New survey puts jobless total above official figure
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.BRITISH unemployment levels look even worse than yesterday's Government figures indicate when calculated by an international standard, a new labour market survey shows.
The Labour Force Survey, published quarterly for the first time by the Government, counts 2.65 million people unemployed in the spring.
That is 40,000 higher than the Employment Department's monthly reckoning of 2.61 million for March, April and May.
The Government views the unemployed on a 'claimant' basis, counting people eligible to claim unemployment benefit. But the international measure defines the unemployed as anyone looking for work.
The Employment Policy Institute, which is an independent body reviewing employment measures, says that an expanded Labour Force Survey would show unemployment at around 300,000 higher than the figure just published, and more than 500,000 higher than the count used by the Employment Department.
'It is likely that such an expanded measure will be approaching 3.5 million by the end of 1992,' it says.
It adds that it is unfair to accuse the Government of fiddling figures, but says there will always be the suspicion that changes to the monthly unemployment count are partly political.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments