While foreign-born persons are correctly This slight bias represented in the total population in the EEC? their share in salaried employment appears structurally underestimated in this survey. This would result from a lower response rate in the EEC of individuals who were both foreign-born and employed. not be fully corrected using the survey’s weighting method? This slight bias has significantly contributed to the divergence between sources on employment in the recent period? due to the large gaps in employment dynamism between persons born in France and those born abroad.
A comparison of EEC wage employment data with EAR data suggests that the share of foreign-born in wage employment may be underestimated by around 15% in the EEC. Assuming this underestimation to be constant over the period 2019-2023? the contribution of this lower representativeness of foreign-born employment to the gap in dynamism between sources is estimated at +85?000 over 2019-2023.
Ultimately? the gap in dynamism between
The Employment Estimates and the japan phone number library Employment Survey is largely explained
Ultimately? the under-reporting of the most dynamic forms of employment? the under-representation of salaried employment of people born abroad? as well as the effects linked to the scope and construction of the EEC sample? make it possible to explain around three quarters of the differences in the dynamism of employment trends between sources? i.e. 345?000 jobs out of the gap of 455?000 observed ( figure 6 ).
Figure 6 – Contribution to the employment change gap
Between Employment Estimates and Continuous Employment Survey? from 2019 to 2023
Contribution to the employment change gap between in this case it is Employment Estimates and Continuous Employment Survey? from 2019 to 2023
Sources: Insee? Employment survey and administrative sources on employment.
The remaining unexplained portion agb directory could refer to certain characteristics specific to the Employment Estimates. For example? it is possible that a decrease in undeclared employment during the period contributed to slightly overestimating the increase in employment declared in the administrative data (Askenazy et al. ? 2024); however? it is not possible to demonstrate this to date.