Wednesday, November 11, 2026Mortgage news · Rates & market context

Economy · ORIGINAL ECONOMIC RELEASE

2014 Second Quarter (Preliminary) Productivity and Costs

Nonfarm business sector labor productivity increased at a 2.5 percent annual rate during the second quarter of 2014, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today, as hours increased 2.7 percent and output increased 5.2 percent.…

Historical releaseThe figures below describe the original reporting period. They are not today’s rates or a current economic forecast.Today’s market brief →

THE PRIMARY SOURCE

Read the release

Original source →

Historical release narrative reproduced from the official public-domain source. Statistical tables, standard technical appendices, administrative material and attendance rosters are omitted; formatting is adapted for reading. Figures retain the release's historical context and may have been revised. Consult the linked source for the complete document.

Second Quarter 2014, Preliminary

Nonfarm business sector labor productivity increased at a 2.5 percent annual rate during the second quarter of 2014, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today, as hours increased 2.7 percent and output increased 5.2 percent. (All quarterly percent changes in this release are seasonally adjusted annual rates.) From the second quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2014, productivity increased 1.2 percent as output and hours worked rose 3.2 percent and 2.0 percent, respectively. (See table A.)

Labor productivity, or output per hour, is calculated by dividing an index of real output by an index of hours worked of all persons, including employees, proprietors, and unpaid family workers.

Historical Revisions to Productivity and Costs Data

Data in this release reflect the comprehensive revision to the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce on July 30, 2014. See Revised measures section.

Unit labor costs in nonfarm businesses increased 0.6 percent in the second quarter of 2014, as the 3.1 percent increase in hourly compensation was larger than the increase in productivity. Unit labor costs increased 1.9 percent over the last four quarters. (See tables A and 2.)

BLS defines unit labor costs as the ratio of hourly compensation to labor productivity; increases in hourly compensation tend to increase unit labor costs and increases in output per hour tend to reduce them.

Manufacturing sector productivity increased 3.6 percent in the second quarter of 2014, as output increased 7.0 percent and hours worked increased 3.2 percent. Productivity increased 2.9 percent in the durable goods sector and increased 5.9 percent in the nondurable goods sector. Over the last four quarters, manufacturing productivity increased 2.1 percent, as output increased 3.7 percent and hours increased 1.5 percent. Unit labor costs in manufacturing decreased 1.3 percent in the second quarter of 2014 and increased 0.8 percent from the same quarter a year ago. (See tables A and 3.)

The concepts, sources, and methods used for the manufacturing output series differ from those used in the business and nonfarm business output series; these output measures are not directly comparable. See Technical Notes for a more detailed explanation.

Revised measures

Output and related measures--including productivity and unit labor costs--in the business and nonfarm business sectors were subject to revision for the entire series going back to 1947. The most notable revisions in these series are generally limited to the period from 2010 onward. Hourly compensation and related measures for all sectors were subject to revision back to 2010. Measures of output for the business and nonfarm business sectors and measures of compensation for all sectors incorporate the revised National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) data released on July 30 by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce. Hours were revised for the business and nonfarm business sectors for 2010 forward to include revised NIPA data on government enterprises and to incorporate revised NIPA data on the proportion of sector compensation paid to employees of nonprofit institutions.

In the first quarter of 2014, nonfarm business productivity decreased 4.5 percent--rather than falling 3.2 percent as reported June 4--reflecting a downward revision to output which was larger than a small downward revision to hours. This decline in productivity was the largest since the fourth quarter of 1981, when productivity decreased 4.7 percent. Unit labor costs rose 11.8 percent in the first quarter of 2014--more than double the previously reported rate--due to both the downward revision to productivity and an upward revision to hourly compensation. Real hourly compensation increased 4.8 percent after revision, rather than the previous estimate of 0.4 percent. In the manufacturing sector, productivity growth in the first quarter was 3.2 percent, as output growth was revised down and hours were not revised. Unit labor costs increased 5.0 percent, rather than falling 0.4 percent as previously reported, due to both the downward revision to productivity and an upward revision to hourly compensation.

Annual Average productivity growth for 2013 in the nonfarm business sector was revised up to 0.9 percent from a previous estimate of 0.5 percent due to an upward revision to output. (See table C). Unit labor costs increased 0.2 percent, less than the 1.1 percent gain reported June 4. Productivity was revised down in both 2012 and 2011, to increases of 1.0 percent and 0.1 percent in those years, respectively. Growth in unit labor costs was revised up from 1.2 percent to 1.7 percent in 2012, and from 2.0 percent to 2.1 percent in 2011.

In the manufacturing sector, annual average productivity growth was not revised. Unit labor costs declined 1.6 percent in 2013, rather than 1.3 percent as previously reported. In 2012, unit labor costs fell 0.2 percent after revision, and in 2011 increased 0.8 percent rather than the previous estimate of 0.4 percent.

