You’re Competing for Workers Who Can’t Afford to Work for You
Sign Up For Daily Job Market News
Only 28% of active U.S. job postings pay enough to support a single-income renting household with one infant. More than two-thirds of open positions in this country, roles a qualified candidate could fill today, cannot cover a family’s basic housing and childcare on one salary.
The threshold is $100,000 a year for typical rent plus infant care, or $122,800 to own rather than rent. Both numbers are up significantly from 2019, by 41% and 70% respectively, because the underlying costs outpaced wages by a wide margin. Rent is up 38% since 2019. Mortgage payments are up 84%. Infant care is up 45%. Wages grew 36%.
Geography changes everything here, but not in the way people assume. Infant childcare runs under $800 a month in Louisville, Kentucky, but tops $2,400 in San Francisco. Despite San Francisco’s higher wages, only 16% of jobs there pay enough for a single earner to cover both costs, compared to 44% in Louisville. Higher-pay markets don’t win when the costs climb faster than the salaries.
The two-income finding is the one to sit with. Nationally, 28% of job postings support a one-earner renting household. Add a second earner making the same wages, and 65% of postings work. Dual income has shifted from a lifestyle choice to an economic calculation. The math is pretty clear about what happens to workforce participation when one income disappears.
The post-baby labor data explains a pipeline issue that employers keep treating as a mystery. For fathers, having a child accelerates both participation and pay: labor force participation climbs from roughly 88% to 95%, and median wages jump from $62,800 to $83,600. For mothers, the same event runs in reverse. Participation falls from 86% to 70%, a 25-point gap behind fathers at the same life stage. The typical working mother of an infant earns around $59,400, and rent plus infant care alone consumes 62% of her gross income. Stepping back isn’t a preference at that number. It’s arithmetic.
Women-dominated occupations compound the gap before childcare even enters the picture. Fields where more than half of workers are women paid a median stated salary of $56,000 in 2026, $14,000 below male-dominated fields. Childcare workers themselves earn a national median of $20 per hour, per ZipRecruiter’s marketplace data. The people most responsible for making the workforce function earn wages that can’t support a household in the same economy they’re enabling.
The compensation read here is direct. When 72% of the job market can’t support a family on one income, pay stops being a recruitment lever and becomes an eligibility gate. If the roles you’re filling require candidates to make a family-income calculation, that calculation is working against you unless your wages clear the threshold. If you want help thinking through what competitive compensation looks like for your market, talk to our team.
New York Just Passed a Law Against Fake Job Postings
New York’s state legislature completed passage of bill S8877 on June 2. If Governor Kathy Hochul signs it, companies with 100 or more employees will have to disclose in every job posting whether the role is real and when they plan to fill it. The HR Digest published the details today.
The provisions are specific. Postings must state, in bold capital letters, whether a role is a current vacancy expected to fill within 90 days, a real role that won’t be filled for more than 90 days, or not a current vacancy at all. Filled positions must come down within two weeks. Third-party platforms must remove listings once notified the role is filled or expired.
Non-compliance gets expensive fast. Fines start at $2,500 per non-compliant posting, rise to $5,000 if not corrected within 30 days, and are assessed per platform. One bad listing on three job boards is potentially three separate fines. The New York Department of Labor can audit employers, and job seekers can report violations directly.
The bill targets what gets called “ghost jobs”: postings that exist to collect resumes for roles that are never going to be filled. A ResumeBuilder survey found 40% of companies posted a fake listing in 2024. The intent is right. Spending three hours tailoring an application for a role that was never real is a waste of candidates’ time, and it erodes trust in the whole hiring process.
Where the bill gets complicated is in the legitimate edge cases. Evergreen postings for roles that turn over continuously, sales, nursing, warehouse, aren’t ghost jobs. A staffing firm building a talent pipeline for a client who hires on an ongoing basis isn’t running a scam. A “will fill within 90 days” requirement doesn’t map cleanly onto legitimate high-volume hiring, and the per-platform fine structure hits good-faith employers harder than the bad actors the bill is designed to stop.
Similar legislation is moving in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California, and Kentucky. Pennsylvania’s version (HB2321, introduced March 26) adds a requirement to disclose how much AI will be used during the hiring process. The Congressional Research Service confirmed no federal bill is pending.
