The best way to have an accurate measure of the employment rate would be to calculate it in full-time equivalent jobs. "Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char
The whole debate about employment is tied up with different framings. The standard framing is that low numbers of people working is a bad thing because it means that the economic resources of the country are being under-utilised. From the point of view of individuals the picture is very different.
Second measuring the hours worked is tricky, because not all the real hours worked are recorded and overtime is not taken into account in some countries.
And only the hours worked per year make sense, because you have a wide spectrum of working time schemes, some of them making people work 50 hours a week in summer and 20 in winter, or any other combination (and, believe me, there are many of them!). "Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char
From the plutocratic point of view the useful measures are:
The irony is that disposable income and leisure time are two of the biggest drivers of individual spending, and an economy which is strong in both has a good chance of being strong in more traditional ways.
