The survey charted Finnish opinions on various policy measures during the coronavirus epidemic. The respondents were with statements on the COVID-19 pandemic, social security, climate policy and possible ways to stimulate the economy and raise employment rates. The data were collected as part of the 'Tackling Biases and Bubbles in Participation' (BIBU) research project, which explores how structural changes in the economy impact policy-making. The BIBU project examines how economic restructuring changes citizens' and decision-makers' political capacities, interests and emotions. The research project is a collaboration between six universities and research institutes, led by Professor Anu Kantola from the University of Helsinki. First, the respondents' views on various economic policy measures were surveyed with a series of statements. These policy measures included, for example, changes to unemployment benefits, working hours, job alternation leave, terms of employment, and working life in general. In addition to policies related to employment, the survey included statements on education, social security, the COVID-19 pandemic and investment in the future. Views on climate policy were also investigated with a series of statements (e.g. Finland should take a leading role internationally in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Finland's economic competitiveness is more important than addressing climate change). The respondents' political opinions were surveyed with questions on where they would place themselves on the left-right political scale and which party they would vote for if parliamentary elections were held now. Additionally, the respondents were asked how they would rate their social status in relation to other people, how they felt that their social status had changed during the past five years, how they anticipated their social status would change in the next five years, and what they considered the risk of being made redundant (e.g. due to automation, relocation of production, or financial difficulties of the company) to be in their current job. Background variables included, among others, the respondent's age, gender, municipality and region of residence, level of education, occupational status, economic activity, and gross personal monthly income.
The tech industry had a rough start to 2024. Technology companies worldwide saw a significant reduction in their workforce in the first quarter of 2024, with over 57 thousand employees being laid off. By the second quarter, layoffs impacted more than 43 thousand tech employees. In the final quarter of the year around 12 thousand employees were laid off. Layoffs impacting all global tech giants Layoffs in the global market escalated dramatically in the first quarter of 2023, when the sector saw a staggering record high of 167.6 thousand employees losing their jobs. Major tech giants such as Google, Microsoft, Meta, and IBM all contributed to this figure during this quarter. Amazon, in particular, conducted the most rounds of layoffs with the highest number of employees laid off among global tech giants. Industries most affected include the consumer, hardware, food, and healthcare sectors. Notable companies that have laid off a significant number of staff include Flink, Booking.com, Uber, PayPal, LinkedIn, and Peloton, among others. Overhiring led the trend, but will AI keep it going? Layoffs in the technology sector started following an overhiring spree during the COVID-19 pandemic. Initially, companies expanded their workforce to meet increased demand for digital services during lockdowns. However, as lockdowns ended, economic uncertainties persisted and companies reevaluated their strategies, layoffs became inevitable, resulting in a record number of 263 thousand laid off employees in the global tech sector by trhe end of 2022. Moreover, it is still unclear how advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) will impact layoff trends in the tech sector. AI-driven automation can replace manual tasks leading to workforce redundancies. Whether through chatbots handling customer inquiries or predictive algorithms optimizing supply chains, the pursuit of efficiency and cost savings may result in more tech industry layoffs in the future.
According to a survey conducted during the Coronavirus outbreak, 52 percent of marketers in the United Kingdom (UK) said their organization had already applied for the Job Retention scheme in September 2020. 10 percent said they definitely would make permanent staff redundant.
Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.BackgroundThe Labour Force Survey (LFS) is a unique source of information using international definitions of employment and unemployment and economic inactivity, together with a wide range of related topics such as occupation, training, hours of work and personal characteristics of household members aged 16 years and over. It is used to inform social, economic and employment policy. The Annual Population Survey, also held at the UK Data Archive, is derived from the LFS.The LFS was first conducted biennially from 1973-1983, then annually between 1984 and 1991, comprising a quarterly survey conducted throughout the year and a 'boost' survey in the spring quarter. From 1992 it moved to a quarterly cycle with a sample size approximately equivalent to that of the previous annual data. Northern Ireland was also included in the survey from December 1994. Further information on the background to the QLFS may be found in the documentation.The UK Data Service also holds a Secure Access version of the QLFS (see below); household datasets; two-quarter and five-quarter longitudinal datasets; LFS datasets compiled for Eurostat; and some additional annual Northern Ireland datasets.LFS DocumentationThe documentation available from the Archive to accompany LFS datasets largely consists of the latest version of each user guide volume alongside the appropriate questionnaire for the year concerned (the latest questionnaire available covers July-September 2022). Volumes are updated periodically, so users are advised to check the latest documents on the ONS Labour Force Survey - User Guidance pages before commencing analysis. This is especially important for users of older QLFS studies, where information and guidance in the user guide documents may have changed over time.LFS response to COVID-19From April 2020 to May 2022, additional non-calendar quarter LFS microdata were made available to cover the pandemic period. The first additional microdata to be released covered