (White, 1986), which measures how

much the projected distribution would have to change

to be the actual
1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

3.8 3.0 2.8 2.1 1.6 1.1

This measure indicates a steady improvement in

projecting the labor force composition, by age, sex, and

race. The greatest error (1980) is considerably lower than

the greatest error in projections made to 1990. The least

error is also smaller than the least error made in the

projections to 1990. For those who rely of labor force

projections to indicate the likely future composition of the

labor force, these numbers offer reassurance. Increasing the

number of groups evaluated may have reduced the size of

this error. By looking at the projections made to both 1990

and 1995, it is possible to see if the improvement is due to

more groups. For the projections made in 1980, 1983, and

1985, the errors are greater for the 1995 projections than the

1990 projections.

8. Alternative projections

For each projection, two alternative projections

were made. Did the range from low-to-high

alternatives span the actual? And, was the high or low

alternative close to the 1995 actual? For evidence, we

turn to chart 2, which shows the high and low

alternatives for each of the six labor force projections

to 1995. The actual is “covered” by the alternatives.

The alternatives did function as confidence or credible

intervals. Generally, the high projection was closer to

the actual than the low projection. However, for the

more recent projections, the low was closer.

The gap between high and low should narrow for

the more recent projections. This happened, but the

interval for the 1983 projection was wider than for the

1980 labor force projection. This reflects a decision

made in 1983 that reflected the evaluation of the

projections to 1980. The high alternative projection,

beginning in 1987, has reflected higher net

immigration. This implies higher labor force

participation rates as well as higher population

numbers. This is one reason the high alternative labor

force projection increased between 1987 and 1989.

Summary

Overall Comparison. Ten measures of projection

accuracy were made of the six labor force projections

for 1995. Which projection was best? In considering

this, there are several ways a projection can be best.

For example, if the errors are offset, the projected

level of the labor force would be very near the actual

level, yet the participation rates and the projected

population would be incorrectly projected. However, if

the main use of the projected labor force was the level

or growth of the labor force, the details would not

matter. The following tabulation lists the number of

times a projection of the 195 labor force was

calculated to be best or worst:

Projection Best Worst

1980 6

1983 2

1985 1 2

1987 1 1

1989 1

1991 5 1

The tests described earlier help users evaluate the

projections in terms of their own needs: for an accurate

level of the total labor force, for accurate labor force

participation rate projections, or for accurate

projections of composition of the labor force. Different

tests of the accuracy of the participation rate

projections allow the user to focus on overall accuracy

or accuracy of specific groups.

Earlier evaluations. Because the projections were

evaluated at a greater level of detail than in the past,

comparison with earlier projections is difficult.

Evaluations of the accuracy of the level and of the

growth rate are at the same level as in previous

evaluations. Evaluations of the components, could

look worse without being worse. An obvious questions

is: Did the more detailed projections yield more

accurate projections?

Projection

to 1995

Projection

to 1990

Error Year Error Year

Error level

(in millions):

Best 0.9 1989 .2 1980

Worst -4.8 1980 -14.2 1970

Error in

growth

rate

(percent):

Best -.05 1983 .02 1983

Worst .27 1991 -.68 1973

Mean

absolute

percent

error:

Best 4.0 1991 6.8 1985

Worst 14.3 1985 10.8 1973

Index of

dissimilarity:

Best 1.1 1991 2.6 1985

Worst 3.8 1980 7.6 1973

The results are fascinating. In terms of the error in

millions, for the projections made to 1990, those made

in 1980 had the lowest error, but the 1980 projections

were the worst (and longest) to 1995. The least error of

the projections to 1995 was greater than the least error
to 1990, but the worst error to 1995 was almost a third

the worst error to 1990. If the error is measured by the

annual growth rate, once again, the best (least error)

for the 1995 projection was greater than the best

projection to 1990, but the worst 1995 error was

significantly better than the worst 1990 error. The

1991 projection to 1995 was the worst, even though it

was the shortest. Focusing on the best projections to

1990 and 1995, leads one to say that the 1995

projections were not as good as the 1990 ones.

Looking at the worst errors (MINIMAX) leads to the

opposite conclusion.

Looking at the two remaining measures, which do

reflect the greater detail evaluated, one gets a mixed

picture. The best 1995 projection was better than the

best projection made to 1990, but the worst to 1995

had a greater error than the worst 1990 projection. For

the three projections that were evaluated earlier to

1990, the MAPE’s for 1995 are higher than for 1990.

The additional 5 years has resulted in lower accuracy.

The highest MAPE for the 1995 projections is the

same as the highest for the 1990 projections, but the

two most recent projections have lower MAPE’s than

any of the projections to 1990. This suggests that the

errors for the groups with lower participation rates

were improved in the 1995 projections.

For those interested in the composition of the labor

force, the index of dissimilarity indicates that the best

projection to 1995 had an error less than half the best

projection to 1990 and that the worst projection to

1995 had half the error of the worst projection to 1990.

The projection for 1990 made in 1983 had a

greatest relative error of 17 percent, for 1995, the

greatest relative error for the projection to 1995 made

in 1983 was 53 percent. The greatest MAD was less

than the greatest for 1990 and the least was just less

than the least for 1990. The median MAD for 1995

(3.7) was less than the median MAD for 1990 (4.05).

