Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from November 2024 that was published in December 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Last month, the national unemployment rate rose to 4.2% (up one-tenth of a percentage point), but only 6 states saw their state-level unemployment go up while one state saw a decrease in unemployment and all the rest saw no significant change in state employment levels.
US employers added more than a quarter of a million jobs at the same time, but only 4 states plus Washington DC recorded a net increase in payroll figures, while the remaining 46 states saw no noteworthy change over the month.
Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary for October 2024.
Nevada had the highest unemployment rate last month at 5.7%, which is up almost one-tenth of a point over the month and about four-tenths of a point over the last year.
Washington DC has the next highest unemployment rate at 5.6%, followed by California at 5.4% and Illinois at 5.3% unemployment.
Those are the only states that currently have unemployment rates above the national average of 4.2%, with Idaho having the next highest unemployment rate at 3.7%.
Last month, 6 states recorded a higher unemployment rate than the month before, led by Alabama, Maine, and Mississippi, which all saw their unemployment rates climb from 2.9% to 3.1% over the course of the month. Iowa (now 3.1%), Kansas (now 3.5%), and Vermont (now 2.4%) all saw the unemployment rates in their states increase by 0.1%.
Over the last year, 26 states have experienced rising unemployment, with the largest percentage increases going to South Carolina (plus 1.8%), Rhode Island (plus 1.4%), and Colorado (plus 1.0%).
South Dakota is now 1 month shy of hitting the 1-year mark of consecutive months with the lowest unemployment rate among states - this month holding steady month-to-month at 1.9%.
The next lowest unemployment rate was 2.4% - recorded by both North Dakota and Vermont - which is more than half of a percentage point above South Dakota’s level, which further reinforces just how strong South Dakota’s labor market has been.
Delaware was the only state that experienced a net reduction in unemployment over the month, dropping one-tenth of a point from 4.0% to 3.9%.
Over the last 12 months, 6 states have recorded a net decrease in unemployment, but the largest reduction by far occurred in Connecticut where unemployment fell by 1.2% over the last year, followed by Wisconsin and Arizona, which each fell by only half a point each.
No state recorded net job losses over the last month or the last year.
Employers in the state of Florida added more net jobs last month than any other state, increasing payrolls by more than 60 thousand, while Washington state had the next largest gain, adding a little more than 30 thousand net jobs over the month.
Washington also had the largest percentage gain, increasing their workforce by 0.9%, followed by Alaska and Washington DC at 0.7% each, Florida at 0.6%, and Kansas at plus 0.5%.
Over the last year, 33 states have recorded statistically significant increases in net jobs.
Texas and California had the largest net increase in raw job figures at about 274 thousand and 208 thousand, respectively, while Idaho had the largest percentage growth (3.1%) followed by Alaska (2.8%), Missouri (2.7%), and Montana (2.4%).
Not much has changed on the surface, but several external factors are in flux that could significantly shift the economic outlook over the coming months (and years) depending upon how they resolve.
The current report is the third to last such dataset that will be compiled by the outgoing Biden administration, and there are still a number of uncertainties that remain about the priorities of the incoming administration and how the transfer of power will impact the economy and labor market, both in the short and long term.
While Congress was able to avert a government shutdown at the end of last week by passing a last-minute continuing resolution, that bill will only keep the government funded for a couple of months through the middle of March when Republicans will control all 3 branches of the federal government, and how they elect to respond to current inter and intra party disputes will have significant ramifications outside of DC, of course.
The end of last week also brought another quarter-point interest rate cut from the Federal Reserve, but that news wasn’t entirely well-received given that it was accompanied by statements from Fed Chair Jerome Powell indicating the Fed will probably only cut another half point from interest rates over the course of 2025, which is half of what many analysts were expecting.
The stock market ended the week on an upturn due to better-than-expected inflation data, but that upturn followed nearly 2 weeks of consecutive losses punctuated by an almost 3% drop on the day of the Fed’s announcement, and while the markets are up close to 10% over the last 6 months, they are down more than 2% over the week/month.
While there are certainly many questions up in the air about how the economic road ahead will unfold, we are unlikely to get many meaningful answers for at least another month and likely more.
Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer blog.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from November 2024 that was published in December 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The national unemployment rate average ticked up one-tenth of a point to 4.2% last month as US employers added 227 thousand jobs, outpacing the approximate 200 thousand jobs that economists were predicting.
The number of unemployed people held comparably steady at about 7.1 million, as well, with about 1.7 million (17%) qualifying as long-term unemployed. The number of unemployed people has risen by around 800 thousand over the last 12 months, while the number of long-term unemployed has risen by about 500 thousand over the same time period.
Those figures, however, do not account for the nearly 5.5 million people who are not counted as unemployed because they have not been actively looking for work in the past 4 weeks.
Also, it’s worth noting that about 4.5 million people are currently employed part time for economic reasons, which is up from about 4 million people who fell into that category a year ago.
Altogether, the figures show general resilience and a strong rebound from last month’s hurricane and strike-induced dip, but the full economic picture is not entirely sunny, and evidence of some softening in the labor market persists.
That said, there’s not much of said evidence to be found in the jobs numbers, however, with 227 net new payroll entries over the month, but it could be argued that the concentration of new jobs across a relatively few industries is less than ideal.
For example, the healthcare industry and leisure & hospitality industry each added about 54 thousand net jobs, which collectively account for nearly half of the total job additions last month. Further, both the healthcare and leisure & hospitality job figures last month were essentially on par with their monthly averages, meaning that last month’s payroll additions were essentially right on the trendline.
Employment figures in government and transportation equipment manufacturing each rose by about a little over 30 thousand jobs, while the social assistance industry saw a net addition of about 20 thousand jobs.
There was little to no noteworthy change in the other industries with the exception of the retail industry which saw a net loss of nearly 30 thousand jobs over the course of November.
Average hourly pay continued its general upward trend climbing 13 cents to $35.61 per hour while the average workweek climbed one-tenth of an hour to 34.3 hours per week.
Average hourly pay is up 4% over the last 12 months.
In light of this most recent batch of economic data, last month’s report of only 12 thousand new jobs looks more like an outlier than evidence of a rapid cooling in the job market.
Although the upward revision to last month’s numbers of about 36 thousand jobs could look huge by some measures (plus 200% upward revision) or fairly insignificant by others (post-revision new payroll entries in October were still only about 25% of the average 186 thousand new jobs added each month over the last 12), the reality is that last month’s performance reflected hurricane and strike related data aberrations more than changing macroeconomic conditions.
Despite this positive jobs report, markets have not been dissuaded from believing another interest rate cut is likely in store when Federal Reserve leadership convenes again later this month.
Still, the outlook is not entirely positive across the board, with a decreasing number in job postings across nearly every industry, for example, indicating the job market is expected to continue cooling - which is in part why continued rate cuts are forecast.
What likely matters more at the moment than the bigger picture environmental factors that are shaping the current economic trends, however, are the political and regulatory factors that will begin impacting the labor market and US/world economies in general when control of the White House and US senate changes hands in the new year.
Even with Republicans in control of all 3 branches of the federal government, there remains a great deal of uncertainty both about which proposals they will pursue and prioritize, many of which can have significant impacts to the economy and labor force (e.g. tariffs, taxes, collective bargaining legislation).
That lack of clarity will begin coming into focus in 2025.
Check out the Mployer blog here.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from October 2024 that was published in November 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
There was no significant change in the national unemployment rate, which held steady at 4.1% over the month, nor was there any meaningful movement in national payroll figures, which fell far short of expectations and amounted to a net increase of only about 12,000 jobs.
The vast majority of states saw comparably little change in their in-state unemployment rates and payroll figures, although 3 states recorded an increase in unemployment throughout October (while 1 state recorded an unemployment rate reduction) and 2 states recorded a net decrease in jobs.
Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary for October 2024.
Washington DC had the highest unemployment rate among ‘states’ for the 6th month in a row - holding steady at 5.7% - joined this month by Nevada which saw its unemployment rate climb by one-tenth of a point over the month up from 5.6%.
California and Illinois are the only other states to have unemployment rates higher than the US national average. Those rates are currently 5.4% and 5.3%, respectively.
Over the course of the last month, Iowa is the only other state that saw its unemployment rate rise by a significant margin, rising from 2.9% to 3%.
In the last year, 25 states have seen their unemployment rates go up, led by South Carolina, Rhode Island, and Indiana with unemployment rate increases of 1.7%, 1.2%, and 0.9%, respectively over the last 12 months.
For the 10th consecutive month, South Dakota has recorded the lowest unemployment rate in the country, dropping one-tenth of a point to 1.9% after holding steady at 2% unemployment for several months prior.
Those figures put South Dakota’s unemployment rate nearly half a point below the next lowest unemployment rate among states, which is Vermont at 2.3%, followed by North Dakota and New Hampshire at 2.4% and 2.5%, respectively.
Besides South Dakota, the only other states to record a decrease in unemployment rate over October are Connecticut and Delaware, which saw their in-state unemployment rates reduced by 0.2% each last month.
Over the last year, 6 states in total have seen a net reduction in unemployment, with the largest unemployment rate decrease over the last 12 months being recorded by Connecticut (minus 1.2%), followed by Arizona (minus 0.6%), Maine and Wisconsin (minus 0.5%), Arkansas (minus 0.4%), and Kentucky (minus 0.2%).
Florida and Washington state both recorded net job losses last month amounting to about 37 thousand jobs each representing 0.4% and 1% in-state workforce losses, respectively.
No state recorded net job losses over the last 12 months.
No state recorded a significant net increase in jobs over the last month, but just over half of all states (27) recorded net job gains over the last year.
In terms of raw job figures, Texas saw the largest number of new job additions at about 275 thousand payroll entries through the last 12 months, followed by California at about 212 thousand, and New York and Florida at about 133 thousand net jobs each.
Idaho has the largest net job gains over the last year as a percentage of in-state workforce (plus 3.1%), followed by Missouri and South Carolina at plus 2.7% each.
In some ways, this latest market employment report looks like a picture of stability at face value given that the unemployment and job numbers have barely budged since last month’s report.
