Report Contrasts State Government and Private Sector Employment Changes During Pandemic

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on
LinkedIn
+

Read coverage of this report in Patch: “MA State Workers Had More Job Security In Pandemic: Study.”

BOSTON – Massachusetts state government employment has been virtually flat during COVID-19 even as employment in the state’s private sector workforce remains nearly 10 percent below pre-pandemic levels, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute. The study, “Public vs. Private Employment in Massachusetts: A Tale of Two Pandemics,” questions whether it makes sense to shield public agencies from last year’s recession at the expense of taxpayers.

“Compared to restaurants, retailers and other businesses, there was very little pressure on state government to cut costs associated with COVID’s economic fallout,” said Serena Hajjar, who authored the study. “The private sector has felt the bulk of the pain of this contraction.”

At one point in April 2020, total employment in Massachusetts was 23 percent below pre-pandemic levels, while at the same time state-level government employment was higher than it was in February 2020.

Using Pioneer Institute’s state employee tracker in MassOpenBooks, researchers highlight employment changes among particular state agencies. As might be expected during a pandemic, the Department of Children and Families and the Department of Public Health have higher employment levels than before the pandemic. Perhaps more surprisingly, the MBTA, whose ridership stands at a third of February 2020 levels, has also gained employees.

Some large educational, law enforcement, and judicial institutions have lost employment. The University of Massachusetts system and the Department of Corrections experienced 4 and 3 percent year-over-year employment declines, respectively.

In the private sector, employment in the leisure and hospitality sector — which includes bars, restaurants, and hotels — hasn’t surpassed 70 percent of pre-pandemic levels since last spring. As of February 25, 2021, in-store retailers still face a 50 percent occupancy cap due to ongoing virus concerns. Over the 12-month period ended January 31, 2021, the number of small businesses open in Massachusetts declined by nearly 38 percent.

“During the pandemic the private sector took it on the chin while public sector employees, for the most part, were treated as a protected class,” said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “To turn around now and raise taxes to placate public sector unions’ desire to bolster their ranks is willful blindness to reality. State employees represent 3 percent of all employees in the Commonwealth. Coming out of the pandemic, the legislature needs to focus on growing private sector jobs, not taxing them.”

About the Author

Serena Hajjar is an independent contractor at Pioneer Institute, focusing on transparency around the state’s reporting of coronavirus figures and the effects of the coronavirus response on the state economy. Ms. Hajjar is a recipient of the Fulbright English Teaching Assistant Grant to Russia for the 2020–21 cycle. She has a B.A. in international relations and Russian and Eastern European studies from the University of Pennsylvania.

About Pioneer

Pioneer’s mission is to develop and communicate dynamic ideas that advance prosperity and a vibrant civic life in Massachusetts and beyond.

Pioneer’s vision of success is a state and nation where our people can prosper and our society thrive because we enjoy world-class options in education, healthcare, transportation, and economic opportunity, and where our government is limited, accountable and transparent.

Pioneer values an America where our citizenry is well-educated and willing to test our beliefs based on facts and the free exchange of ideas, and committed to liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise.

Get Updates on Our Economic Opportunity Research

Related Content:

Massachusetts Releases New Permanent Regulations for MBTA Communities Act

The April edition of The House Call provides an update regarding the MBTA Communities Act's implementation, with some communities amending their zoning via either referendum votes or Town Meeting this spring. The newsletter also includes a discussion of communities that have eliminated minimum parking requirements in recent years.

Historical Domestic Migration Patterns: Putting Massachusetts in Context

This week's edition of Mapping Mass Migration features an analysis of newly released data from the Census Bureau, its March supplement of the Current Population Survey. Our analysis covers how migration trends have played out nationally since 1948, including the demographics of movers, the extent of their migration (within a county, across counties, to another state, etc.), and the most common reasons movers cite for changing their primary residence. The newsletter concludes with a brief discussion of what might account for a decline in overall migration rates nationally and where Massachusetts fits in.

The House Call – Cambridge Adopts a Zoning Ordinance Allowing 4 to 6-Story Residential Buildings Citywide

The March edition of The House Call covers recent zoning changes in Cambridge that allow 4 to 6-story buildings on every residential lot. It also summarizes reform recommendations from a state commission tasked with advising the Healey administration on how to ramp up housing production.

Study: Inclusionary Zoning Helps Some, but Can Jeopardize Broad-Based Affordability

Policies often force developers to raise market-rate prices to compensate for losses on affordable units

Pioneer Institute Study Says MA Housing Permitting Process Needs Systemic Reform

Highlights Bureaucratic licensing process and appeals as areas to fix

Mapping Mass Migration – New 2024 Census Estimates Show Surge in Population Growth, With Considerable Caveats

This week's edition of Mapping Mass Migration will cover 2024 state population estimates and components of change from the Census Bureau, how trends are impacting Massachusetts, and an analysis of how a methodological change significantly impacted their estimates for net international migration from 2022 to 2024 and what that means for the number and demographic backgrounds of immigrants captured in the data.

Study Finds Bump in State Population Due to Changes in Census Bureau Methodology

BOSTON – State leaders cheered in January when the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that Massachusetts’ population grew by 69,000 in 2024, more than at any other time in 60 years. Unfortunately, a closer look reveals that the higher estimates are largely driven by a change in Census Bureau methodology designed to better capture the influx of humanitarian migrants.  

The House Call – Accessory Dwelling Units are Officially Legal Statewide in Massachusetts

This issue of The House Call covers Massachusetts' recent legalization of accessory dwelling units, as well as a bill filed in the state legislature last month that would broadly prevent localities from enforcing certain housing-related regulations. 

Pioneer Institute Study Compares MA Workforce Development System to Those in Peer States

(Boston, Mass) - As Massachusetts has significantly increased investment in a myriad of workforce training programs to better compete for talent, a new Pioneer Institute report examines the Massachusetts workforce development system to determine what operational changes would better maximize results, and it compares the system to those in peer states. 

Mapping Mass Migration: New England State and County Population Change, 2020 to 2023

This week's edition of Mapping Mass Migration will cover state and county population change in Massachusetts and New England from 2020 to 2023, how population has shifted for major demographics during that period, and how population change in general fits into the broader picture of a state's economic wellbeing. 

McAnneny’s January Musings – Legislative Transparency Takes Center Stage in the New Year

A new year unfolds with so much promise.  It offers us all a fresh start, a clean slate, a reset.  It is a time for reviewing, reassessing and revising.