Even though the groups being analyzed in 1995 are

smaller and thus more variable than the groups for

1990, the spread of errors is smaller. The greater

variability resulted in the extreme errors being greater

than in 1990.

BLS labor force projections to 1995 were

marginally better than the projections to 1990 because

the Bureau of the Census is projecting the population

more accurately, because BLS is not projecting as far

forward as in the past, and because the labor force

itself is not growing as rapidly. However, the most

stable population groups, white, non-Hispanics, are

expected to be a smaller portion of the future labor

force. Thus, future labor force projections may not be

as accurate. As the baby boom ages, projecting their

labor force activity at the older ages should also be

more difficult.

References

Fullerton Jr., Howard N (1980), "The 1995 labor force:

a first look," Monthly Labor Review, December, pp.

11-21.

Fullerton, Howard N, and Tschetter, John (1983), "The

1995 labor force: a second look,' , Monthly Labor

Review, November; pp. 3-10.

____ (1985), "The 1995 labor force: BLS's latest

projections," Monthly Labor Review, November pp.

17-25

____ (1987), "Labor force projections: 1986 to 2000",

Monthly Labor Review, September, pp. 19-39

____ (1988), “An evaluation of labor force projections

to 1985,” Monthly Labor Review, November, pp. 7-17.

____ (1989), "New labor force projections, spanning

1988 to 2000," Monthly Labor Review, November, pp.

3-12

____ (1991), "Labor force projections: the baby boom

moves on," Monthly Labor Review, November, pp. 31-

44.

____ (1992), “Evaluation of labor force projections to

1990,” Monthly Labor Review, August, pp. 3-14.

Long, John (1991), “Relative effects of fertility,

mortality, and immigration of projections of age

structure,” in Wolfgang Lutz, ed., Future

Demographic Trends in Europe and North America

(Academic Press, New York), pp. 503-22.

Polivka, Anne E., and Miller, Stephen M. (1994),

“The CPS after the redesign: refocusing the economic

lens.” Paper presented at the (Labor Statistics

Measurement Issues Conference, Conference on

Research in Income and Wealth, Washington, DC,

December, available from the Bureau of Labor

Statistics).

Swerdloff, Sol (1969) “How good were manpower

projections for the 1960’s,” Monthly Labor Review,

November, pp. 17-22.

U. S. Bureau of the Census (1977), Current Population

Reports, “Projections of the Population of the United

States: 1977 to 2050,” P-25, No. 704;

U. S. Bureau of the Census (1982), Current Population

Reports, “Projections of the Population of the United

States: 1982 to 2050,” P-25, No. 922;

U. S. Bureau of the Census (1984), Current Population

Reports, “Projections of the Population of the United

States: 1983 to 2080,” P-25, No. 952;

U. S. Bureau of the Census (1989), Current Population

Reports, “Projections of the Population of the United

States by Age, Sex, and Race: 1987 to 2080,” P-25,

No. 1018.
White, Michael J., “Segregation and Diversity

Measures in Population Distribution,” Population

Index, Summer 1986, pp. 198-221.
Table 1. The 1995 labor force, and labor force participation rates, actual and as projected

in 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and 1991

 Labor force (in thousands) Participation rate (in

percent)

Labor force group As published in -- Actual As published in -- Actual

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995

Total 127,542 131,387 129,168 131,598 133,215 134,085 132,304 68.6 67.8 66.6 67.2 68.1 67.8 66.6

Men, 16 and older 67,611 69,970 69,282 70,392 71,220 72,149 71,360 76.8 76.1 75.3 75.3 76.3 76.3 75.0

Women, 16 and older 59,931 61,417 59,886 61,206 61,995 61,936 60,944 61.2 60.3 58.9 59.8 60.6 60.1 58.9

White 109,292 112,393 110,086 111,686 113,300 113,883 111,950 68.8 68.1 66.8 67.5 68.5 68.3 67.1

 Men 58,871 60,757 59,894 60,471 61,226 61,953 61,146 77.7 77.0 75.8 75.9 76.9 76.9 75.7

 16 and 17 years 1,742 1,638 1,374 1,451 1,462 1,433 1,429 63.0 58.9 49.3 51.1 51.5 50.0 47.7

 18 and 19 years 1,973 2,001 1,904 1,899 1,883 1,887 1,998 80.8 80.4 75.6 73.5 72.6 71.3 69.9

 20 to 24 years 5,527 5,632 5,773 5,760 5,730 5,873 6,096 89.0 87.3 89.5 88.8 88.2 87.2 85.1

 25 to 29 years 6,553 6,997 7,074 7,016 7,026 7,251 7,224 93.9 93.9 94.9 94.2 94.8 94.5 93.6

 30 to 34 years 7,884 8,327 8,390 8,539 8,521 8,676 8,445 94.9 95.1 95.6 95.5 95.5 95.4 94.5

 35 to 39 years 8,187 8,768 8,635 8,720 8,774 8,834 8,587 95.3 96.7 95.3 94.9 95.5 95.3 93.7

 40 to 44 years 7,750 7,949 7,880 7,934 7,951 7,949 7,827 95.8 95.6 94.7 94.5 94.9 94.3 93.2

 45 to 49 years 6,685 7,052 6,920 6,886 6,897 6,859 6,740 92.4 94.5 92.7 93.3 93.5 92.7 91.8

 50 to 54 years 5,197 5,139 5,163 5,150 5,155 5,211 4,991 89.6 89.0 89.3 89.0 89.1 89.9 87.8