What’s missing from the report, however, is consistency and predictability, as evidenced by the job forecasts exceeding the actual number of net new jobs recorded by a factor of 10.
To be clear, these job numbers are difficult to take at face value, as well, in light of the disruptions to both data collection and hiring caused by external factors such as hurricanes and strikes that occurred when this data was being reported and compiled.
That said, given that the average monthly job growth over the past year has been nearly 200 thousand net new jobs per month, it is exceedingly unlikely that those external factors can account for the entirety of the shortfall.
The labor market certainly seems to be continuing to soften to some degree, though the extent remains to be seen, but that softening was very much expected and in fact is an intended result of the interest rate hikes to help reduce inflation without triggering a recession.
With inflation down to 2.6% annualized and no apparent imminent recession on the way, and with the Federal Reserve already having cut baseline interest rates by half a point over the last couple of months while signaling more cuts for 2025, the soft-landing sought by the Fed seems to have been successfully executed.
Of course, there is no hard cut-off date by which the success of the interest-rate-hiking campaign and the soft landing will ultimately be evaluated, and the current inertia of the labor market could result in continued softening even with interest rates already starting to come down.
While there is no set bookend for evaluating the Fed’s soft-landing, however, there likely is a bookend on Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s remaining time in his current role given that his term is set to expire in May of 2026.
Assuming Chairman Powell serves out the remainder of his term, which he appears intent to do, we can reasonably expect continuity at the Fed and whatever economic consistency that continuity helps foster for nearly another year and a half after power in the White House and US Senate changes hands in the new year.
The bigger questions in the nearer term are what new policies we are going to see as a result of the shifting power (e.g. tariffs, tax cuts, work visas, labor regulations) and how those policies affect the current economic trajectory and momentum.
We will be keeping an eye on those policies as they emerge and take shape through the governing process in the months ahead.
Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer blog.
Key Takeaways
ARTICLE | 3 Questions That Will Determine How The 2024 Elections Impact Employer-Sponsored Healthcare
The 2024 elections are now in the books, and while votes are still being counted and will continue being counted for the next week or two at least, there are only a few handfuls of races at this point where there remains much uncertainty about the outcome.
As of this writing, control of the US House of Representatives has yet to be officially called, but in order to take the majority Democrats would essentially need to flip 6 of 8 swing districts that have yet to announce winners, all of which are seats held by Republicans currently, so it’s a tall order for Dems to say the least.
Given these odds and given that Donald Trump and a majority of Senate Republicans have already decisively won their respective elections, it is very likely the case that Republicans will soon control just about all the levers of power in the federal government, including a supermajority of Republican appointees on the Supreme Court.
Although the Senate majority will not be filibuster-proof, which is the one check on power that Democratic politicians in the federal government will maintain over the next 2 years, it’s fair to say that Republicans have a pretty clear path for the foreseeable future to enact whatever policies they choose.
With that in mind, we wanted to take a look at the 3 most significant open questions concerning how the incoming GOP majority will govern with respect to the US healthcare system - specifically in terms of how such changes may impact employer-sponsored health insurance - in order to shine some light on where we may be heading in the coming term.
One of the biggest unanswered questions at the moment with the greatest potential to impact employer-sponsored healthcare is whether or not the GOP will attempt again to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and if so, what if anything will they replace it with?
Of all the potential changes a future Trump administration and Republican Congress/Judiciary might make/allow, repealing the ACA may have the most far-reaching and significant implications from an employer’s perspective.
For employers, repeal of the ACA as-is would mean not only the elimination of penalties for failing to offer minimum-standard-meeting health insurance to employees (or possibly the reduction of those penalties in the event of repeal and replace), repeal of the ACA would also remove/reduce the minimum standards that those policies must meet in order to be brought to market in the first place.
From a practical standpoint, the elimination or reduced efficacy of the exchange system will likely have some major repercussions as well, as will ending coverage protection for people with pre-existing conditions, both of which will increase the perceived value of strong employer-sponsored benefit packages and can support talent attraction and retention efforts.
There are also a number of somewhat less significant potential outcomes that could be expected in the wake of ACA repeal and are still impactful enough to be worth noting, including reduced administrative requirements/costs and reduced or eliminated wellness program subsidies.
The downsides to eliminating everything from subsidies to preexisting condition coverage protections and the exchanges themselves will be substantial, however, given that the number of uninsured people would climb significantly in each case and the costs resulting from their lack of preventative care and emergency room dependence will ultimately make its way to commercial group plans and employer bottom lines.
To be clear, it is not at all a foregone conclusion that the GOP will use their control of government to repeal the ACA within the next couple of years.
For one, the ACA was only about 7 years old the last time that the GOP was in power and initially attempted to repeal it, and it’s been about 7 years since then during which time ACA provisions and expectations have become all the more entrenched within our healthcare system.
Further, while the outspoken calls for repeal of the ACA from both Republican leadership and Republican rank-and-file alike have never gone away entirely, they have become much quieter in recent years, perhaps partly in response to the pandemic and the attention it drew to both public and personal health matters.
There is certainly a degree of disagreement within the Republican party about the best path forward in terms of improving the US healthcare system, especially as it relates to the ACA, and in fact many individual Republican politicians have had different views on these matters at different times themselves, adding additional complication to the task of anticipating how it will play out when power transfers in the new year.
In a previous piece, we covered some of President-elect Donald Trump’s positions on various healthcare-related issues including the ACA as outlined by the actions he took during his previous administration as well as statements he made on the topic at the time and since.
Early in his first term, for example, Trump supported the attempted repeal of the ACA, but it is not at all certain that he will support doing so again given competing priorities and given that the healthcare exchanges and ACA infrastructure are further established and ingrained in our healthcare system now than when repeal last failed.
In fact, in a statement from March of this year, Trump said that he was not running to ‘terminate’ the ACA and instead wanted to improve it and make it less expensive, although he did not supply further detail as to how these goals would be accomplished.
During his first term, Trump did implement some ACA cost-saving measures such as allowing enhanced ACA direct enrollment through online brokers and reducing funding for outreach and enrollment assistance, but he also weakened individual mandate enforcement, resulting in reduced revenue to offset the costs of the program.
If cost-cutting is the goal and if they revive the strategy of reshaping the ACA via relatively small changes as opposed to a one-fell-swoop overhaul/repeal, it’s a good bet that the premium tax credits through the exchanges will not be renewed when they expire in 2025, for one.
Exempting employers from ACA contraception coverage requirements is another action the previous Trump administration took and the future Trump administration is likely to revisit, as is reinstating short-term non-ACA-compliant insurance options, as well.
Of course, Trump isn’t the only Republican leader who has offered somewhat mixed messages with regard to the future of the ACA.
After declaring ‘no Obamacare’ at a rally in Pennsylvania, when reports interpreted this statement as an indication of his intent to repeal the ACA, Johnson clarified that is not what he said.
Trump’s running mate and soon-to-be Vice President JD Vance, on the other hand, has signaled more direct support for the ACA, even telling an anecdote at the vice presidential debate about how his mother bought health insurance via Obamacare.
That said, Vance has also floated proposals for plans that undermine and run counter to the ACA, like allowing health insurers to stratify their groups which would reduce premium expenses for younger and healthier people but would cause them to increase significantly for older people and people with pre-existing conditions.
Perhaps the biggest question mark about the future of the ACA involves the incoming Senate Majority leader. With Mitch McConnell set to step down as top Republican in the Senate, however, and with no obvious successor at the moment, there is no clear answer about how the ACA will be approached by the leader of the House of Congress that is likely to play the most significant role in determining the future of the ACA.
One fairly consistent theme across much of the ideology expressed by Republicans has been giving more power to states in making policy decisions in many situations.
In Trump’s first term, we saw this transfer of power manifest via Medicaid block grants and allowing states to mandate work requirements, for example, and has reemerged in Trump’s promises for his second term as well, exemplified by the stated plan to dismantle the Department of Education and allow each state to manage its internal public education without much federal assistance or oversight.
As laws and regulations become decentralized, however, keeping up with compliance can become more cumbersome, especially for large employers operating in multiple states, and that problem gets amplified as the variance in rules between states grows over time.
Furthermore, differences in policy from one state to another can have significant effects on attracting and retaining talent in some areas of the country, which can be a benefit to attraction and retention efforts in cases such as low/no income tax states, but state-level policy can be a detriment to talent attraction and attention when those policies are contentious and considered off-putting to various groups of potential candidates, especially when it comes to health issues.
There are more than a few such contentious state health-related policy considerations that can affect candidate perception of a potential relocation site including issues ranging from disability accommodations to gender-affirming care access and vaccine mandates, but there is no more contentious now-state-level healthcare issue than abortion, which has significant implications for employers not only with regard to talent recruitment but also family planning as it relates to business operational efficiency.
While some Republican leaders have called for a national abortion ban over the last couple of years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Trump has repeatedly stated that he favors leaving abortion up to the states and that he will not sign a national abortion ban.
Speaker Johnson, however, appears less opposed to a national abortion ban, but he recently stated that he thinks it would be too soon to introduce such a ban within the next year without having first built political consensus for such a measure.
Perhaps the biggest question marks surrounding these statements for both supporters and opponents of abortion rights, however, is whether or not the statements refer exclusively to an outright ban or if they also encompass achieving the same or similar results via other means, such as banning abortion drug mifepristone, enacting fetal personhood, and/or legislating additional abortion restrictions that don’t constitute a total national ban.
Even in the event of additional national abortion restrictions of some kind, however, it’s important to keep in mind that those restrictions are likely to set a minimum standard that states can then go beyond in terms of implementing additional restrictions if they elect to do so.
As a result, both the perception and the reality of abortion access and the correlated access to other reproductive healthcare may continue to grow as factors influencing candidates’ willingness to work in certain locations.
Further, a piecemeal approach to abortion and reproductive healthcare access across states will make issues involving contraception access all the more relevant, especially in places with more limited abortion access.
As already noted, Trump exempted employers from complying with ACA contraception requirements based on moral and religious grounds, which is a policy that seems likely to be reinstated.
That policy, however, may make certain aspects of family planning considerably more complicated for a large number of employees, which in turn may negatively impact employers not only by shrinking the talent pool of labor willing to work for some employers in the first place but also by reducing the potential availability of the labor that is accessible to them as a result of employees having less control over if and when they have children.
