Weekly U.S. initial jobless claims rise by 8,000
June 5 (UPI) -- Eight thousand more Americans filed initial unemployment claims for the week ending May 31, according to a Thursday Department of Labor report.
The total number of seasonally adjusted initial unemployment claims for the week were 247,000, -- 8,000 higher than the previous week.
The four-week moving average of initial unemployment claims was also 8,000 higher for a total of 1,895,250. It's the highest since November 27, 2021 when it was 1,923,500.
"The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 208,642 in the week ending May 31, a decrease of 3,128 (or -1.5%) from the previous week. The seasonal factors had expected a decrease of 10,505 (or -5.0%) from the previous week. There were 196,177 initial claims in the comparable week in 2024," The Labor Department said in a statement.
The jobless claims report comes as U.S. layoffs are 47% higher this May than last, according to Challenger, Gray and Christmas.
The insured unemployment rate - meaning the percentage of the workforce covered by unemployment insurance and receiving benefits - was 1.2% for the week ending May 24.
Highest number of initial jobless claims came in Michigan (+3,259), Nebraska (+1,328), California (+ 1.041), Florida (+977) and Virginia (+947).
The largest decreases were in Massachusetts (-747), Illinois (-744), Texas (-601), Washington (-307), and New York (-259).
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
DOGE just got a green light to access your Social Security data. Here's what that means
Editor's Note: This article, which originally ran on February 19, has been updated to reflect a Supreme Court decision handed down on June 6. When people think of Social Security, they typically think of monthly benefits — for the roughly 69 million retirees, disabled workers, dependents and survivors who receive them today. But efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency this year to access the Social Security Administration's data systems should conjure up thoughts of data on hundreds of millions of people. Why? Because the SSA's multiple data systems contain an extensive trove of personal information on most people living in the United States today — as well as those who have died. While a lower federal court had blocked DOGE's efforts to access such data — which it argued it needs in order to curtail waste, fraud and abuse — the Supreme Court lifted that order on Friday, allowing DOGE to access the data for now. The three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented. In her opinion, Jackson wrote, 'The government wants to give DOGE unfettered access to this personal, non-anonymized information right now — before the courts have time to assess whether DOGE's access is lawful,' she added. The personal data the Social Security Adminstration has on most Americans runs 'from cradle to grave,' said Kathleen Romig, who used to work at the SSA, first as a retirement policy analyst and more recently as a senior adviser in the Office of the Commissioner. DOGE was created unilaterally by President Donald Trump with the goal of 'modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity,' according to his executive order. To date, the group has caused chaos and intimidation at a number of federal agencies where it has sought to take control and shut down various types of spending. It is also the subject of various lawsuits questioning its legal right to access wholesale the personal data of Americans on highly restricted government IT systems and to fire groups of federal workers in the manner it has. Here's just a partial list of the data the SSA systems likely have about you: your name, Social Security number, date and place of birth, gender, addresses, marital and parental status, your parents' names, lifetime earnings, bank account information, immigration and work authorization status, health conditions if you apply for disability benefits, and use of Medicare after a certain age, which the SSA may periodically check to ascertain whether you're still alive. Other types of personal information also may be obtained or matched through the SSA's data-sharing agreements with the IRS and the Department of Health and Human Services. Information on your assets and living arrangements also may be gathered if you apply for Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which is meant to help those with very limited income. As with the IRS data systems to which DOGE has also sought access, the SSA systems are old, complex, interconnected and run on programming language developed decades ago. If you make a change in one system, it could trip up another if you don't know what you're doing, said Romig, who now is director of Social Security and disability policy at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. And, just as at the IRS, there are concerns that if DOGE team members get access to the SSA systems and seek to make changes directly or through an SSA employee, they could cause technical errors or base their decisions on incorrect understandings of the data. For example, multibillionaire CEO Elon Musk, a driving force at DOGE, had incorrectly claimed that SSA is making payments to millions of dead people. His claim appeared to be based on the so-called Numident list, which is a limited collection of personal data, Romig said. The list includes names, Social Security numbers, and a person's birth and death dates. But the Numident list does not reflect the death dates for 18.9 million people who were born in 1920 or earlier. That's a known problem, which the Social Security inspector general in a 2023 report already recommended the agency correct. That same report, however, also noted that 'almost none of the 18.9 million number holders currently receive SSA payments.' And making any decisions based on mistaken interpretations could create real-world