 55 to 59 years 3,613 3,592 3,605 3,570 3,694 3,739 3,589 79.2 78.4 78.7 77.4 80.1 80.9 78.6

 60 to 64 years 2,191 2,059 1,873 2,102 2,258 2,285 2,220 54.8 50.8 46.3 51.2 55.0 55.6 54.3

 65 to 69 years 817 841 647 810 1,028 1,085 1,074 21.5 21.8 16.8 20.4 25.9 27.3 27.4

 70 years and older 752 762 656 634 847 871 ,926 10.8 9.7 8.3 8.0 10.7 11.0 11.7

 Women 50,421 51,636 50,192 51,215 52,074 51,930 50,804 60.7 60.0 58.4 59.7 60.7 60.2 59.0

 16 and 17 years 1,663 1,406 1,201 1,420 1,409 1,326 1,320 62.5 52.6 44.9 52.4 52.0 48.5 46.7

 18 and 19 years 2,051 1,912 1,668 1,839 1,856 1,756 1,798 81.2 74.4 64.8 69.9 70.5 66.0 64.5

 20 to 24 years 5,739 5,707 5,306 5,381 5,399 5,269 5,170 87.8 84.9 79.0 78.6 78.8 75.6 72.3

 25 to 29 years 6,419 6,215 6,136 6,066 6,096 6,010 5,890 89.4 82.7 81.7 79.9 80.3 77.7 75.9

 30 to 34 years 6,625 7,150 7,166 7,157 7,065 6,906 6,766 78.1 81.1 81.4 80.2 79.2 76.6 75.7

 35 to 39 years 7,377 7,511 7,439 7,468 7,475 7,334 7,024 83.1 82.0 81.2 81.4 81.5 79.6 76.5

 40 to 44 years 6,669 7,032 6,679 6,832 6,916 6,926 6,674 80.5 83.5 79.3 80.9 81.9 81.8 78.8

 45 to 49 years 5,206 5,449 5,646 5,833 5,931 6,026 5,856 69.9 71.4 74.0 77.5 78.8 79.9 78.2

 50 to 54 years 3,756 4,076 4,024 4,027 4,189 4,294 4,218 61.9 67.5 66.7 66.9 69.6 71.2 71.5

 55 to 59 years 2,420 2,562 2,525 2,646 2,854 2,927 2,908 50.0 51.9 51.3 53.6 57.8 59.2 60.0

 60 to 64 years 1,459 1,442 1,460 1,521 1,608 1,753 1,714 33.3 31.7 32.2 33.5 35.4 38.6 38.2

 65 to 69 years 619 686 563 598 753 861 837 13.4 14.7 12.1 12.8 16.1 18.4 18.1

 70 years and older 418 488 379 427 523 542 629 3.8 4.0 3.1 3.6 4.4 4.6 5.4

Black and other 18,250 18,994 19,082 19,912 19,915 20,202 20,354 67.0 65.7 65.9 65.7 65.8 65.5 64.3

 Men 8,740 9,213 9,388 9,921 9,994 10,196 10,215 71.3 70.6 71.7 71.8 72.5 72.4 70.7

 16 and 17 years 159 152 171 242 250 242 239 24.8 24.7 27.7 33.2 34.2 32.7 29.9

 18 and 19 years 270 252 301 385 363 365 370 48.8 46.7 54.5 59.6 56.0 55.0 51.8

 20 to 24 years 970 898 1,017 1,144 1,107 1,185 1,243 70.8 68.3 76.6 78.0 75.5 77.7 74.3

 25 to 29 years 1,174 1,265 1,265 1,308 1,318 1,375 1,428 88.1 84.1 84.2 87.6 88.6 88.8 86.9

 30 to 34 years 1,418 1,516 1,518 1,523 1,524 1,578 1,573 94.6 87.6 87.2 89.3 90.0 90.1 88.2

 35 to 39 years 1,247 1,485 1,468 1,482 1,480 1,486 1,497 91.6 90.8 89.5 90.9 91.2 89.6 85.0

 40 to 44 years 1,113 1,244 1,249 1,258 1,238 1,266 1,277 93.1 90.1 90.3 90.1 88.7 89.5 86.8

 45 to 49 years 878 935 975 967 983 980 932 88.2 84.2 87.3 87.1 88.6 87.3 82.5

 50 to 54 years 672 681 663 705 708 709 759 83.6 84.3 81.7 81.9 82.1 81.5 79.6

 55 to 59 years 412 414 412 521 525 511 427 65.9 64.8 64.4 71.6 72.1 69.5 66.4

 60 to 64 years 263 246 229 245 304 298 268 47.8 48.2 44.8 40.3 50.0 48.5 47.9

 65 to 69 years 96 68 71 96 122 118 124 18.5 15.6 16.5 17.6 22.3 21.4 26.0

 70 years and older 68 57 49 45 72 83 77 8.3 6.9 6.0 5.1 8.1 9.3 9.2
Table 1. The 1995 labor force, and labor force participation rates, actual and as projected

in 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and 1991—

continued

 Labor force (in thousands) Participation rate (in

percent)

Labor force group As published in — Actual As published in — Actual

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995

 Women 9,510 9,781 9,694 9,991 9,921 10,006 10,140 63.5 61.7 61.1 60.5 60.1 59.7 58.9

