US President Donald Trump has criticised the latest US jobs report, calling it “rigged” on his social media platform, Truth Social. The controversy arose after the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised the employment numbers for May and June downward by 258,000 jobs combined. These revisions sparked debate over the accuracy and reliability of the monthly jobs data.The revisions showed that the US added 19,000 jobs in May and 14,000 in June, rather than the initially reported figures of 158,000 and 144,000 respectively. Economists quickly pointed out that such revisions are routine, reflecting updated survey data from businesses that respond late. The president’s comments have raised concerns about politicising a key economic indicator.How the jobs report is compiledEach month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases an “employment situation” report that includes data on employment, wages, and hours worked. The report is based primarily on two surveys: an “establishment survey” of approximately 121,000 businesses and government agencies, and a “household survey” of individuals about labour force participation, employment, and unemployment. The establishment survey covers various sectors of the economy and is considered the main source for monthly payroll employment estimates.The establishment survey collects data from employers during the week that includes the 12th of the month. However, not all businesses submit their information immediately. As a result, the BLS publishes initial estimates which are subject to revisions in the following two months, once additional data is received. This process ensures that the employment numbers become more accurate over time.Why revisions are routine and necessaryAccording to the BLS, the initial employment figures are revised twice in the succeeding two months to incorporate late survey responses and to adjust seasonal factors. This means that changes, whether upwards or downwards, are normal and expected. Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics, told Yahoo that the recent revisions, although large, fall within the BLS’s confidence interval of plus or minus 136,000 jobs per month.For example, the May payroll data was revised down by 125,000 jobs to 19,000, and June by 133,000 to 14,000. Sweet also noted that these revisions are not significantly larger than those seen historically. Larger revisions tend to occur during times of economic disruption, such as the 2008 financial crisis or the Covid-19 pandemic.
Political reactions and impact on trustPresident Trump’s comments on the jobs report followed the release of the revised figures. He stated on Truth Social, “Last weeks Job’s Report was RIGGED,” as reported by Yahoo. The remarks come amid ongoing political debates over economic performance and data transparency.William Beach, McEntarfer’s predecessor as BLS commissioner, said in a Yahoo interview that the commissioner does not handle the preparation or estimation of job numbers, but the damage to trust is done. He warned that it may take time to restore confidence in the figures.Declining survey response ratesOne challenge facing the BLS is the declining response rate from businesses to the establishment survey, which has raised concerns about the reliability of initial estimates. Researchers from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco reported in March 2025 that despite lower response rates, the incoming data does not show increased noise or uncertainty compared to the past.Ryan Sweet said the lower survey participation means the initial jobs estimate is less clear than before but stressed this is not a fault of the BLS. The agency continues to adjust its methodology to maintain the accuracy of the labour market data.Annual benchmark revisions and past controversiesBeyond monthly updates, the BLS performs annual benchmark revisions based on wage and employment data from state unemployment insurance records. One such revision in August 2024 revealed the US had 818,000 fewer jobs in the previous 12 months than initially reported, a figure later revised to 598,000 fewer jobs.President Trump has referenced these annual revisions as evidence of data manipulation, though economists explain that such adjustments are a normal part of maintaining accurate economic statistics.Why jobs data revisions matterWhile revisions may cause confusion, experts emphasise their importance for long-term economic stability. Michael Madowitz, principal economist at the Roosevelt Institute, wrote in a blog post that transparent revision processes contribute to the reliability of US economic data, as quoted by Yahoo.Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative and former Biden official, noted that large revisions often coincide with unusual labour market conditions, such as the post-pandemic labour force re-entry or economic uncertainty from tariffs and immigration changes.The recent two-month revision, the largest since 1968 excluding recession periods, may indicate strains in the US economy, reinforcing the need for cautious interpretation of initial jobs reports.TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here.