In attempting to reform the healthcare system absent successfully repealing ACA, the first Trump administration turned much of its attention to addressing the rapidly rising costs of care.
Some of those cost-saving measures that were implemented were systemic reforms that share wide bi-partisan support such as efforts to lower prescription drug prices, increase cost transparency, and improve provider billing practices, all of which are goals that the Biden administration has pursued in the interim as well, so there shouldn’t be a much of a shift on these fronts when Trump retakes office.
The Biden administration, however, did not continue some other measures related to privatization and consolidation that the first Trump administration implemented with an aim to reduce healthcare expenses, for example promoting Medicare Advantage at the expense of Medicaid and showing a greater willingness to greenlight mergers and acquisitions across the healthcare business spectrum.
A second Trump administration is expected to continue its support for both Medicare Advantage and a robust M&A environment in the healthcare space, which will likely be a benefit to companies that are able to join forces and diversify via merger, but the ultimate impact on costs for employer-sponsored plans from these consolidations remains to be seen.
As healthcare and healthcare-adjacent companies consolidate, grow, and absorb accounts and market share over the next couple of years, employers would be wise to stay proactive in working with their insurance brokers and consultants to monitor how the shifting landscape may impact coverage going forward as policies change hands and terms and conditions evolve.
There are several reasons that there are still major questions about how the GOP will approach healthcare despite the fact that the president-elect has previously held office and just completed a years-long campaign that included major media interviews, two debates, and quite a few political rallies.
In terms of historical data, we of course know what Trump did the last time he was president when he also happened to start the term with majority support in both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court, but that evidence of action is somewhat incomplete given how much time and resources the GOP invested in repealing the ACA only to come up a few votes short.
After unsuccessfully repealing and replacing the ACA, many of the other healthcare-related policy changes enacted in Trump’s first term felt more like afterthoughts than a fully formed representation of Republican healthcare goals at the time, and as noted above, full repeal of the ACA seems less likely now than it did then.
As for why we don’t have better information about Trump and the GOP’s healthcare plans going forward, the fault largely lies with the voters in a sense. Since election polling this cycle consistently revealed that healthcare was not one of the most pressing issues on voters’ minds, candidates up and down the ticket on both sides of the aisle largely neglected the topic on the campaign trail, and the media did the same for the same reason.
It’s most likely not the case, however, that healthcare became less of a priority to voters than it has been over the last 20 years, especially still living in the aftermath of a recent global pandemic. It’s probable that other issues like the economy, immigration, and abortion have become more urgent in recent years in a lot of voters’ minds and they simply jumped to the front of the line.
Regardless of why we know relatively little about the GOP’s healthcare priorities, assuming that Republicans do ultimately hold onto the House of Representatives when the final vote tally is complete, at this point it shouldn’t take long for those priorities to become clear.
Although their majorities will be slim in Congress, Republicans and Republicans alone are likely to be setting the agenda in a matter of months, and we’ll be back to weigh in with our take as those plans come into focus.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from October 2024 that was published in November 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The unemployment rate held steady at 4.1% for the second straight month, while US employers added around 12 thousand jobs, which was about 90% below growth estimates.
Not only was the labor market essentially unchanged over the month, there also wasn’t much noteworthy change over the year in terms of the unemployment rate, which rose just three-tenths of a percent from 3.8% over the last 12 months.
The number of people who qualify as long-term unemployed after remaining jobless for at least 27 weeks also showed little movement at about 1.6 million people, as did the number of people not currently in the labor force but want a job despite not actively looking for one (7.3 million).
To be clear, however, while most of these metrics were fairly consistent from month to month, seeing the number of new payroll entries fall so far beneath the predicted levels does represent a significant departure from the norm in recent years.
Still, the vast majority of industries recorded little to no meaningful change in payroll entries over the month, including construction, natural resource extraction, wholesale, retail, information services, transportation & warehousing, and leisure & hospitality.
The healthcare industry saw the largest number of new jobs last month at 52 thousand, which is just below the average monthly growth recorded in the healthcare industry over the past 12 months.
The government sector recorded an increase of about 40 thousand jobs last month, as well, which was similarly in line with the monthly average of about 43 thousand.
The number of temporary employees and manufacturing employees, however, declined by about 50 thousand each over the course of October, with manufacturing strikes playing a significant role in the latter reduction.
Meanwhile, the average workweek was essentially unchanged at 34.3 hours per week while average hourly pay spiked 13 cents for the second straight month based on initially-reported figures, rising to $35.46 per hour and representing a 0.4% increase over the month before.
From one perspective, this report looks like the picture of stability - with practically no perceptible change to either the unemployment rate or the payroll figures. Taking that angle, this report may represent a reversion to the mean after a couple of years when the market has been particularly hot, but it is generally indicative of business as usual.
From another perspective, this report looks like the job growth figures just fell off of a cliff, coming up about 100 thousand jobs short of forecasts and almost 200 thousand short of average monthly job growth over the past year. This vantage point might suggest that recession is imminent.
The reality is that this report largely represents an incomplete picture and may in fact not be a fair reflection of the current state of the labor market. Factors such as Hurricane Milton, Hurricane Helen, and the Boeing strike among others have potentially skewed the jobs data via disruptions not only in the ability of companies to conduct businesses, service customers, and hire employees according to demand, but there have also been disruptions in the data collection process that could be influencing the report, as well.
That said, the job numbers from the last couple of months were also revised downward in the latest report by more than 100 thousand collectively, the unemployment rate was stabilized in part by job-seekers at least temporarily abandoning the job hunt, and the data collection period was still within statistically acceptable ranges despite being cut short.
Put more succinctly, hurricanes and strikes significantly impacted the latest employment release, but the softening we may be seeing in the job market may go beyond those impacts alone.
For one, the upcoming elections and the uncertainty surrounding the distribution of power among state and federal offices alike may well be influencing business decisions in the short term before some of those uncertainties are resolved.
In any case, both hurricane season and election season will be over in a matter of weeks and we’ll get a better look at how the markets and economy are likely to respond heading into the new year.
Check out the Mployer blog here.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from September 2024 that was published in October 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The US unemployment rate average came down about one-tenth of a point for the second straight month, falling from 4.2% to 4.1% over the course of September.
The overall economic picture remains one of stability, however, with 44 states reporting no significant change in unemployment rate during the month.
There were, however, only 5 states plus Washington DC that saw an increase in unemployment rate, while only 1 state saw its unemployment rate drop in a meaningful way.
At the same time, US employers saw about a quarter million new additions to their payrolls, but only 5 states and Washington DC recorded a net increase in jobs while only 1 state saw a net decrease.
Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary for October 2024.
The latest report marks the 5th straight month in a row that Washington DC has claimed the highest unemployment rate, holding steady at 5.7% month to month.
Nevada wasn’t far behind at 5.6% - and worse, Nevada’s rate increased one-tenth of a point over the month climbing to 5.5%, so it’s moving in the wrong direction.
5 other states saw their unemployment rates go up, with the largest increases (plus 0.2% each) recorded by South Carolina and Utah, while Indiana, Montana, and Tennessee each recorded a 0.1% increase in unemployment rate.
Over the last 12 months, just under half of all states (23) saw an increase in unemployment rate over the last 12 months, with South Carolina and Rhode Island recording the largest rate increases at 1.5% and 1.4%, followed by Ohio at plus 0.9% and Washington DC and Indiana each at plus 0.8%.
For 9 straight months now, South Dakota has claimed the lowest unemployment rate among states, which has been remarkably steady at 2% over the last several months.
Next on the list are Vermont, North Dakota, and Nebraska, which also held steady month to month at 2.2%, 2.3%, and 2.7%, respectively, followed by Mississippi and Maine at 2.8%.
For the second month in a row, Connecticut was the only state to record a net reduction in unemployment - falling from 3.4% to 3.2%.
Over the last year, 6 states have recorded a decrease in unemployment rate, led by Connecticut at minus 0.8%, followed by Arizona at minus 0.7%, Wisconsin at minus 0.5%, Mississippi and Maine at minus 0.4%, and Arkansas at minus 0.3%.
No state recorded a net reduction in jobs over the course of the last month and no state recorded a net reduction in jobs over the course of the last year.
Over the last month, 5 states plus Washington DC have seen a net increase in their number of in-state payroll entries.
New Jersey added the largest number of jobs, with a net gain of more than 19 thousand, followed by Colorado with almost 13 thousand, and Arizona with just over 11 thousand.
In terms of net job gains as a percent of total jobs with in-state employers, Idaho saw the biggest increase with a 0.7% bump; followed by Washington DC and Rhode Island, which grew 0.6% each; Colorado and New Jersey recorded 0.4% increases, and the number of employed people in Arizona rose by 0.3%.
Over the last 12 months, Idaho and Montana have seen the largest percentage growth at 3.4% each. South Carolina payrolls grew by 3.3% over the past year, while Alaska and Minnesota grew by 2.9%, and North Dakota grew by 2.2%.
New Jersey and Minnesota recorded the smallest job growth over the past year at 1.2%, followed by Kansas at 1.3%.
Less than 2 weeks out from the election, all eyes are on the races to determine who will control the reigns of government for the coming terms.
Currently, the DOW is predicting a Harris win, while the betting markets are favoring Trump, and the polls are nearly split right down the middle.
One last jobs report will be coming out next Friday, the first of November, which will be the last economic release prior to Election Day, but with the polls already open in many if not most places, that data certainly won’t be influencing the decisions of the entirety of the electorate, at the very least.
One more interest rate cut before year’s end seems likely regardless of how the elections play out, but for the moment at least, the most important factor in determining the trajectory of the US economy and job market in the coming years is currently being decided at the ballot box.
By the time we check back in with November’s Market Summary analysis, we will hopefully have a better idea about what comes next in the bigger picture sense.
Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer blog.
Nashville, Tenn.– October 8, 2024 – Mployer, the industry-leader in providing employee benefits research, ratings, and reviews, has named over 750 brokerage office winners nationally in more than 50 regions as part of its fourth annual “Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards” for 2024.
