Decline in man-weeks worked
Labour market and earnings;Labour market and earnings
akumnd, Labour force survey, seasonally-adjusted figures, LFS, labour market, employees, unemployed, economically active, man-weeks worked, labour forceUnemployment , Employment , Labour market and earnings

Labour force survey, seasonally-adjusted figuresOctober 2000



This is an archived release.

Go to latest release

Decline in man-weeks worked

Man-weeks worked declined by 14 000 from July to October 2000 according to seasonally adjusted figures from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). In the same period the labour force increased by 7 000 persons.

 Labour force, employed persons and man-weeks worked. Seasonally adjusted figures in thousands

Seasonally adjusted figures indicate a decline of 14 000 man-weeks worked from July to October 2000, after a top around May.

The employment increased by 6 000 persons from July to October 2000.

 Unemployed(Labour Force Survey - LFS), registered unemployed and  registered unemployed + government measures to promote employment. Seasonally adjusted figures in thousand

The unemployment (LFS) in per cent of the labour force where unchanged from July to October 2000.

The purpose of adjusting for seasonal variations is to give figures of changes for the last three months and to describe the development during the last year. Please use unadjusted figures from the LFS in order to get figures of level.


The series are made by seasonally adjusting monthly figures from the LFS. The levels are then corrected to make the yearly averages of the seasonally adjusted figures equal to the corresponding unadjusted figures from the LFS.

In order to reduce uncertainty the presented series are three months moving averages of the seasonally adjusted figures. For instance the figure from September is the average of the estimates from August - October.

Previous to the seasonal adjustment, adjustments are made for changes in the survey sample plan, the way the questions are being asked and for the method of estimation. We also make adjustments for holidays that fall in random months every year.


Quality tests from our seasonal adjustment program X12-ARIMA show that the unemployment figures are very uncertain. This may have some connection to the fact that some of the calendar-effects already are adjusted for. However the main problem is probably that the random component is larger than then seasonal component. In addition there are only a few unemployed persons, which may result in the uncertainty being considerable. The figures should therefor be used with caution.