One More Thing: The Truth About Un- & Under-employment

Last one in today's multi-post rant, I promise.

Every time I hear a story on the "official" unemployment numbers, usually on WNYC, I want to throw my radio at the wall.  It's so rarely mentioned that the monthly percentage hardly reflects the reality of joblessness, declining income, and underemployment.

Consider those whose unemployment ran out.

Consider those whose new jobs pay a fraction of what they were previously making.

Or those who stopped filing because they were contracted for sufficient work... but were never paid for it.

Paul Krugman's editorial today brings up a related point: I can't tell you how many of my still-employed friends are now doing twice or three times the work they were previously doing before their colleagues were laid off and never replaced.  Here's where "structural unemployment" is factual: the two full-time jobs I have been courted for in the past several months were not individual jobs at all, but two or three distinct roles packed into one.  It was both insulting and deflating that these companies (small businesses where hours and duties are typically already demanding) sought mid- to high-level director and higher positions with expertise in two to three distinct areas.  One of the two companies had been looking to fill the role for over a year - no surprise that someone who has senior level experience in sales, publicity, and marketing either doesn't exist or isn't willing to work for small-company-salary.  Oh, and they clearly wanted someone under 35.  It's as ridiculous as the idea of a woman looking for a husband with a 100-point checklist of perfection.  Unless you're Angelina Jolie, or in this case, Google or Goldman, time for a reality check.