Mployer’s Top Employee Benefits Consultant Award Program evaluates each benefits broker and consultant office based on their depth of experience across employer industries, sizes, and plan design features, as well as employer client ratings and reviews.
“We are proud to recognize this distinct group of 2024 top-rated insurance advisors as part of our fourth annual Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards,” said Brian Freeman, CEO of Mployer. “Employer-sponsored healthcare and benefits provide care for over 160M Americans. Who an employer selects as their benefits advisor and their plan design has more impact on employee cost and satisfaction than who an employer chooses as the insurance carrier. We have rated each broker using our proprietary M Score and applaud the winners’ demonstrated commitment to service, quality, and positive employer experience.”
In Houston, The Woodlands, and Sugar Land, Mployer has named over 25 benefit brokerages as top brokerages with several of the highest-scoring winners in the market listed below. The Houston, The Woodlands, and Sugar Land job markets are among the most competitive in the U.S. South Central region, employing more than 3.5 million people. Offering competitive employee benefits is a critical factor in hiring top talent for the region’s employers. Finding and partnering with a highly-rated insurance consultant is imperative to attracting and retaining talent in any market.
Several of the “Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards” for Houston, The Woodlands, and Sugar Land include:
To see the full list of Top Employee Benefit Consultant Award winners for Houston, The Woodlands, and Sugar Land, visit Mployer. The above winners are a snapshot of Mployer's matrices and proprietary M Score as of July 2024.
About Mployer:
Mployer is transforming employee benefits by empowering employers and leading benefit consultants to easily assess, rate, and communicate the value of employee benefits. Providing industry-first transparency through unbiased research, benchmarking, and advanced analytics, our goal is to support employers and brokers in providing benefit plans that optimize costs and employee-employer relationships. To learn more about Mployer, visit https://mployeradvisor.com and follow us on LinkedIn.
Disclaimer: Rankings are dynamic, and this report may not reflect the rankings currently listed on Mployer’s website. Because Mployer’s research is ongoing, interested companies that want to join next year’s list are encouraged to claim their free profile on Mployer.
Media Contact:
Anthony Waters
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from September 2024 that was published in October 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The unemployment rate fell one-tenth of a point for a second straight month, dropping from about 4.2% to 4.1% after inching up for the 5 consecutive prior months.
The payroll figures were even more impressive, with over 250 thousand new jobs added through September, beating estimates of 150 thousand jobs by nearly 70%.
The number of unemployed people essentially held steady at about 6.8 million which is up approximately half a million people from where it was 12 months ago when the unemployment rate was 3.8%.
Interestingly, the number of people who were jobless for less than 5 weeks fell by more than 10% down to 2.1 million, while the number of long-term unemployed was essentially unchanged at 1.6 million, which is up slightly from 1.3 million at this time last year.
The food services and drinking establishment industries were responsible for the largest portion of the 254 thousand jobs that were added last month, netting almost 70 thousand additional workers over the course of September, which is almost 5 times the monthly hiring rate that food services and drinking establishments have averaged over the last 12 months.
The healthcare industry added the next most net jobs last month at 45 thousand, although that figure represents underperformance relative to the 57 thousand jobs that the healthcare industry has been averaging for the past year.
Government payrolls increased by about 31 thousand jobs, while the social assistance and construction industries each saw their ranks grow by about 26 thousand.
No industries saw a significant decrease in jobs throughout September while the remainder of industries including natural resource extraction, manufacturing, wholesale, retail, information, transportation & warehousing, finance, and business/professional/other services all remained essentially unchanged.
Average hourly pay spiked by 13 cents last month, jumping to $35.36 per hour and representing a 0.4% increase over the month before. Average hourly pay has increased by 4% over the last year, which is two-tenths of a point higher than it was in last month’s report.
The average workweek, on the other hand, increased by another tenth of an hour down to 34.2 hours per week.
Just over 2 weeks ago, the Federal Reserve announced the long-awaited 50 basis point (or half percent) cut in the benchmark interest rate, which is the first rate cut since 2020.
With those rates still around 5% however, another rate cut before the year ends remains possible at this point - especially in light of inflation in consumer prices hovering at 2.5%, just over the Fed’s long-stated target of 2% - but the strength of this of this jobs report has probably reduced the chances of another rate cut in the next few months.
From an economic perspective, it is hard to find much to complain about in this data, and the long-sought soft landing that the Fed has been aiming for appears to be coming to fruition.
Looking at the political perspective given the upcoming election, the strength of this report would certainly be welcome news by any incumbent candidate who can fairly claim some credit, and that may be increasingly true the closer we get to Voting Day.
As it turns out, however, this particular jobs report won’t be the last to arrive in advance of the election, as the November report covering October’s data will come out on November 1st this year, which happens to be the last Friday before ballots are cast on Tuesday, November 5th.
The strength of this jobs report is undeniable, but the contents of next month’s report may ultimately be significantly more influential.
Check out the Mployer blog here.
Nashville, Tenn.– October 1, 2024 – Mployer, the industry-leader in providing employee benefits research, ratings, and reviews, has named over 750 brokerage office winners nationally in more than 50 regions as part of its fourth annual “Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards” for 2024.
Mployer’s Top Employee Benefits Consultant Award Program evaluates each benefits broker and consultant office based on their depth of experience across employer industries, sizes, and plan design features, as well as employer client ratings and reviews.
“We are proud to recognize this distinct group of 2024 top-rated insurance advisors as part of our fourth annual Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards,” said Brian Freeman, CEO of Mployer. “Employer-sponsored healthcare and benefits provide care for over 160M Americans. Who an employer selects as their benefits advisor and their plan design has more impact on employee cost and satisfaction than who an employer chooses as the insurance carrier. We have rated each broker using our proprietary M Score and applaud the winners’ demonstrated commitment to service, quality, and positive employer experience.”
In Philadelphia, Camden, and Wilmington, Mployer has named over 50 benefit brokerages as top brokerages with several of the highest-scoring winners in the market listed below. The Philadelphia, Camden, and Wilmington job markets are among the most competitive in the U.S. Northeast region, employing more than 3.1 million people. Offering competitive employee benefits is a critical factor in hiring top talent for the region’s employers. Finding and partnering with a highly-rated insurance consultant is imperative to attracting and retaining talent in any market.
Several of the “Top Employee Benefits Consultant Awards” for Philadelphia, Camden, and Wilmington include:
To see the full list of Top Employee Benefit Consultant Award winners for Philadelphia, Camden, and Wilmington, visit Mployer. The above winners are a snapshot of Mployer's matrices and proprietary M Score as of July 2024.
About Mployer:
Mployer is transforming employee benefits by empowering employers and leading benefit consultants to easily assess, rate, and communicate the value of employee benefits. Providing industry-first transparency through unbiased research, benchmarking, and advanced analytics, our goal is to support employers and brokers in providing benefit plans that optimize costs and employee-employer relationships. To learn more about Mployer, visit https://mployeradvisor.com and follow us on LinkedIn.
Disclaimer: Rankings are dynamic, and this report may not reflect the rankings currently listed on Mployer’s website. Because Mployer’s research is ongoing, interested companies that want to join next year’s list are encouraged to claim their free profile on Mployer.
Media Contact:
Anthony Waters
Key Takeaways
ARTICLE | The Employers’ Guide to Voting Leave Regulation and Early Voting
Election Day is Tuesday, November 5th, which is just 5 weeks away as of this posting.
That leaves just 26 business days not only to make sure your organization is up-to-date with state and local election rules governing employee voting leave requirements, but also to communicate and coordinate your Election Day plans with employees in order to ensure the minimal disruption to your workflow.
Below, we have compiled a list of relevant voting regulations by state as well as information about early voting that you can share with employees and potentially reduce the number of absences concentrated on Election Day, as well.
The process of early voting has already begun in many places and will soon begin in many more, so let’s get to it.
Alabama: Employees in Alabama that begin work less than 2 hours after polls open or end work less than 1 hour before polls close are entitled to 1 hour of voting leave if they give reasonable notice. There is no early voting in Alabama.
Alaska: For employees that don’t already have at least 2 consecutive hours off duty when the polls are open on Election Day, employers are required to provide paid voting leave and allow as much time off as is reasonably necessary for employees to vote. The early voting window can differ in different districts but 15 days prior to Election Day is the norm.
Arizona: Employers in Arizona must provide employees with up to 3 hours of paid leave if they do not already have 3 hours in a row when they are not scheduled to work when polls are open on Election Day. Employees must apply for voting leave in advance of Election Day, and employers can specify the hours on Election Day when employee’s utilize their voting leave. The early voting period in Arizona varies by location but begins about 15 days before Election Day in most districts.
Arkansas: In Arkansas, employers are required to adjust employees’ work schedules on Election Day in order to enable employees to vote. Early voting will begin 15 days prior to Election Day.
California: Employees who give their employer at least 2 working days notice of their intent to take time off work in order to vote are allowed up to 2 hours of paid voting leave at either the beginning or end of a shift. Employers must provide enough leave so that when it is combined with voting hours before/after the shift, employees will have sufficient time to vote. Although there is some variation from one county to the next, in general early voting in California begins 29 days before Election Day.
Colorado: Employees that request voting leave and who do not already have 3 consecutive non-working hours during which the polls are open are entitled to paid voting leave. Employees can request that leave be at either the beginning or end of their shift, but employers can determine when leave is granted. Early voting begins in-person 15 days before Election Day in general, though there may be some variance between counties.
Connecticut: There are currently no voting leave rules in place in Connecticut as the last law regulating that issue expired in June 2024 and has not yet been replaced. Early voting begins 15 days prior to Election Day.
Delaware: Employers in Delaware are not required to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting begins 10 days before Election Day.
Florida: Florida law does not require employers to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting schedules can differ from one county to another, but early voting in Florida typically begins at least 10 days in advance of Election Day.
Georgia: Employees in Georgia are entitled by law to up to 2 hours of voting leave that can be used on Election Day or before via in-person early voting. That leave can be unpaid except for employees who can’t have their pay decreased due to absence from the job. Early voting begins the fourth Monday before Election Day, which is October 14th this cycle.