A New Coalition Wants to Redesign Unemployment Insurance for the AI Era
A new bipartisan group called RAISE US launched today with the goal of preparing the U.S. workforce for AI disruption. Former Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, who served under President Biden, is the group’s CEO. Former Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb, a Republican, is co-leading it. The Wall Street Journal reported the details.
The coalition’s membership includes Amazon, Microsoft, Bank of America, and Eli Lilly, alongside state governments and philanthropies. The work goes past retraining. RAISE US wants to test actual policy redesigns, including restructuring unemployment insurance so displaced workers can keep drawing benefits while they retrain or start a business using AI. Corporate incentives for employers who retain and retrain disrupted workers are also on the agenda.
State-level pilots are already scoped. Maryland plans to expand a service-year program toward healthcare. Arkansas is building an AI-powered career navigation platform.
The bipartisan construction matters. A Biden cabinet secretary and a Republican governor running this together signals this is positioned outside the partisan frame. Raimondo said it directly: “There’s an enormous amount of money and focus right now on winning the technology: the chips, the models. There’s not enough attention on securing the future for the American worker.”
The skepticism worth holding is about execution, not intent. Coalitions of this kind, major employers, former officials, philanthropies, have a long track record of producing white papers rather than jobs. Amazon and Microsoft, two RAISE US members, are running some of the largest AI-driven workforce reductions happening right now. The membership overlap makes the effort complicated, not worthless. The proof has to show up in what those employers actually do. Raimondo put the tension plainly herself: “I personally don’t believe there’ll be nothing for humans to do… But I am worried. Obviously, I wouldn’t be doing this if I weren’t worried.” Both things can be true simultaneously. Whether RAISE US changes anything is a 2027-2028 question, not a launch-day one.
Staffing your team doesn’t have to be hard.
Reach out and see how we can help.
Jobless Claims Drop to 215,000, But the Continued-Claims Number Is the Real Read
Initial unemployment claims for the week ending June 20 came in at 215,000, down 12,000 from the prior week’s revised 227,000, according to today’s U.S. Department of Labor release. The 4-week moving average ticked up slightly to 224,250. Both figures are below their year-ago levels: the comparable week in 2025 showed 236,000 initial filings.
The number that matters more is continued claims. The count of people still collecting benefits sat at 1,821,000 for the week ending June 13, up 21,000. The insured unemployment rate held at 1.2%. A year ago, continued claims stood at 1,960,000, so the absolute pool is smaller. But the rate of movement matters: people who lose jobs in this market are staying out of work longer because hiring is slow, not because layoffs have spiked.
Low initial claims are the most misread labor market signal. The 215,000 headline looks healthy. Layoffs aren’t the problem. What the continued-claims level shows is that people already out of work have fewer places to land.
State-level spikes worth noting: Pennsylvania led with +3,814, attributed to transportation and warehousing, food services, administrative and waste management, and health care. Minnesota added +1,587 and Oregon +1,536, both in educational services, consistent with end-of-school-year calendar timing. Kentucky added +1,401 in manufacturing. Federal civilian claims stayed low at 431; newly discharged veteran claims were 398. No state triggered Extended Benefits.
The Chicago Fed’s Model Sees Unemployment Drifting Higher
The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago runs a real-time model that forecasts the official unemployment rate ahead of the government’s monthly jobs report. Its June 2026 advance estimate: 4.33%, up from the BLS-reported 4.30% in May and above the 4.14% reading from a year ago.
Two indicators drive the forecast. The Layoffs and Other Separations Rate edged up to 2.08% from 2.06% in May. The Hiring Rate for Unemployed Workers fell to 44.90% from 45.48%. The Chicago Fed’s own summary: “This forecast is a product of a small increase in layoffs and a small decrease in hiring.” The rounded-rate odds: 44% chance the unemployment rate increases, 28% chance it holds, 28% chance it falls.
The direction matters more than the decimal here. Unemployment is drifting up because the hiring side is softening, not because layoffs are accelerating. The DOL claims data says the same thing from a different angle: continued claims stable near 1.82 million, initial claims relatively low, people staying out of work longer. Two separate data sources, the same underlying picture.
For employers actively filling roles right now, a falling hiring rate for unemployed workers means your candidates have fewer competing options than they did six months ago. If you have open positions, move on them. And for job seekers navigating this market, see what’s currently available.
