Haver Analytics
Haver Analytics
Global| Jan 13 2021

Remote Working Limited the Economic Fallout In 2020, And Its Reversal Will Spur Growth In 2021

Summary

In December, payroll employment fell 140,000, the first monthly decline since April. The job loss would have been much larger if it were not for the ability of a large number of businesses to offer their employees the ability to work [...]


In December, payroll employment fell 140,000, the first monthly decline since April. The job loss would have been much larger if it were not for the ability of a large number of businesses to offer their employees the ability to work remotely. I missed the speed and scale of the shift to teleworking in 2020. Teleworking limited economic fallout while contributing to huge business gains for firms involved in technology and digital infrastructure.

2021 starts with a more flexible workforce. That's positive. But remote working has limits. And I would argue that a drop in the numbers of people working remotely would be a signal of increased mobility, a more open economy, and faster growth in 2021.

The Scale of Teleworking

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), roughly one in four workers worked remotely in December. That figure has been between mid-20% and mid-30% since March. Based on the level of household employment, approximately 50 million people have been working remotely every month since the start of the pandemic.

Those figures do not include the number of people who regularly work remotely from home before the pandemic surveys showed that about 3% of the entire workforce worked remotely.

The percentage of people teleworking differed greatly based on education, occupation, and age. According to BLS surveys, nearly half of those with a bachelor's degree or higher worked remotely, while less than 5% with those with a high school degree or less. Also, roughly half of people in management, finance, and business operations worked remotely, while a small number (5% or less) in production, construction, accommodations, recreation, food service, and transportation did so. Older workers were twice as likely to work remotely than younger workers (ages 16 to 24).

BLS also found that employment and unemployment rates were two or three times higher in occupations where remote working was not feasible compared to other occupations where it was.

In March, I warned investors to expect a large decline in GDP due to the closing of businesses and the restrictions placed on travel, entertainment, recreation, and social gatherings. I was right and wrong.

The economy posted its largest quarterly decline in history only to roar back with the largest quarterly gain. A lot of credit for the economic rebound is given to the record amount of fiscal support. But the adaptability of companies and workers is under-appreciated.

An economy that is dependent on workers being physically present to produce and conduct commerce would have performed a lot worse. The US economy, even a decade ago, probably could not have adapted and adjusted as quickly as it did in 2020.

But even though the rapid shift to remote working enabled the economy to perform better than expected, that doesn't guarantee future success. Most companies still see a huge value when people are working together, face to face. Also, the majority of people miss aspects of the office environment and are eager to return.

A shift back to office work would be a positive sign in that companies and workers feel confident that the workplace environment is safe. A sharp drop in the number of people working remotely could well become an important indicator in the coming months. That’s because the spending multiplier of people going back and forth to work is a lot higher than people working remotely. And the return to work would help a lot of the service sectors that remain in a deep slump.

Viewpoint commentaries are the opinions of the author and do not reflect the views of Haver Analytics.
  • Joseph G. Carson, Former Director of Global Economic Research, Alliance Bernstein.   Joseph G. Carson joined Alliance Bernstein in 2001. He oversaw the Economic Analysis team for Alliance Bernstein Fixed Income and has primary responsibility for the economic and interest-rate analysis of the US. Previously, Carson was chief economist of the Americas for UBS Warburg, where he was primarily responsible for forecasting the US economy and interest rates. From 1996 to 1999, he was chief US economist at Deutsche Bank. While there, Carson was named to the Institutional Investor All-Star Team for Fixed Income and ranked as one of Best Analysts and Economists by The Global Investor Fixed Income Survey. He began his professional career in 1977 as a staff economist for the chief economist’s office in the US Department of Commerce, where he was designated the department’s representative at the Council on Wage and Price Stability during President Carter’s voluntary wage and price guidelines program. In 1979, Carson joined General Motors as an analyst. He held a variety of roles at GM, including chief forecaster for North America and chief analyst in charge of production recommendations for the Truck Group. From 1981 to 1986, Carson served as vice president and senior economist for the Capital Markets Economics Group at Merrill Lynch. In 1986, he joined Chemical Bank; he later became its chief economist. From 1992 to 1996, Carson served as chief economist at Dean Witter, where he sat on the investment-policy and stock-selection committees.   He received his BA and MA from Youngstown State University and did his PhD coursework at George Washington University. Honorary Doctorate Degree, Business Administration Youngstown State University 2016. Location: New York.

    More in Author Profile »

More Viewpoints