Hawaii: Elections in Hawaii are conducted by mail, and all registered voters should receive mail-in ballots automatically about 18 days in advance of Election Day. Voters can also turn in ballots or vote in person at service centers beginning 10 days prior to election day.
Idaho: There are no laws or regulations in Idaho that require employers to provide voting leave to employees. Some Idaho counties allow no early voting at all, but for the counties that do allow early voting, it begins the third Monday in advance of the election, which is October 21st this cycle.
Illinois: Employers are required to provide employees with up to 2 hours of paid voting leave if an employee doesn’t already have 2 consecutive hours of non-working time when the polls are open. Employers can use their discretion as to when the voting leave is exercised, and employees must apply for voting leave in advance of Election Day. Early voting in Illinois begins 40 days before Election Day.
Indiana: Indiana has no rules with regard to voting leave for employees. Early voting in Indiana begins 28 days before the election.
Iowa: Employees who request voting leave in writing in advance of Election Day are entitled to 3 consecutive hours of paid voting leave, assuming that there is not already a period of 3 consecutive non-working hours when the polls are open. Employers, however, can set the time during which employees are allowed to exercise their voting leave. In-person absentee voting in Iowa starts 20 days prior to Election Day.
Kansas: Kansas law ensures that employees have at least 2 consecutive hours that they are not required to work while the polls are open. If the polls are open before or after an employee’s shift but for less than 2 consecutive hours, employers are required to provide complementary paid voting leave sufficient to amount to 2 consecutive hours when combined with the pre or post-shift polling hours. Other than lunch hours, employers can also set when the voting leave is utilized. Early voting varies by country and begins up to 20 days prior to Election Day.
Kentucky: Employers in Kentucky must give employees up to 4 hours of leave that can be used either to cast a ballot on Election Day or to apply for an absentee ballot. To qualify, however, employees must request voting leave at least one day before they intend to utilize it, but employers can set the hours during which that voting leave is available on a given day and can penalize employees who utilize voting leave but fail to actually vote in certain cases. Early voting in Kentucky starts 5 days before the election.
Louisiana: There are no laws in Louisiana that require employers to provide voting leave to employees. Early voting in Louisiana starts 18 days before Election Day this cycle.
Maine: Employers in Maine are not required to provide employees with voting leave. In-person absentee voting in Maine begins 30 days prior to Election Day.
Maryland: In Maryland, employers are required to allow employees up to 2 hours of paid voting leave if an employee does not have at least 2 consecutive hours before or after their shift when polls are open. Employers, however, are allowed to require employees to submit a form that the state will provide as proof that the employee either voted or tried to vote. Early voting in Maryland opens two Thursdays prior to Election Day, which is October 24th this cycle.
Massachusetts: In Massachusetts, the only industries in which employers are required to provide employees with voting leave are the mercantile, manufacturing, and mechanical industries. Employers in those industries must provide employees with 2 hours of voting leave, while there are no voting leave requirements made of employers in other industries. Early voting starts 17 days in advance of Election Day.
Michigan: Michigan has no rules requiring employers to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting begins the second Saturday prior to Election Day, which falls on October 27th this cycle.
Minnesota: Employers in Minnesota must provide employees with paid leave for as long as necessary to enable employees to vote and return to work. In-person absentee voting begins 46 days before Election Day.
Mississippi: No laws or regulations in Mississippi require employers to provide employees with voting leave, but Mississippi law does state that employers can’t take any adverse action against employees because they voted (or chose not to vote). Eligible absentee voters can begin casting their ballots 45 days before Election Day.
Missouri: Unless employees have at least 3 consecutive non-working hours when the polls are open, employers in Missouri are required to provide employees with at least 3 hours in a row of paid voting leave. Employers, however, can require that employees who wish to exercise their voting leave apply to do so in advance of Election Day, and employers can choose when that voting leave is utilized. Beginning the second Tuesday before Election Day, which is October 22nd this cycle, Missouri offers in-person absentee voting in locations designated by local county election officials.
Montana: Employers in Montana have no duty to provide employees with voting leave. In-person absentee voting in Montana begins 30 days prior to the election.
Nebraska: For employees that don’t already have at least 2 consecutive hours off when the polls are open on Election Day, employers must provide up to 2 hours of paid voting leave at a time of the employer’s choosing if the employee requests voting leave either on or before Election Day. If an employee exercises voting leave without requesting it, however, it may be possible for that voting leave to be unpaid. Early voting begins 30 days before the election in Nebraska.
Nevada: Nevada employers must provide paid voting leave to employees for whom it would be impractical to vote before or after work - 1 hour of paid voting leave for employees who must travel 2 or fewer miles to vote, 3 hours of paid voting leave for employees who must travel more than 10 miles to vote, and 2 hours of paid voting leave for all other employees. Employers can determine the window during which that voting leave is exercised, and they can require that employees apply for voting leave in advance of election day as well. Early voting starts 17 days before Election Day.
New Hampshire: Employers in New Hampshire are not required to provide voting leave to employees. New Hampshire offers neither early voting nor in-person, no-excuse absentee voting.
New Jersey: There are no New Jersey laws requiring employers to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting begins 10 days before Election Day.
New Mexico: If polls are not open for at least 2 hours in a row before an employee’s shift or for at least 3 hours in a row after an employee’s shift, then that employee is entitled to 2 hours of paid voting leave, although employers can set when that leave is utilized. Early voting opens 28 days before Election Day.
New York: Employees in New York who do not have 4 consecutive hours before or after their shift when the polls are open are entitled to 2 hours of paid voting leave. Employers, however, can specify if the voting leave is utilized at the beginning or end of the scheduled work period, or at another time agreed upon by both the employer and employee. Early voting begins 10 days before Election Day.
North Carolina: While North Carolina employers are not required to offer voting leave, employers that discharge employees for taking leave to vote may nonetheless be in violation of rules prohibiting wrongful discharge. Early voting in North Carolina begins no sooner than 3 Thursdays prior to Election Day.
North Dakota: Employers in North Dakota are not required to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting schedules can differ by county but early voting tends to begin at least 15 days prior to Election Day.
Ohio: Employers in Ohio must give employees a reasonable length of time off work on Election Day so that they may vote. Early voting in Ohio begins on the first business day that occurs 29 days before Election Day or less.
Oklahoma: Employees who don’t have at least 3 consecutive non-working hours when the polls are open before or after their shift are entitled to two hours of voting leave and potentially additional time beyond those 2 hours if distance to the voting site requires it. Employees must request voting leave at least one day before Election Day, but employers can set the day and hours during which employees can exercise their voting leave. Early voting this cycle begins the Wednesday before Election Day, which is October 30th.
Oregon: Employers in Oregon are not required to provide voting leave to employees, and Oregon does not have early voting in a traditional sense since Oregon elections are conducted largely through mail-in ballots.
Pennsylvania: There are no requirements that Pennsylvania employers provide employees with voting leave. There is no statewide early voting, either, but some Pennsylvania counties allow voters to fill out absentee and mail-in ballots in person beginning 50 days before the election.
Rhode Island: There are no rules in Rhode Island that require employers to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting begins 20 days prior to Election Day.
South Carolina: Employers in South Carolina are not permitted to terminate employees due to exercising their voting rights, but there are no other rules with regard to voting leave. Early voting begins 15 days before Election Day.
South Dakota: Under South Dakota law, employees that don’t already have 2 consecutive non-working hours when the polls are open either before or after their shift are entitled to 2 hours of paid voting leave. Employers, however, can choose the hours during which voting leave is utilized. In-person absentee voting begins 46 days prior to Election Day.
Tennessee: Employers are required to provide up to 3 hours of paid voting leave if employees don’t have 3 consecutive hours when polls are open either before or after their shifts. Employer’s may demand that employees request voting leave by noon on the day before Election Day and may also set the hours during which an employee utilizes their voting leave. Early voting in Tennessee begins 20 days before Election Day.
Texas: Employers in Texas must provide employees with at least 2 consecutive hours in which to vote if they don’t already have 2 consecutive hours off duty on Election Day when the polls are open. Early voting begins 17 days before the election if it’s a business day and if not, the next business day.
Utah: If an employee’s work shift on Election Day doesn’t allow for at least 3 consecutive off-duty hours when the polls are open and that employee requests voting leave before Election Day, employers are required to provide up to 2 hours of paid leave. Early voting in Utah begins 2 weeks prior to Election Day.
Vermont: There are no rules on the books requiring employers in Vermont to provide voting leave, although state law does require employers to give employees unpaid leave to attend annual Town Hall Meetings if employees provide 7 days notice in advance. Vermont opens early voting from 45 days prior to the election until the day before Election Day.
Virginia: The only laws on the books in Virginia requiring employers to provide employees with election-related leave apply only to employees who are working as election officials. In-person absentee voting in Virginia begins 45 days before Election Day.
Washington: Washington has no state laws or regulations that require employers to provide employees with voting leave. Early voting in Washington begins 18 days before the election.
West Virginia: Employees in West Virginia are entitled to up to 3 hours of voting leave unless those employees already have 3 consecutive non-working hours when polls are open. Employers, however, can demand that employees submit applications for voting leave at least 3 days in advance of Election Day. Early voting begins 13 days before Election Day.
Wisconsin: Employers in Wisconsin must provide their employees with up to 3 hours of unpaid voting leave during the hours of the employer’s choosing to any employee that provides at least 1 day of notice. Early voting in Wisconsin begins no sooner than 2 weeks before Election Day.
Wyoming: For employees who do not have at least 3 hours in a row outside of their work shift when the polls are open, employers must provide at least 1 hour of paid leave, although employers are allowed to determine when that voting leave is utilized within the shift. In-person absentee voting starts 28 days before the election.
If the election process is not already underway in your area, it will be very soon.
Employers seeking to minimize election-related confusion and impacts should be proactive in coordinating absences, communicating plans, and ensuring that disruptions in workflow and productivity are kept to an absolute minimum.
For the next 5 weeks, uncertainty about the outcome of the elections is an unfortunate inevitability, but there is no need for or benefit from uncertainty about how your organization will manage employees as they exercise their voting rights.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from August 2024 that was published in September 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The US unemployment rate average came down about one-tenth of a point last month, dropping from approximately 4.3% to 4.2%.