 16 and 17 years 245 175 167 234 231 223 237 38.8 28.4 27.0 32.9 32.4 30.9 30.1

 18 and 19 years 300 268 271 356 361 344 374 49.6 45.0 45.5 52.5 53.2 49.9 50.2

 20 to 24 years 1,207 1,089 1,010 1,147 1,106 1,136 1,179 75.4 69.8 64.5 67.6 65.2 65.4 62.7

 25 to 29 years 1,373 1,367 1,304 1,288 1,268 1,297 1,369 85.3 80.1 76.5 73.1 72.0 71.6 70.7

 30 to 34 years 1,554 1,568 1,562 1,510 1,506 1,492 1,502 86.7 82.0 81.5 77.0 76.9 74.3 72.2

 35 to 39 years 1,435 1,523 1,513 1,536 1,532 1,489 1,545 83.7 82.5 81.9 81.2 81.1 77.6 74.7

 40 to 44 years 1,170 1,361 1,312 1,313 1,318 1,341 1,320 77.5 83.9 80.9 79.6 79.9 80.5 76.2

 45 to 49 years 853 941 1,044 1,018 1,004 1,008 997 70.6 70.5 78.0 75.9 74.8 74.4 73.5

 50 to 54 years 584 659 694 711 695 742 731 60.3 65.7 69.1 67.5 65.9 69.7 65.5

 55 to 59 years 379 423 449 487 480 477 485 50.4 51.6 54.7 55.7 54.9 54.0 59.1

 60 to 64 years 244 244 261 261 243 258 249 36.5 34.6 36.8 34.6 32.2 33.7 34.3

 65 to 69 years 112 122 75 74 117 122 82 16.2 18.8 11.6 10.5 16.5 17.0 12.3

 70 years and older 54 41 32 56 60 77 70 4.4 2.8 2.2 3.5 4.2 5.4 5.4

Black — — 14,796 15,058 15,120 15,102 14,817 — — 65.3 65.6 65.9 65.3 63.7

Asian and other — — — 4,854 4,795 5,100 5,539 — — — 65.8 65.3 66.1 65.8

Hispanic — — — 11,787 11,939 11,900 12,267 — — — 66.7 68.7 68.5 65.8

Note: Dash indicates data not available
Table 2. Characteristics of the 1995 labor force, actual and as projected using the

participation rates projected in 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and 1991,

with the actual 1995 population and associated errors

 Labor force (in thousands)

Labor force group Using rates published in -- Actual Errors due to participation rate projections1

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Total 143,975 142,311 139,175 140,526 142,276 141,228 132,305 11,671 10,007 6,871 8,222 9,972 8,924

Men, 16 and older 75,833 75,197 74,293 74,759 75,566 75,367 71,361 4,472 3,836 2,933 3,398 4,206 4,007

Women, 16 and older 68,143 67,114 64,882 65,768 66,709 65,860 60,944 7,199 6,171 3,939 4,824 5,766 4,917

White 122,129 121,203 117,980 119,061 120,807 119,956 111,950 10,179 9,253 6,031 7,111 8,857 8,006

 Men 65,340 65,089 63,908 64,082 64,855 64,703 61,146 4,193 3,943 2,762 2,936 3,709 3,557

 16 and 17 years 2,327 2,306 2,270 2,273 2,303 2,303 1,429 898 877 841 844 874 874

 18 and 19 years 1,801 1,684 1,409 1,461 1,472 1,430 1,998 -196 -314 -588 -537 -525 -568

 20 to 24 years 5,788 5,759 5,415 5,265 5,200 5,107 6,096 -308 -337 -681 -831 -896 -989

 25 to 29 years 6,872 6,740 6,910 6,856 6,810 6,733 7,224 -353 -484 -314 -368 -414 -492

 30 to 34 years 8,387 8,387 8,476 8,414 8,468 8,441 8,445 -58 -58 32 -31 23 -4

 35 to 39 years 8,699 8,718 8,764 8,754 8,754 8,745 8,587 112 131 176 167 167 158

 40 to 44 years 8,005 8,123 8,005 7,972 8,022 8,005 7,827 178 296 178 145 195 178

 45 to 49 years 7,037 7,022 6,956 6,941 6,970 6,926 6,740 297 282 216 201 231 187

 50 to 54 years 5,251 5,370 5,268 5,302 5,314 5,268 4,991 261 380 278 312 323 278

 55 to 59 years 4,090 4,063 4,077 4,063 4,067 4,104 3,589 501 474 488 474 478 515

 60 to 64 years 3,237 3,204 3,216 3,163 3,274 3,306 2,220 1,017 984 996 943 1,054 1,086

 65 to 69 years 2,148 1,991 1,814 2,007 2,155 2,179 1,074 1,073 917 740 932 1,081 1,105

 70 years and older 1,698 1,721 1,327 1,611 2,045 2,156 ,926 772 795 401 685 1,119 1,230

 Women 56,789 56,114 54,072 54,979 55,952 55,253 50,804 5,986 5,310 3,268 4,175 5,148 4,449

 16 and 17 years 1,716 1,696 1,651 1,688 1,716 1,702 1,320 396 376 331 368 396 382

 18 and 19 years 1,742 1,466 1,251 1,460 1,449 1,352 1,798 -56 -332 -547 -338 -349 -447

 20 to 24 years 5,806 5,319 4,633 4,998 5,041 4,719 5,170 636 149 -537 -172 -129 -451

 25 to 29 years 6,814 6,589 6,131 6,100 6,116 5,867 5,890 925 700 242 211 226 -22

 30 to 34 years 7,993 7,394 7,305 7,144 7,180 6,947 6,766 1,227 628 538 377 413 181

 35 to 39 years 7,174 7,450 7,477 7,367 7,275 7,036 7,024 151 426 454 344 252 13

 40 to 44 years 7,037 6,944 6,876 6,893 6,901 6,741 6,674 363 270 202 219 228 67

 45 to 49 years 6,029 6,253 5,939 6,059 6,133 6,126 5,856 173 397 83 203 278 270

 50 to 54 years 4,125 4,213 4,367 4,573 4,650 4,715 4,218 -93 -4 149 356 432 497

 55 to 59 years 2,999 3,270 3,232 3,241 3,372 3,450 2,908 91 362 323 333 464 541

 60 to 64 years 2,244 2,329 2,302 2,406 2,594 2,657 1,714 530 615 588 692 880 943

 65 to 69 years 1,542 1,468 1,491 1,551 1,639 1,788 837 705 631 654 714 802 951

 70 years and older 1,569 1,721 1,417 1,498 1,885 2,154 629 939 1,092 787 869 1,256 1,525

Black and other 21,846 21,109 21,195 21,466 21,469 21,272 20,354 1,492 754 841 1,111 1,114 917

 Men 10,493 10,108 10,385 10,677 10,711 10,664 10,215 278 -107 170 462 496 450

 16 and 17 years 570 564 573 574 579 579 239 331 325 334 335 340 340

 18 and 19 years 177 176 198 237 244 233 370 -193 -194 -172 -133 -126 -137

 20 to 24 years 816 781 911 997 936 920 1,243 -427 -462 -332 -246 -306 -323

 25 to 29 years 1,163 1,122 1,259 1,282 1,241 1,277 1,428 -265 -306 -170 -147 -188 -152

 30 to 34 years 1,571 1,499 1,501 1,562 1,580 1,583 1,573 -2 -73 -71 -11 7 11

 35 to 39 years 1,666 1,543 1,536 1,573 1,585 1,587 1,497 169 46 39 76 88 90

 40 to 44 years 1,348 1,336 1,317 1,338 1,342 1,319 1,277 71 59 40 60 65 41

 45 to 49 years 1,052 1,018 1,020 1,018 1,002 1,011 ,932 120 86 88 86 70 79

 50 to 54 years 840 802 832 830 844 832 759 82 44 73 71 86 73

 55 to 59 years 537 542 525 526 528 524 427 110 115 98 100 101 97

 60 to 64 years 369 363 361 401 404 389 268 101 95 93 133 136 121

 65 to 69 years 228 230 213 192 238 231 124 104 106 90 68 114 107

 70 years and older 155 131 138 148 187 180 77 78 54 61 70 110 102
Table 2. Characteristics of the 1995 labor force, actual and as projected using the

participation rates projected in 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and 1991,

with the actual 1995 population and associated errors— continued

 Labor force (in thousands)

Labor force group Using rates published in -- Actual Errors due to participation rate projections1

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1995 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

 Women 11,353 11,001 10,810 10,789 10,758 10,607 10,140 1,213 861 670 649 618 468

 16 and 17 years 499 485 480 476 472 469 237 262 248 243 239 236 232

 18 and 19 years 289 211 201 245 241 230 374 -85 -163 -173 -129 -133 -144

 20 to 24 years 932 846 855 987 1000 938 1,179 -247 -333 -324 -192 -179 -241

 25 to 29 years 1,460 1,352 1,249 1,309 1,263 1,267 1,369 91 -18 -120 -60 -107 -103

 30 to 34 years 1,775 1,666 1,592 1,521 1,498 1,490 1,502 272 164 89 19 -4 -13

 35 to 39 years 1,793 1,696 1,686 1,593 1,591 1,537 1,545 248 151 141 48 46 -8

 40 to 44 years 1,449 1,428 1,418 1,406 1,404 1,344 1,320 129 108 98 86 84 24

 45 to 49 years 1,051 1,138 1,097 1,080 1,084 1,092 ,997 54 141 100 82 87 95

 50 to 54 years 788 787 870 847 835 830 731 57 56 140 116 104 99

 55 to 59 years 495 539 567 554 541 572 485 10 54 82 69 56 87

 60 to 64 years 366 374 397 404 398 392 249 117 125 148 155 149 143

 65 to 69 years 244 231 246 231 215 225 82 162 149 164 149 133 143

 70 years and older 213 247 152 138 217 223 70 142 176 82 67 146 153

Black 15,180 15,249 15,319 15,180 14,817 363 432 502 363

Asian and other 5,537 5,495 5,563 5,539 -1 -43 24

Hispanic 12,426 12,798 12,761 12,267 159 531 494

1

Difference from actual

1995 values
Table 3. Difference between the projected and actual labor

force, and between the original labor force

and one using the actual 1995 population, by

characteristic, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and

1991

[Numbers in thousands]

Labor force group Difference between the projected and the

actual 1995 labor force based on projections

made in 3⁄4

Errors due to population projections1

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Total -4,762 -917 -3,136 -706 911 1,781 -

