Connect with us

Economics

Job openings fell more than expected in July

Published

on

Job openings drop to lowest level since January 2021

Job openings slumped to their lowest level in three and a half years in July, the Labor Department reported Wednesday in another sign of slack in the labor market.

The department’s closely watched Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey showed that available positions fell to 7.67 million on the month, off 237,000 from June’s downwardly revised number and the lowest level since January 2021.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for 8.1 million.

With the decline, it brought the ratio of job openings per available worker down to less than 1.1, about half where it was from its peak of more than 2 to 1 in early 2022.

The data likely provides further ammunition to Federal Reserve officials who are widely expected to begin lowering interest rates when they meet for their next policy meeting on Sept. 17-18. Fed officials watch the JOLTS report closely as an indicator of labor market strength.

“The labor market is no longer cooling down to its pre-pandemic temperature, it’s dropped past it,” said Nick Bunker, head of economic research at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Nobody, and certainly not policymakers at the Federal Reserve, should want the labor market to get any cooler at this point.”

While the job openings level declined, layoffs increased to 1.76 million, up 202,000 from June. Total separations jumped by 336,000, pushing the separations rate as a share of the labor force up to 3.4%. However, hires rose as well, up 273,000 on the month, putting the rate at 3.5% or 0.2 percentage point better than June.

The report comes two days ahead of the pivotal August nonfarm payrolls count that the Labor Department will release Friday. The report is expected to show an increase of 161,000 and a tick down in the unemployment rate to 4.2%.

Economics

Andrew Bailey on why UK-U.S. trade deal won’t end uncertainty

Published

on

Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey attends the central bank’s Monetary Policy Report press conference at the Bank of England, in the City of London, on May 8, 2025.

Carlos Jasso | Afp | Getty Images

Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey told CNBC on Thursday that the U.K. was heading for more economic uncertainty, despite the country being the first to strike a trade agreement with the U.S. under President Donald Trump’s controversial tariff regime.

“The tariff and trade situation has injected more uncertainty into the situation… There’s more uncertainty now than there was in the past,” Bailey told CNBC in an interview.

“A U.K.-U.S. trade agreement is very welcome in that sense, very welcome. But the U.K. is a very open economy,” he continued.

That means that the impact from tariffs on the U.K. economy comes not just from its own trade relationship with Washington, but also from those of the U.S. and the rest of the world, he said.

“I hope that what we’re seeing on the U.K.-U.S. trade side will be the first of many, and it will be repeated by a whole series of trade agreements, but we have to see that happen of course, and where it actually ends up.”

“Because, of course, we are looking at tariff levels that are probably higher than they were beforehand.”

Trump unveils United Kingdom trade deal, first since ‘reciprocal’ tariff pause

In Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Report released Thursday, the word “uncertainty” was used 41 times across its 97 pages, up from 36 times in February, according to a CNBC tally.

The U.K. central bank cut interest rates by a quarter percentage point on Thursday, taking its key rate to 4.25%. The decision was highly divided among the seven members of its Monetary Policy Committee, with five voting for the 25 basis point cut, two voting to hold rates and two voting to reduce by a larger 50 basis points.

Bailey said that while some analysts had perceived the rate decision as more hawkish than expected — in other words, leaning toward holding rates elevated than slashing them rapidly — he was not surprised by the close vote.

“What it reflects is that there are two sides, there are risks on both sides here,” he told CNBC.

“We could get a much more severe weakness of demand than we were expecting, that could then pass through to a weaker outlook for inflation than we were expecting.”

“There’s a risk on the other side that we could get some combination of more persistence in the inflation effects that are gradually working their way through the system,” such as in wages and energy, while “supply capacity in the economy is weaker,” he said.

Continue Reading

Economics

Trump knocks down a controversial pillar of civil-rights law

Published

on

IN THE DELUGE of 145 executive orders issued by President Donald Trump (on subjects as disparate as “Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness” and “Maintaining Acceptable Water Pressure in Showerheads”) it can be difficult to discern which are truly consequential. But one of them, signed on April 23rd under the bland headline “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy”, aims to remake civil-rights law. Those primed to distrust Mr Trump on such matters may be surprised to learn that the president’s target is not just important but also well-chosen.

Continue Reading

Economics

Harvard has more problems than Donald Trump

Published

on

A Programme at Harvard Divinity School aspired to “deZionize Jewish consciousness”. During “privilege trainings”, working-class Harvard students were instructed that, by being Jewish, they were oppressing wealthier, better prepared classmates. A course in Harvard’s graduate school of public health, “The Settler Colonial Determinants of Health”, sought to “interrogate the relationships between settler colonialism, Zionism, antisemitism, and other forms of racism”: Will these findings by Harvard’s task-force on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias, released on April 29th, shock anyone? Maybe not. Americans may be numb by now to bulletins about the excesses, not to say inanities, of some leftist academics.

Continue Reading

Trending