For context, the US unemployment rate hasn’t been above 4.3% since October of 2021, representing a tight labor market for an extended period of time seldom seen in US history outside of wartime.
Only 1 state saw its internal unemployment rate come down over the month, however, with Connecticut showing a 0.2% unemployment rate reduction, falling from 3.6% to 3.4%.
On the other hand, 7 ‘states’ - Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington DC - recorded increases in their state unemployment rates, ranging from plus 0.1% to plus 0.4%. The number of states with climbing unemployment rates is down from 13 the month prior.
The more than 140 thousand new jobs added last month across the US as a whole resulted in 4 states with a net increase in payroll figures, while only 1 state - South Dakota - saw a net decrease in jobs, and the remainder were essentially unchanged.
Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary for September 2024.
For the fourth straight month, Washington DC had the highest unemployment rate, jumping two-tenths of a point from 5.5% to 5.7%.
Nevada had the next highest unemployment rate, climbing from 5.4% to 5.5%.
California and Illinois were the only 2 other states that posted unemployment rates above 5%, at 5.3% each.
Washington State at 4.8% unemployment was the only other state above the US average, and the only other state above 4% for that matter.
South Carolina saw the largest increase in unemployment last month, spiking 0.4% from 3.9% to 4.3% unemployment, while Washington DC, Georgia, and Massachusetts each saw 0.2% increases in their respective unemployment rates, and 0.1% unemployment rate increases were recorded by Minnesota, North Dakota, and Utah.
Half of all states plus Washington DC recorded an increase in unemployment over the last 12 months - the largest increases going to Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Ohio, with 1.7%, 1.4%, and 1.0% increases, respectively.
For the 8th month in a row, South Dakota has recorded the lowest unemployment rate, holding steady at 2%.
Vermont has the next lowest unemployment rate at 2.2%, followed by North Dakota at 2.3% and New Hampshire at 2.6%. Mississippi and Nebraska are next at 2.7%; followed by Alabama and Maine at 2.8%; and Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, and Wisconsin at 2.9% unemployment.
Only Connecticut saw its unemployment rate decrease over the month, dropping 0.2% from 3.6% unemployment to 3.4%.
Over the last 12 months, only 4 states have seen a net reduction in their unemployment rates, led by Arizona ( - 0.7%) and followed by Connecticut ( - 0.4%), Wisconsin ( - 0.4%), and Mississippi ( - 0.5%).
Despite having the lowest unemployment rate, or perhaps because it has consistently had the lowest unemployment rate among states throughout 2024, South Dakota was the only state to record a net decrease in jobs over the month, dropping a little more than 3 thousand and seeing in-state payrolls reduce by 0.7%.
No state recorded a net reduction in jobs over the course of the year.
Indiana, Minnesota, Texas, and Wisconsin all recorded net payroll increases last month.
Texas recorded the largest net gain both in terms of raw jobs figures and percentage gain, with the Texas labor force growing by 0.6% or almost 80 thousand jobs over the course of August.
Indiana tied Texas at 0.6% job growth and had the second largest number of raw jobs gains, netting almost 20 thousand.
Minnesota added a bit more than 14 thousand jobs for 0.5% growth and Wisconsin added a little less than 12 thousand jobs, accounting for 0.4% growth.
Over the course of the last year, Missouri and South Carolina have recorded the largest workforce growth rates at 3.3% each, followed by Montana at 3.1% and Alaska at 2.8%.
The states with the smallest job growth rates over the year are Massachusetts and New Jersey at 1.1% each, followed by Wisconsin at 1.2% and Iowa at 1.3%.
In terms of raw job figures, Texas has added just over 300 thousand net jobs over the last 12 months, while California added just under 290 thousand, Florida added just over 200 thousand, New York added 140 thousand, and Pennsylvania added a bit more than 100 thousand jobs.
The big economic story of the moment is the long-awaited interest rate cuts that finally arrived when the Federal Reserve reduced rates by half a percentage point last week, bringing baseline rates down to between 4.75% and 5%.
Further, the Fed is poised to lower interest rates by another half point over the remainder of 2024, and is on course to bring rates down by another percentage point over 2025, as well - assuming that inflation and employment trends hold.
While there are more than a few intervening events and trend shifts that might disrupt potential 2025 rate reductions, an additional half point cut in 2024 remains far more likely than not to occur at this point.
According to Fed projections, although inflation has yet to fall below the Fed’s stated target of 2%, we are expected to cross that threshold by 2026, and unemployment is forecast to climb slowly through 2025 before leveling out.
In sum, keep an eye out for more interest rate relief in the near-term, and maybe significant interest relief next year as well if expectations about our current economic trajectory hold. It has been a long time coming.
Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer Advisor blog.
Key Takeaways
ARTICLE | The Boring Yet Obligatory Guide to Dental & Vision Insurance For Employers
Dental and vision insurance have often been looked at as more of an afterthought than a necessity, but those views are quickly becoming outdated.
Not only are an increasing number of organizations offering supplemental dental and/or vision insurance options, but more and more organizations are choosing to contribute to the coverage costs, as well, which further encourages participation.
In addition to that organic growth, a slew of recent changes in vision and dental insurance-related law both at the state and federal level indicates that this space currently has the attention of policymakers, as well, with one new federal rule poised to expand demand levels for dental and vision services in the coming years, potentially leading to some upward pressure on the costs associated with these services in the future.
Let’s take a look at dental and vision coverage in terms of where we’ve been, where we are, and where we’re going.
According to the most recent Mployer Insights data for 2024, the vast majority of employers offer dental insurance (93%) with a slightly smaller proportion offering vision insurance (82%) as well, but smaller organizations are less likely to offer these supplemental forms of health insurance than larger organizations.
In fact, only about 40% of employers with between 2 and 24 employees offer dental insurance, but that number climbs significantly to about 90% and up for employers with 100 or more employees. About 60% of employers with between 25 and 49 employees offer dental insurance, while about 75% of employers with between 50 and 99 employees offer dental insurance, so the employee count and dental insurance trend are pretty closely correlated, although there is some additional variance depending on industry and geographical region, as well.
Interestingly, the percentage of employees who choose to enroll in dental insurance plans if offered by their employer is much less correlated with employee count and more consistent across variously sized companies. The enrollment rate for companies with between 3 and 24 employees is about 71% and about 75% for companies with 500 or more employees.
Employer contributions toward employee dental coverage aren’t strongly correlated with employee count, either, with about 16% of employers covering 100% of the premium, about 16% of employers making no contributions toward employee dental plan costs, and the remainder (about 68%) making partial contributions.
As for vision insurance, about 62% of employers with between 3 and 24 employees offer it, which is significantly above the 40% of comparably-sized employers that offer dental insurance, but only about 83% of employers with 100 or more employees offer vision insurance, which is a bit under the approximate 90% of employers with 100 or more employees offering employee dental plans.
Participation rates among employees who are offered vision insurance hovers in the low 70% regardless of company size, which is comparable to dental insurance as well. Employer contributions toward employee vision plan costs are comparable - although slightly more generous - than dental plan contributions, with about 19% of employers making a 100% contribution to employee vision plans and about 64% providing a partial contribution.
It is also worth noting how these trends have evolved over time with half of the growth in small business dental insurance offering rates since the beginning of the millennium occurring in just the four years between 2019 and 2023.
The proportion of smaller organizations offering vision coverage has seen comparable growth, with the percentage of large employers who offer vision insurance doubling between 2006 and 2023, while the percentage of small employers offering vision insurance quadrupled over the same time period.
Smaller organizations clearly lagged behind larger organizations in terms of adding dental and vision benefits to their offerings, but they have nearly caught up at relatively low employee counts in terms of participation, although there is still room for differentiation on the contribution front, both with dental and vision coverage, which is especially relevant given how consistent demand seems to be for these offerings at employers of all sizes.
There are no laws that require employers to provide employees with dental or vision insurance, although doing so has certainly become the norm amongst organizations, regardless of size.
Further, the ACA does not require parents to provide children with dental insurance, but it does label dental insurance for children as an essential health benefit, thereby requiring that such coverage be either included in a plan or offered as a separate plan in order for an insurance plan to meet the minimum qualifications necessary to appear on the exchanges.
A few months ago, however, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services issued a new rule that will allow states to designate non-pediatric dental care for adults as an essential health benefit as well, which will broadly expand the dental coverage options for many of the residents of states that opt-in.
As a caveat, it is important to bear in mind that this expansion will only apply to those states that take proactive steps to label adult dental care as an essential health benefit as a matter of law, which is not a cause that will be taken up by all state legislatures in the near future, so not all states will see a meaningful shift in demand as a result.
There has also been significant activity in recent years addressing issues including transparency, patient choice, downcoding, network access, and loss ratios.
While there are several different plan designs for dental benefits, by far the most common are Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plans, accounting for more than 8 out of 10 employer-sponsored dental plans.
Typically, DPPO plans contain an annual cap on all expenses, which is the most money that an insurer will pay out for a claimant in total over a single year.It’s important to also point out that these annual caps often exclude orthodontic work, which may have a separate lifetime cap - meaning that orthodontic work doesn’t count against the annual cap but instead has its own separate maximum dollar figure that an insurer will pay out for orthodontic work over the life of the policy.
Additionally, DPPOs will typically require insurance to cover a predetermined percentage of any given service up to that annual limit after a small annual deductible is met.For example, a DPPO plan may have a $1,500 annual cap and a small annual deductible, which is often waived for class 1 preventative services. Coinsurance amounts are usually broken down by class of service, with plans typically covering preventative services like teeth cleanings at 100% (deductible waived), 80% coverage for basic restoration work (after deductible is met), 50% for major restoration work, and 50% for orthodontic work up to a lifetime max (e.g. $1,500).
Other relatively common types of dental plans include Dental Health Maintenance Organizations (DHMO), which prepay dentists for potential services and account for about 4% of dental plans; traditional indemnity plans, which are similar to DPPOs but without the same in-network emphasis and account for about 3% of dental plans; Point of Service plans, which further emphasize discounts for in-network services; and Direct Reimbursement plans, which reimburses policy holders for their expenses after the fact according to a predetermined reimbursement schedule.Some of the key elements that distinguish plans are:
.