16,433

-

10,924

-

10,007

-8,928 -9,061 -7,143

Men, 16 and older -3,750 -1,391 -2,079 -969 -141 788 -8,222 -5,227 -5,011 -4,367 -4,346 -3,218

Women, 16 and older -1,013 474 -1,058 263 1,052 993 -8,212 -5,697 -4,996 -4,562 -4,714 -3,924

White -2,658 443 -1,864 -264 1,350 1,933 -

12,837

-8,810 -7,894 -7,375 -7,507 -6,073

 Men -2,275 -389 -1,252 -675 80 807 -6,469 -4,332 -4,014 -3,611 -3,629 -2,750

 16 and 17 years 313 209 -55 22 33 4 -585 -668 -896 -822 -841 -870

 18 and 19 years -25 3 -94 -99 -115 -111 172 317 495 438 411 458

 20 to 24 years -569 -464 -323 -336 -366 -223 -261 -127 358 495 530 766

 25 to 29 years -671 -227 -150 -208 -198 27 -319 257 164 160 216 518

 30 to 34 years -561 -118 -55 94 76 231 -503 -60 -86 125 53 235

 35 to 39 years -400 181 48 133 187 247 -512 50 -129 -34 20 89

 40 to 44 years -77 122 53 107 124 122 -255 -174 -125 -38 -71 -56

 45 to 49 years -55 312 180 146 157 119 -352 30 -36 -55 -73 -67

 50 to 54 years 206 148 172 159 164 220 -54 -231 -105 -152 -159 -57

 55 to 59 years 24 3 16 -19 105 150 -477 -471 -472 -493 -373 -365

 60 to 64 years -29 -161 -347 -118 38 65 -1,046 -1,145 -1,343 -1,061 -1,016 -1,021

 65 to 69 years -257 -233 -427 -264 -46 11 -1,331 -1,150 -1,167 -1,197 -1,127 -1,094

 70 years and older -174 -164 -270 -292 -79 -55 -946 -959 -671 -977 -1,198 -1,285

 Women -383 832 -612 411 1,270 1,126 -6,368 -4,478 -3,880 -3,764 -3,878 -3,323

 16 and 17 years 343 86 -119 100 89 6 -53 -290 -450 -268 -307 -376

 18 and 19 years 253 114 -130 41 58 -42 309 446 417 379 407 404

 20 to 24 years 569 537 136 211 229 99 -67 388 673 383 358 550

 25 to 29 years 529 325 246 176 206 120 -395 -374 5 -34 -20 143

 30 to 34 years -141 384 400 391 299 140 -1,368 -244 -139 13 -115 -41

 35 to 39 years 353 487 415 444 451 310 203 61 -38 101 200 298

 40 to 44 years -5 358 5 158 242 252 -368 88 -197 -61 15 185

 45 to 49 years -650 -407 -210 -23 75 170 -823 -804 -293 -226 -202 -100

 50 to 54 years -462 -142 -194 -191 -29 76 -369 -137 -343 -546 -461 -421

 55 to 59 years -488 -346 -383 -262 -54 19 -579 -708 -707 -595 -518 -523

 60 to 64 years -255 -272 -254 -193 -106 39 -785 -887 -842 -885 -986 -904

 65 to 69 years -218 -151 -274 -239 -84 24 -923 -782 -928 -953 -886 -927

 70 years and older -211 -141 -250 -202 -106 -87 -1,151 -1,233 -1,038 -1,071 -1,362 -1,612
Table 3. Difference between the projected and actual labor

force, and between the original labor force

and one using the actual 1995 population, by

characteristic, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, and

1991— continued

[Numbers in thousands]

Labor force group Difference between the projected and the

actual 1995 labor force based on projections

made in 3⁄4

Errors due to population projections1

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Black and other -2,104 -1,360 -1,272 -442 -439 -152 -3,596 -2,115 -2,113 -1,554 -1,554 -1,070

 Men -1,475 -1,002 -827 -294 -221 -19 -1,753 -895 -997 -756 -717 -468

 16 and 17 years -80 -87 -68 3 11 3 -411 -412 -402 -332 -329 -337

 18 and 19 years -100 -118 -69 15 -7 -5 93 76 103 148 119 132

 20 to 24 years -273 -345 -226 -99 -136 -58 154 117 106 147 171 265

 25 to 29 years -254 -163 -163 -120 -110 -53 11 143 6 26 77 98

 30 to 34 years -155 -57 -55 -50 -49 5 -153 17 17 -39 -56 -5

 35 to 39 years -250 -12 -29 -15 -17 -11 -419 -58 -68 -91 -105 -101

 40 to 44 years -164 -33 -28 -19 -39 -11 -235 -92 -68 -80 -104 -53

 45 to 49 years -54 3 43 35 51 48 -174 -83 -45 -51 -19 -31

 50 to 54 years -87 -78 -96 -54 -51 -50 -168 -121 -169 -125 -136 -123

 55 to 59 years -15 -13 -15 94 98 84 -125 -128 -113 -5 -3 -13

 60 to 64 years -5 -22 -39 -23 36 30 -106 -117 -132 -156 -100 -91

 65 to 69 years -28 -56 -53 -28 -2 -6 -132 -162 -142 -96 -116 -113

 70 years and older -9 -20 -28 -32 -5 6 -87 -74 -89 -103 -115 -97

 Women -630 -359 -446 -149 -219 -134 -1,843 -1,220 -1,116 -798 -837 -601

 16 and 17 years 8 -62 -70 -3 -6 -14 -254 -310 -313 -242 -241 -246

 18 and 19 years -74 -106 -103 -18 -13 -30 11 57 70 111 120 114

 20 to 24 years 28 -90 -169 -32 -73 -43 275 243 155 160 106 198

 25 to 29 years 4 -2 -65 -81 -101 -72 -87 15 55 -21 5 30

 30 to 34 years 52 66 60 8 4 -10 -221 -98 -30 -11 8 2

 35 to 39 years -110 -22 -32 -9 -13 -56 -358 -173 -173 -57 -59 -48

 40 to 44 years -150 41 -8 -7 -2 21 -279 -67 -106 -93 -86 -3

 45 to 49 years -144 -56 47 21 7 11 -198 -197 -53 -62 -80 -84

 50 to 54 years -147 -72 -37 -20 -36 11 -204 -128 -176 -136 -140 -88

 55 to 59 years -106 -62 -36 2 -5 -8 -116 -116 -118 -67 -61 -95

 60 to 64 years -5 -5 12 12 -6 9 -122 -130 -136 -143 -155 -134

 65 to 69 years 30 40 -7 -8 35 40 -132 -109 -171 -157 -98 -103

 70 years and older -16 -29 -38 -14 -10 7 -159 -206 -120 -82 -157 -146

Black NA NA -21 241 303 285 NA NA -384 -191 -199 -78

Asian and other NA NA NA -685 -744 -439 NA NA NA -683 -700 -463

Hispanic NA NA NA -480 -328 -367 NA NA NA -639 -859 -861
Table 4. Difference between the 1995 labor force and the

projections made in

1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989,

and 1991

Labor force group Percentage point difference Absolute relative error

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Total 2.0 1.2 0.0 0.6 1.5 1.2 3.0 1.8 0.0 0.9 2.2 1.8

Men, 16 and older 1.8 1.1 0.3 0.3 1.3 1.3 2.4 1.5 0.4 0.4 1.8 1.8

Women, 16 and older 2.3 1.4 0.0 0.9 1.7 1.2 3.8 2.3 0.1 1.5 2.8 2.0

White 1.7 1.0 -0.3 0.4 1.4 1.2 2.6 1.5 0.4 0.6 2.1 1.8

 Men 2.0 1.3 0.1 0.2 1.2 1.2 2.6 1.7 0.1 0.2 1.5 1.5

 16 and 17 years 15.3 11.2 1.6 3.4 3.8 2.3 32.0 23.4 3.3 7.1 7.9 4.8

 18 and 19 years 10.9 10.5 5.7 3.6 2.7 1.4 15.6 15.1 8.2 5.2 3.9 2.0

 20 to 24 years 3.9 2.2 4.4 3.7 3.1 2.1 4.6 2.6 5.2 4.3 3.6 2.5

 25 to 29 years 0.3 0.3 1.3 0.6 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.4 1.4 0.7 1.3 1.0

 30 to 34 years 0.4 0.6 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.6 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9

 35 to 39 years 1.6 3.0 1.6 1.2 1.8 1.6 1.7 3.2 1.7 1.3 1.9 1.7

 40 to 44 years 2.6 2.4 1.5 1.3 1.7 1.1 2.8 2.6 1.6 1.4 1.8 1.2

 45 to 49 years 0.6 2.7 0.9 1.5 1.7 0.9 0.7 3.0 1.0 1.7 1.9 1.0

 50 to 54 years 1.8 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.0 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.5 2.4