problems for individuals. For example, Romig said, there are different types of Social Security numbers assigned — eg, for US citizens, for noncitizens with work authorization and for people on student visas who do not have work authorization. But a person's status can change over time. For example, someone on a student visa may eventually get work authorization. But it's up to the individual to update the SSA on their status. If they don't do so immediately or maybe not even for years, the lists on SSA systems may not be fully up to date. So it's easy to see how a new entity like DOGE, unfamiliar with the complexity of Social Security's processes, might make a quick decision affecting a particular group of people on a list that itself may not be current. Charles Blahous, a senior research strategist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, has been a leading proponent of addressing Social Security's long-term funding shortfall. And he is all for rooting out waste, fraud and abuse. But, Blahous noted, 'best estimates of improper payments in Social Security are less than 1% of the program's outlays. I've been concerned that this particular conversation is fueling profound misimpressions about Social Security and the policy challenges surrounding it.' SSA's data systems are housed in locked rooms, and permission to view — never mind alter — information on them has always been highly restricted, Romig said, noting that she was fingerprinted and had to pass a background check before being allowed to view data for her research while at the agency — and it could only be data that had no personally identifiable information. Given the variety of personal data available, there are also a number of federal privacy and other laws limiting the use and dissemination of such information. Such laws are intended to prevent not only improper use or leaks of the data by individuals, but abuse of power by government, according to the Center on Democracy and Technology. DOGE's arrival at the SSA resulted in a number of seasoned employees leaving the agency, including Michelle King, a long-time career service executive who briefly served as acting commissioner from January 20 until February 16. She resigned after DOGE staffers attempted to access sensitive government records. In her place, SSA employee Lee Dudek was named acting director. Dudek put out a statement on SSA's 'Commitment to Agency Transparency and Protecting Benefits and Information' when he came on. In it, he noted that DOGE personnel: a) 'cannot make changes to agency systems, benefit payments, or other information'; b) 'only have read access' to data; c) 'do not have access to data related to a court ordered temporary restraining order, current or future'; and d) 'must follow the law and if they violate the law they will be referred to the Department of Justice for possible prosecution.' CNN's Alayna Treene and John Fritze contributed to this report.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court rules DOGE can access Social Security information
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled the Department of Government Efficiency could access Social Security systems with sensitive information. The ruling blocked a lower Maryland court order that kept Doge from seeking certain Social Security information due to federal privacy laws. The data from the U.S. Social Security Administration includes Social Security numbers, medical information, citizenship records, school records, and tax returns for millions of Americans. Exclusive: Legal Institute Celebrates Scotus Decision, Declares 'Religious Liberty Is Alive And Well' "We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work," the court said in an unsigned order. The six conservative justices voted for the ruling and the three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. Read On The Fox News App Doge Will Go On: Hill Pork Hawk Says Rooting Out Government Waste Will Continue After Elon Jackson said the ruling created "grave privacy risks" for millions of Americans by giving "unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access." The ruling came soon after DOGE's former head, Elon Musk, left the government and a day after he and President Donald Trump traded personal attacks that were sparked by a disagreement over the president's "Big, Beautiful" bill. DOGE's path forward after Musk's exit isn't clear, but Trump and Musk have both previously said the newly-created agency's work would continue. The Trump administration has said DOGE needs access to Social Security information to continue its core task of rooting out government waste. Musk has previously called Social Security a "Ponzi scheme," and insisted on eliminating waste in the program. Maryland U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander previously ruled that DOGE's efforts with Social Security were a "fishing expedition" based on "little more than suspicion" of fraud. She did allow some access, however, to anonymous data for DOGE workers who had gone through background checks. An appeals court didn't immediately lift the block, with dissenting conservative judges saying there's no evidence that DOGE has done any "targeted snooping" or exposed personal information. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Original article source: Supreme Court rules DOGE can access Social Security information
an hour ago
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court cleared the way Friday for the Department of Government Efficiency to access Social Security systems containing personal data on millions of Americans. The justices sided with the Trump administration in its first Supreme Court appeal involving DOGE, the team once led by billionaire Elon Musk. The high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland restricting the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws.