You can read more about the various types of dental plan designs and their differences in this piece from the American Dental Association.
Four of the main types of vision plans closely mirror prominent plan types for dental insurance coverage: Preferred Provider Organization plans, Health Maintenance Organization plans, Point of Service plans, and Indemnity insurance plans.
Beyond plan structure, some of the main factors to consider that distinguish one plan from another are:
While deductibles are less common with vision insurance than dental and traditional medical coverage, copays and annual coverage caps are standard.
The US dental insurance market crossed the $80 billion threshold in 2021, and is expected to grow by 6% compounded each year between 2024 and 2029, while the US vision insurance market is expected to hit about $60 billion this year.
Top market share leaders in the US dental insurance market are:
The top market share leaders in the US vision insurance market are:
On one hand, it is understandable why dental and vision care have historically been dealt with as separate offerings from traditional medical care.
For one, professionals in each field are typically trained at separate institutions on separate courses of study with little overlap, and much dental and vision related care takes place at separate sites apart from hospitals and traditional medical practices.
But these distinctions are becoming less and less relevant given a modern understanding of how closely tied dental health can be to overall bodily health, not to mention the correlation between proper progressive lens care and productivity.
As with many other aspects of life and business, regular maintenance and an ounce of prevention can be worth a pound of cure, and employers have an opportunity not only to provide employees with a valuable benefit offering, but they can also stand apart from competitors on the talent attraction and retention front by not only offering dental and vision insurance but also making contributions to that coverage to further encourage employees to opt in.
With as many as 3 in 10 US adults currently without dental insurance, and with up to 8 in 10 US adults currently without vision insurance, there is no better time than the present for employers to review their benefits offerings to determine how best to help employees meet their dental and vision insurance needs.
Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from August 2024 that was published in September 2024. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)
For the first time in 5 months, the US unemployment rate has started coming down again, albeit ever so slightly from about 4.2% to 4.1%.
US employers also added 142 thousand jobs to their payrolls, which was a decent performance although about 20 thousand jobs fewer than expected. Downward revisions of the job numbers from the previous 2 months were a bit more substantial, however, accounting for about 80 thousand fewer jobs than previously reported.
The labor force participation rate held steady at about 62.7 million and has been pretty consistent all year long.
The number of people who have part-time jobs because full-time work was not available also essentially held steady at 4.8 million, but it is worth noting that this figure is up almost 15% from 4.2 million just 12 months ago. This change may in part represent a growing number of both employers and employees that have been navigating the softening economy and labor market and waiting for interest rates to come down before reevaluating their labor demand - a wait that will likely soon be over.
Among the 142 thousand jobs added to US employer payrolls last month, the construction industry claimed the largest share, with 34 thousand new jobs - almost an 80% increase over the approximate 19 thousand jobs added by the construction industry on average each of the last 12 months.
The healthcare industry wasn’t far behind with 31 thousand jobs added last month, but that figure represents a significant slow down in healthcare hiring and a major underperformance relative to the approximate 60 thousand jobs by which payrolls in the healthcare industry have increased on average each month over the last year.
The social services industry also added about 13 thousand jobs, down from an average monthly gain of 21 thousand.
While there was little to no change in job figures across the majority of the remainder of industries, the manufacturing industry actually saw a fairly significant reduction in jobs last month, losing 25 thousand positions in the durable goods production industries.
Average hourly pay rose by 4 cents last month, climbing to $35.21 per hour and representing a 0.4% increase over the month before. Average hourly pay has increased by 3.8% over the last year, outpacing inflation by nearly a percentage point over the same time frame.
The average workweek on the other hand increased by one-tenth of an hour up to 34.3 hours per week. In the manufacturing sector, however, the average workweek held steady at about 40 hours per week, but the average amount of overtime inched up one-tenth of a point as well to 3 hours per week.
Mployer’s Take
Last month, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said that Fed policy goals no longer include any further softening of the labor market, which paves the way for the first interest rate cuts since the Fed began raising rates 2 and a half years ago.
The Fed is expected to lower interest rates when they meet next week and this latest jobs report further solidifies that likelihood, but the main remaining question is how big of a cut they will implement.
With inflation now down below 3% on an annualized basis, some Fed watchers are expecting a 50 basis point interest rate cut, but the majority seems to be rallying around a more modest 25 basis point cut given the remaining resilience in the job market and economy in addition to the continuing upward pressure on wages.
To be clear, however, a 50 basis point rate cut is still a very real possibility, and is only slightly less likely than a 25 basis point cut.
It’s only a little over a week before September 18th when the Fed is expected to announce whether or not they will be cutting interest rates, and if so by how much, so the speculation about whether and how much rates will be cut this time will very soon be replaced by speculation about whether and how much interest rates will be cut next time when the Fed meets again in the first week of November.
Nothing is certain, of course, but it does seem like some interest rate relief may at long last be at hand.
While it took less than a year and a half for the Fed to increase interest rates from practically 0 to over 5 and a half percent (in increments of a quarter and half point at a time), however, it is likely going to take much, much longer to bring interest rates back down by even half of the increase we’ve seen since the pandemic.
We still appear to be on track for a relatively soft landing where inflation is tamped down without triggering a swift onset recession, but in order to maintain the delicate balance necessary to avoid some of the worse potential outcomes, this soft landing is going to occur over a very long period of time.
Check out the Mployer blog here.
Nashville, TN – September 4th, 2024 - Mployer, the nation’s leader in providing employee benefits ratings and analytics, today announced the launch of Insights+, an industry-first solution designed to empower employers, employees and leading brokers to rate their employee benefit plans against similar companies and easily communicate their position to employees and recruits.
Employers spend $1.5T+ on employee benefits each year, yet there is no definitive measure for employers or employees of what good benefits are. Some employers offer benefits much higher than intended overspending on benefits while others provide benefits that lag the market, yet do not know it. Insights+ solves this problem for free by allowing employers and employees to rate their benefits quickly and easily against employers just like them.
Key Features of Insights+include:
1. Free to use: Employers can access their rating for free by sharing their benefit plans guide. After sharing the guide, you will receive your rating in under 24 hours.
2. Detailed Plan Assessment: A 25-page assessment of your benefits vs. your custom cohort is available evaluating each component of your benefit package, from medical and contribution to leave and retirement.
3. Recognition and Communication Package: For employers who qualify, you will receive a Recognition Package to use to promote and communicate the value of your benefits to their employees.
“Insights+ is a game-changer for employers looking to stand out among the competition,” said Anthony Waters, Chief Growth Officer. “Providing recognition for great benefit plans will not only enhance employer branding, but also drive greater employee satisfaction, trust and retention.”
Chris Burns, CFO of Touchstone Closing, shared "Employees and new hires always ask if our benefits are good. We can finally answer that with confidence and show proof with Mployer's Insights+. Being able to see how our benefits compare to similar companies from an independent source is exactly what we needed to be confident and validate in the investment we make in benefits each year."
Insights+ is now available to employers nationwide. To see how your benefits are rated, visit https://mployeradvisor.com/employer-benefit-rating.
About Mployer
Mployer is transforming employee benefits by empowering employers and leading benefit consultants to easily assess, rate, and communicate the value of employee benefits. Providing industry-first transparency through unbiased research, benchmarking, and advanced analytics, our goal is to support employers and brokers in providing benefit plans that optimize costs and employee-employer relationships. To learn more about Mployer, visit https://mployeradvisor.comand follow us on LinkedIn.
Media Contact:
PAN Communications
As an employee, your benefits package is one of the most important aspects of your overall compensation. Beyond just salary, your benefits have real monetary value that contributes significantly to your financial well-being. A good benefits plan not only supports your health and security but also helps you plan for the future. Whether it's health insurance, retirement savings, paid time off, or additional perks like wellness programs and flexible work hours, understanding the financial value of these offerings can greatly enhance your job satisfaction and loyalty to your employer.
Your benefits aren’t just a bonus—they make up a significant portion of your total compensation. Many employees underestimate the financial value their benefits bring, but these offerings often account for a sizable portion of your overall earnings. For example, health insurance, retirement contributions, and paid leave all have measurable dollar amounts attached to them. Recognizing their worth can help you make more informed decisions about your job and long-term financial health.
A comprehensive benefits plan can also reduce your out-of-pocket expenses for medical care, save you money on taxes through retirement savings plans, and provide paid time off that allows you to take necessary breaks without losing income. By knowing the exact value of each benefit, you can better appreciate how much your employer is investing in your overall well-being.
-p-1080.png)
There’s a noticeable difference between the actual value of employee benefits and what employees perceive. On average, companies invest $23,200 annually in individual benefits, but employees tend to perceive the value as only $11,200. This gap illustrates why it's crucial to fully understand the true worth of your benefits.
Understanding the dollar value of your benefits can give you a clearer sense of your true compensation. Often, benefits are viewed as just additional perks, but they can make up a significant portion of your overall earnings. In some cases, the value of your benefits can be worth tens of thousands of dollars annually, making it essential to not only understand what’s included but also how each benefit impacts your financial health and long-term well-being. Here’s a detailed breakdown of the key benefits you should expect from a robust package and how each of these contributes to your financial security:
Health insurance is a cornerstone of any benefits package, and its financial value should not be underestimated. In the U.S., where healthcare costs can be extraordinarily high, having employer-sponsored health insurance can save you thousands—if not tens of thousands—of dollars annually in medical expenses. For example, the average premium for an individual health plan is about $7,000 annually, and for a family plan, it can reach over $21,000. If your employer covers a portion of these premiums, that’s a significant cost you’re avoiding. Some employers even cover the full amount, which can add substantial value to your overall compensation.
Additionally, many plans offer dental and vision insurance, which, although sometimes viewed as minor, can help cover the costs of dental cleanings, orthodontics, glasses, and eye exams—costs that can add up quickly. Understanding the structure of your health insurance, including premiums, deductibles, copayments, and out-of-pocket maximums, can help you assess the full financial value of the health benefits your employer provides. For example, an employer covering a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) with contributions to a Health Savings Account (HSA) can provide you with both immediate healthcare savings and long-term tax advantages.