 55 to 59 years 0.6 -0.2 0.1 -1.2 1.5 2.3 0.7 0.3 0.1 1.6 1.9 2.9

 60 to 64 years 0.5 -3.5 -8.0 -3.1 0.7 1.3 0.9 6.5 14.8 5.7 1.3 2.4

 65 to 69 years -5.9 -5.6 -10.6 -7.0 -1.5 -0.1 21.6 20.5 38.7 25.6 5.5 0.4

 70 years and older -1.0 -2.0 -3.4 -3.7 -1.0 -0.7 8.1 17.4 29.1 31.9 8.8 6.2

 Women 1.7 1.0 -0.6 0.7 1.7 1.2 3.0 1.8 0.9 1.3 3.0 2.1

 16 and 17 years 15.8 5.9 -1.8 5.7 5.3 1.8 33.9 12.7 3.8 12.2 11.4 3.9

 18 and 19 years 16.7 9.9 0.3 5.4 6.0 1.5 25.8 15.3 0.4 8.3 9.3 2.3

 20 to 24 years 15.5 12.6 6.7 6.3 6.5 3.3 21.4 17.4 9.3 8.7 9.0 4.6

 25 to 29 years 13.5 6.8 5.8 4.0 4.4 1.8 17.8 9.0 7.7 5.3 5.8 2.4

 30 to 34 years 2.4 5.4 5.7 4.5 3.5 0.9 3.2 7.2 7.6 6.0 4.7 1.2

 35 to 39 years 6.6 5.5 4.7 4.9 5.0 3.1 8.7 7.2 6.2 6.5 6.6 4.1

 40 to 44 years 1.7 4.7 0.5 2.1 3.1 3.0 2.1 6.0 0.6 2.7 3.9 3.8

 45 to 49 years -8.3 -6.8 -4.2 -0.7 0.6 1.7 10.6 8.7 5.4 0.9 0.8 2.2

 50 to 54 years -9.6 -4.0 -4.8 -4.6 -1.9 -0.3 13.4 5.6 6.7 6.4 2.6 0.4

 55 to 59 years -10.0 -8.1 -8.7 -6.4 -2.2 -0.8 16.7 13.5 14.5 10.7 3.7 1.4

 60 to 64 years -4.9 -6.5 -6.0 -4.7 -2.8 0.4 12.8 17.0 15.7 12.3 7.3 1.1

 65 to 69 years -4.7 -3.4 -6.0 -5.3 -2.0 0.3 25.9 18.7 33.1 29.2 10.9 1.8

 70 years and older -1.6 -1.4 -2.3 -1.8 -1.0 -0.8 30.0 26.4 42.4 32.7 18.1 14.4
Table 4. Difference between the 1995 labor force and the

projections made in

1980, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989,

and 1991continued

Labor force group Percentage point difference Absolute relative error

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Black and other 2.7 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.2 4.2 2.2 2.5 2.2 2.4 1.9

 Men 0.6 -0.1 1.0 1.1 1.8 1.7 0.8 0.2 1.4 1.5 2.5 2.4

 16 and 17 years -5.1 -5.2 -2.2 3.3 4.3 2.8 17.1 17.4 7.4 11.0 14.3 9.3

 18 and 19 years -3.0 -5.1 2.7 7.8 4.2 3.2 5.8 9.9 5.2 15.0 8.1 6.1

 20 to 24 years -3.5 -6.0 2.3 3.7 1.2 3.4 4.7 8.1 3.1 4.9 1.6 4.5

 25 to 29 years 1.2 -2.8 -2.7 0.7 1.7 1.9 1.4 3.2 3.1 0.8 1.9 2.2

 30 to 34 years 6.4 -0.6 -1.0 1.1 1.8 1.9 7.3 0.7 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.2

 35 to 39 years 6.6 5.8 4.5 5.9 6.2 4.6 7.7 6.8 5.3 6.9 7.3 5.4

 40 to 44 years 6.3 3.3 3.5 3.3 1.9 2.7 7.3 3.8 4.0 3.8 2.2 3.1

 45 to 49 years 5.7 1.7 4.8 4.6 6.1 4.8 6.9 2.0 5.8 5.6 7.4 5.8

 50 to 54 years 4.0 4.7 2.1 2.3 2.5 1.9 5.0 5.9 2.6 2.9 3.1 2.4

 55 to 59 years -0.5 -1.6 -2.0 5.2 5.7 3.1 0.8 2.4 3.0 7.8 8.6 4.6

 60 to 64 years -0.1 0.3 -3.1 -7.6 2.1 0.6 0.1 0.7 6.4 15.8 4.4 1.3

 65 to 69 years -7.5 -10.4 -9.5 -8.4 -3.7 -4.6 28.9 40.0 36.5 32.3 14.2 17.7

 70 years and older -0.9 -2.3 -3.2 -4.1 -1.1 0.1 9.4 24.9 34.7 44.9 12.1 1.0

 Women 4.6 2.8 2.2 1.6 1.2 0.8 7.9 4.8 3.8 2.8 2.1 1.4

 16 and 17 years 8.7 -1.7 -3.1 2.8 2.3 0.8 28.8 5.7 10.4 9.2 7.6 2.6

 18 and 19 years -0.6 -5.2 -4.7 2.3 3.0 -0.3 1.3 10.4 9.4 4.5 5.9 0.7

 20 to 24 years 12.7 7.1 1.8 4.9 2.5 2.7 20.2 11.3 2.8 7.8 3.9 4.3

 25 to 29 years 14.6 9.4 5.8 2.4 1.3 0.9 20.6 13.3 8.2 3.4 1.8 1.3

 30 to 34 years 14.5 9.8 9.3 4.8 4.7 2.1 20.1 13.6 12.9 6.6 6.5 2.9

 35 to 39 years 9.0 7.8 7.2 6.5 6.4 2.9 12.1 10.5 9.7 8.7 8.6 3.9

 40 to 44 years 1.3 7.7 4.7 3.4 3.7 4.3 1.7 10.1 6.1 4.4 4.8 5.6

 45 to 49 years -2.9 -3.0 4.5 2.4 1.3 0.9 4.0 4.1 6.1 3.2 1.7 1.2

 50 to 54 years -5.2 0.2 3.6 2.0 0.4 4.2 7.9 0.3 5.5 3.1 0.6 6.4

 55 to 59 years -8.7 -7.5 -4.4 -3.4 -4.2 -5.1 14.7 12.6 7.4 5.7 7.1 8.6

 60 to 64 years 2.2 0.3 2.5 0.3 -2.1 -0.6 6.4 0.8 7.2 0.8 6.2 1.8

 65 to 69 years 3.9 6.5 -0.7 -1.8 4.2 4.7 32.2 53.4 5.3 14.3 34.7 38.7

 70 years and older -1.0 -2.6 -3.2 -1.8 -1.2 0.0 18.3 48.2 59.6 33.9 21.7 0.7

Median 1.2 0.3 1.0 2.0 1.8 1.7

Mean absolute percent error 11.6 11.2 10.2 9.4 6.4 4.2
Chart 2. Range of labor force projections to 1995

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

1980 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

Millions

High

Middle

Low