Nonfinancial corporate sector output and related measures were subject to revision for the entire series going back to 1947, and hourly compensation and related measures were revised back to 2010. First-quarter 2014 productivity growth was revised up to a decline of 0.9 percent; the revision was due solely to an upward revision to output. Annual average productivity in 2013 and 2012 grew more than previously reported--reflecting upward revisions to output in both years, and in 2011 a downward revision to productivity was due to a downward revision to output. (See tables D and 6.)

Sector Nonfarm Durable Nondurable Business Business Manufacturing Manufacturing Manufacturing Q to Q Y to Y Q to Q Y to Y Q to Q Y to Y Q to Q Y to Y Q to Q Y to Y

Sector Nonfarm Durable Nondurable Business Business Manufacturing Manufacturing Manufacturing Revised Previous Revised Previous Revised Previous Revised Previous Revised Previous

Percent change, annual rate, first quarter 2014

Percent change, annual rate, first quarter 2014

Percent change, annual average

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics · Original release Aug 8, 2014.

Archived Nov 11, 2026. Source reuse policy. Formatting has been adapted for reading; the source’s conclusions remain attributed to its publisher.

MortgageRates.news analysis · Historical context

The mortgage market around this release

This original analysis is separate from the source article. It compares observed benchmarks around ; historical averages and yields are not current mortgage offers.

Separate output per hour from compensation per unit

Labor productivity measures real output per hour worked. Unit labor costs relate labor compensation to output, so a change in hourly pay alone does not describe the change in cost per unit produced. Check the sector, whether a quarterly percentage change has been annualized, and how it differs from the change over four quarters. Revisions to output and hours can alter earlier estimates. Productivity and costs help describe the economy’s supply conditions; the historical rate comparison does not measure this release’s isolated effect. BLS Productivity and Costs.

Nearest published observation on or before each target date
Benchmark30 days earlierJul 9, 2014Publication referenceAug 8, 201430 days laterSep 7, 2014
30-year fixed mortgageNational weekly averageFreddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey®4.12%Observed 4.14%Observed +2 bps vs. earlier reference4.10%Observed −4 bps vs. publication reference
10-year TreasuryDaily par yieldU.S. Department of the TreasuryUnavailableBefore available coverage, which starts Jan 4, 2016.UnavailableBefore available coverage, which starts Jan 4, 2016.UnavailableBefore available coverage, which starts Jan 4, 2016.

Calendar references, not an intraday reaction. A same-day market observation may have been published after a morning release. These figures do not show what was known at its exact publication time. One basis point (bp) is 0.01 percentage point; changes use the actual dated observations shown.

Six months around publication

May 8, 2014 – Nov 8, 2014
Historical mortgage and Treasury observations around Aug 8, 2014Each dot is a published observation. No missing values are estimated. The dashed vertical line marks the article’s publication calendar date. Rates and yields are percentages.3.50%4.00%4.50%Publication date30-year fixed mortgage: 4.21% · May 8, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.20% · May 15, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.14% · May 22, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · May 29, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.14% · Jun 5, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.20% · Jun 12, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.17% · Jun 19, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.14% · Jun 26, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · Jul 3, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.15% · Jul 10, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.13% · Jul 17, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.13% · Jul 24, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · Jul 31, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.14% · Aug 7, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · Aug 14, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.10% · Aug 21, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.10% · Aug 28, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.10% · Sep 4, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · Sep 11, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.23% · Sep 18, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.20% · Sep 25, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.19% · Oct 2, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.12% · Oct 9, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 3.97% · Oct 16, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 3.92% · Oct 23, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 3.98% · Oct 30, 201430-year fixed mortgage: 4.02% · Nov 6, 2014May 8, 2014Aug 8, 2014Nov 8, 2014
30-year fixed mortgage27 observations
Dots show published observations only. Missing dates remain blank, with no interpolation. The series have different publication schedules and measure different markets.

What that benchmark difference would mean for a $300,000 loan

At the publication reference$1,456.56/month

4.14% · Aug 7, 2014

At the later reference$1,449.60/month

4.10% · Sep 4, 2014

The illustrative principal-and-interest payment is $6.97 lower per month. This holds the loan amount and term constant to show the arithmetic effect of the benchmark difference.

Assumptions: two separate hypothetical $300,000 loans, each fully amortizing over 30 years with 360 monthly payments and its stated fixed interest rate. Excludes points, lender fees, taxes, insurance, association charges and other costs. PMMS is a national average, not an APR or a personalized rate offer. These are not two payments on one existing loan.

Sources, historical coverage and calculation limits

The 30-day comparisons use calendar days. Each cell selects the last published observation on or before its target; no rates are synthesized for missing dates. Gaps greater than seven days for daily Treasury data or fourteen days for weekly mortgage data are marked unavailable. Forward comparisons require the date to have arrived and source coverage to extend through it.

Historical files may contain revisions and do not reconstruct precisely what every market participant knew at the time. Freddie Mac changed its PMMS collection methodology in November 2022. Cross-period comparisons should account for that change. These windows include other news and cannot establish causation or forecast the next rate move.

Understand the Treasury–mortgage relationship →See current advertised mortgage options →