In total, the annual value of a good health insurance plan could easily exceed $10,000, and understanding how this fits into your overall compensation helps you make smarter decisions regarding your health and finances.
Retirement savings plans, such as a 401(k) or 403(b), are another critical component of your benefits package, offering significant financial benefits both in the present and for your future. Many employers offer matching contributions, typically between 3% and 5% of your salary. If you’re earning $50,000 annually and your employer offers a 5% match, that’s an additional $2,500 going into your retirement account each year. Over time, with the power of compound interest, these contributions can grow exponentially, potentially adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to your retirement fund.
Beyond employer matching, many retirement plans come with tax advantages. Contributions are typically tax-deferred, meaning you don’t pay taxes on the money you contribute until you withdraw it in retirement, which can significantly lower your current taxable income. Some employers may also offer Roth 401(k) options, allowing you to pay taxes upfront and enjoy tax-free withdrawals in retirement. These benefits, when combined with employer contributions, can substantially improve your financial future.
Using tools like the Mployer Advisor Employee Benefits Calculator, you can calculate the full financial impact of these contributions and tax benefits on your long-term wealth. With smart planning, your employer’s retirement benefits could easily add tens of thousands of dollars to your overall compensation over the course of your career.
you’re ready to stop working.
Paid Time Off (PTO) is often an overlooked aspect of a benefits package, but it holds both intrinsic and financial value. PTO allows you to take time off without sacrificing your income, providing crucial rest and recovery time that supports your mental and physical health. PTO policies vary widely across employers, but let’s consider a typical scenario: if you earn $60,000 annually and receive 15 days of PTO, that’s the equivalent of being paid $3,460 for time you’re not working. For many employees, this can make a huge difference in their ability to balance work and personal life.
Some employers are even moving towards unlimited PTO policies, giving employees the flexibility to take time off as needed, which can lead to increased job satisfaction and improved productivity. Understanding the financial value of your PTO, whether it’s a set number of days or an unlimited policy, helps you better appreciate the compensation you receive beyond your regular paycheck.
In today’s competitive job market, employers are increasingly recognizing the value of offering a robust and diverse benefits package that goes beyond the basics of health insurance and retirement savings. Additional employee benefits, such as wellness programs, financial perks, flexible working hours, and other unique incentives, can significantly enhance the overall value of your compensation. These extras not only address various aspects of your well-being—physical, mental, and financial—but also help create a more supportive and productive work environment.
For employees, these added benefits can make a huge difference in day-to-day life, contributing to greater job satisfaction, reducing stress, and fostering a healthier work-life balance. Employers offering such perks are often more attractive to top talent, and these benefits can lead to higher retention rates as employees feel more supported in both their professional and personal lives. From wellness programs that promote a healthy lifestyle to financial benefits that alleviate concerns about long-term security, these additional offerings are becoming an essential part of modern benefits packages. Here's a closer look at how these extra perks can positively impact your work experience and why they’re worth taking full advantage of.
Wellness programs have gained significant popularity in recent years as employers recognize the importance of both physical and mental health. Many companies now offer free or subsidized access to fitness centers, which could save you hundreds or even thousands of dollars annually, depending on membership costs. Other wellness perks include access to mental health resources, such as therapy sessions or meditation apps, which may be otherwise expensive or difficult to access.
Wellness programs also extend to on-site health screenings, flu shots, and ergonomic assessments, helping you avoid out-of-pocket healthcare costs. Additionally, these programs can contribute to better long-term health, potentially reducing the need for more costly medical treatments down the line. In the long run, participating in wellness initiatives could not only save you money but also improve your quality of life and productivity at work.
Many employers offer financial assistance programs, such as student loan repayment, tuition reimbursement, or down payment assistance for homebuyers. These benefits provide immediate financial relief and help you achieve major life goals without taking on additional debt. For instance, if your employer reimburses $5,000 in tuition costs each year, you’re effectively adding that amount to your annual compensation without the burden of educational loans.
Some companies also offer financial wellness programs, providing tools like budgeting apps and access to financial advisors who can help you manage debt, plan for retirement, or save for major purchases. These resources, while not direct cash benefits, have measurable value in improving your long-term financial security.
Flexible work schedules are increasingly seen as a highly desirable benefit, especially in today’s evolving work environment. Remote work options or flexible hours can lead to substantial savings on commuting costs, child care, and even meals. For example, if you work from home three days a week and save $50 per week on gas and parking, that’s a $2,600 annual savings. Additionally, the flexibility to structure your workday around your most productive hours can improve work performance and job satisfaction.
Flexible work schedules also contribute to work-life balance, reducing stress and burnout, which can lead to higher productivity and a more fulfilling work experience. While the financial savings might not be as immediately apparent, the long-term value of this benefit can be substantial in terms of mental health and job satisfaction.
Your benefits package holds significant financial value, but it’s up to you to take full advantage of it. One of the first steps in maximizing your benefits is to calculate their total worth. Using the Mployer Advisor Employee Benefits Calculator, you can input your benefits and compare them against industry standards, giving you a clearer understanding of how much your employer is investing in your compensation.
It’s also important to regularly review and adjust your benefits as your personal and financial circumstances change. If you’re nearing retirement, for example, increasing your 401(k) contributions will allow you to maximize your employer’s matching contributions, effectively adding more money to your retirement savings. If you experience a significant life change, such as getting married or having a child, review your health insurance coverage to ensure it still meets your needs without overpaying for unnecessary coverage.
Additionally, fully leveraging PTO, wellness programs, and financial perks can significantly enhance the value you derive from your benefits. By being proactive, staying informed, and using tools like the Mployer Advisor Employee Benefits Calculator, you can ensure that your benefits are working for you in the best possible way.
To ensure your benefits plan is working for you, it’s important to regularly evaluate its effectiveness. One of the best ways to do this is by understanding how often you and your colleagues are using the various benefits offered. Are health insurance plans being utilized? Are employees taking full advantage of PTO and wellness programs? Tracking this information helps employers make necessary adjustments, ensuring the benefits offered continue to meet employee needs.
At Mployer Advisor, we make this process easier with our Employee Benefits Calculator. This tool allows you to input your current benefits and compare them against industry benchmarks, helping you evaluate if your package is competitive and truly supports your well-being. It’s a simple way to see if your employer's offerings match up with what’s available in the market and can help you identify areas for improvement in your benefits.
In addition to usage, companies often assess how benefits impact employee retention and job satisfaction. A strong, comprehensive benefits package typically results in lower turnover and happier employees. If your employer’s benefits are lacking, it may lead to dissatisfaction and higher turnover rates. With Mployer Advisor’s insights, you can gain valuable data on how your benefits package compares and provide feedback that could lead to enhancements in your workplace offerings.
Another critical measure is how benefits programs influence overall workplace engagement and employee health. For instance, wellness programs can improve your work-life balance and reduce sick days. The result is a healthier, more engaged workforce—and a more positive work environment for everyone. Mployer Advisor helps you see these connections clearly, so you can ensure your benefits are truly working for you.
A strong benefits package goes far beyond just being a part of your job—it’s an essential investment in your health, your future, and your overall well-being. Whether it's comprehensive health insurance, retirement savings plans, or wellness programs, the benefits you receive from your employer are designed to support you in all aspects of your life, both inside and outside of work. It’s not just about financial perks or insurance coverage; it's about creating a foundation for long-term personal and professional success.
Taking the time to fully understand your benefits package is crucial. Every option available to you—whether it's health insurance, paid time off, or financial support programs—has the potential to impact your quality of life. These benefits are more than just add-ons; they can reduce stress, improve your work-life balance, and help you plan for major life events like retirement, family growth, or health challenges. By familiarizing yourself with the details of your benefits and how they work, you’re ensuring that you’re making informed decisions about your health, your financial security, and your personal growth.
Furthermore, by taking full advantage of these offerings, you’re not just receiving compensation—you’re investing in yourself and your future. Whether it’s contributing to a retirement fund that will provide security in your later years, using wellness programs to maintain your mental and physical health, or leveraging flexible work schedules to create a better work-life balance, these benefits provide real, tangible value that goes well beyond your paycheck.
The benefits you receive today can have a lasting impact on your tomorrow. So, take the time to engage with them fully, ask questions when you need clarity, and regularly reassess how your benefits align with your current needs and future goals. In doing so, you are not only maximizing the value of your compensation package but also taking control of your well-being and setting yourself up for long-term success, both personally and professionally. Remember, investing in your employee benefits is, ultimately, an investment in yourself—an investment that can pay dividends for years to come.
Employee benefits play a significant role in boosting your overall job satisfaction and productivity. They go beyond just salary to support your well-being and contribute to a positive work environment. A strong benefits package helps attract and retain skilled employees like you, ensuring that you feel valued and supported in both your professional and personal life.
A complete benefits package typically includes health insurance, retirement savings options, and paid time off. These core components are essential for helping you maintain a balance between your work responsibilities and personal life. Health coverage supports your physical well-being, retirement plans ensure long-term financial security, and PTO gives you the flexibility to take care of yourself and your loved ones.
It’s important to understand how well your benefits are working for you. Regularly reviewing your benefits usage, comparing it to your needs, and staying informed about what’s available can help you maximize their value. Companies often measure the success of their benefits plan by tracking how often employees use them and how they impact job satisfaction and retention. As an employee, providing feedback on what works and what doesn’t can help ensure your employer tailors the benefits to better meet your needs.
Beyond the standard offerings, additional perks like wellness programs, financial assistance, flexible work schedules, pet insurance, and commuter benefits can significantly improve your experience. These extra benefits are designed to support different aspects of your life, contributing to greater satisfaction, work-life balance, and engagement at work. If your employer offers unique perks, take advantage of them to get the most out of your benefits package.
To get the most from your benefits, it’s essential to understand your options and how they apply to your personal needs. Regularly check your benefits package, ask questions when unclear, and take advantage of resources like your HR department or benefits portal to stay informed. Providing feedback on your benefits also helps your employer tailor their offerings to better support you and your colleagues. By engaging with your benefits, you’re ensuring they work for you in the best way possible.
.png){kind=small}
%20(1).png){kind=small}
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)