February to April 2020 and the final non-calendar dataset covered March-May 2022. Publication then returned to calendar quarters only. Within the additional non-calendar COVID-19 quarters, pseudonymised variables Casenop and Hserialp may contain a significant number of missing cases (set as -9). These variables may not be available in full for the additional COVID-19 datasets until the next standard calendar quarter is produced. The income weight variable, PIWT, is not available in the non-calendar quarters, although the person weight (PWT) is included. Please consult the documentation for full details.Occupation data for 2021 and 2022 data filesThe ONS has identified an issue with the collection of some occupational data in 2021 and 2022 data files in a number of their surveys. While they estimate any impacts will be small overall, this will affect the accuracy of the breakdowns of some detailed (four-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)) occupations, and data derived from them. Further information can be found in the ONS article published on 11 July 2023: Revision of miscoded occupational data in the ONS Labour Force Survey, UK: January 2021 to September 2022.2024 ReweightingIn February 2024, reweighted person-level data from July-September 2022 onwards were released. Up to July-September 2023, only the person weight was updated (PWT23); the income weight remains at 2022 (PIWT22). The 2023 income weight (PIWT23) was included from the October-December 2023 quarter. Users are encouraged to read the ONS methodological note of 5 February, Impact of reweighting on Labour Force Survey key indicators: 2024, which includes important information on the 2024 reweighting exercise.End User Licence and Secure Access QLFS dataTwo versions of the QLFS are available from UKDS. One is available under the standard End User Licence (EUL) agreement, and the other is a Secure Access version. The EUL version includes country and Government Office Region geography, 3-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) and 3-digit industry group for main, second and last job (from July-September 2015, 4-digit industry class is available for main job only).The Secure Access version contains more detailed variables relating to:age: single year of age, year and month of birth, age completed full-time education and age obtained highest qualification, age of oldest dependent child and age of youngest dependent childfamily unit and household: including a number of variables concerning the number of dependent children in the family according to their ages, relationship to head of household and relationship to head of familynationality and country of originfiner detail geography: including county, unitary/local authority, place of work, Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics 2 (NUTS2) and NUTS3 regions, and whether lives and works in same local authority district, and other categories;health: including main health problem, and current and past health problemseducation and apprenticeship: including numbers and subjects of various qualifications and variables concerning apprenticeshipsindustry: including industry, industry class and industry group for main, second and last job, and industry made redundant fromoccupation: including 5-digit industry subclass and 4-digit SOC for main, second and last job and job made redundant fromsystem variables: including week number when interview took place and number of households at addressother additional detailed variables may also be included.The Secure Access datasets (SNs 6727 and 7674) have more restrictive access conditions than those made available under the standard EUL. Prospective users will need to gain ONS Accredited Researcher status, complete an extra application form and demonstrate to the data owners exactly why they need access to the additional variables. Users are strongly advised to first obtain the standard EUL version of the data to see if they are sufficient for their research requirements. Latest edition informationFor the third edition (April 2024), the variable OMCONT was added to the data. Main Topics:The QLFS questionnaire comprises a 'core' of questions which are included in every survey, together with some 'non-core' questions which vary from quarter to quarter.The questionnaire can be split into two main parts. The first part contains questions on the respondent's household, family structure, basic housing information and demographic details of household members. The second part contains questions covering economic activity, education and health, and also may include a few questions asked on behalf of other government departments (for example the Department for Work and Pensions and the Home Office). Until 1997, the questions on health covered mainly problems which affected the respondent's work. From that quarter onwards, the questions cover all health problems. Detailed questions on income have also been included in each quarter since 1993. The basic questionnaire is revised each year, and a new version published, along with a transitional version that details changes from the previous year's questionnaire. Four sampling frames are used. See documentation for details.
The outbreak of coronavirus in 2020 will have a massive impact on the functioning of most companies in Poland. If the state of the epidemic in Poland continues until mid-April, the number of companies that will be forced to lay off all their employees as a result of the outbreak of coronavirus in 2020 will almost double.
For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.
The LFS was first conducted biennially from 1973-1983, then annually between 1984 and 1991, comprising a quarterly survey conducted throughout the year and a 'boost' survey in the spring quarter. From 1992 it moved to a quarterly cycle with a sample size approximately equivalent to that of the previous annual data. Northern Ireland was also included in the survey from December 1994. Further information on the background to the QLFS may be found in the documentation.
The UK Data Service also holds a Secure Access version of the QLFS (see below); household datasets; two-quarter and five-quarter longitudinal datasets; LFS datasets compiled for Eurostat; and some additional annual Northern Ireland datasets.
LFS Documentation
The documentation available from the Archive to accompany LFS datasets largely consists of the latest version of each user guide volume alongside the appropriate questionnaire for the year concerned (the latest questionnaire available covers July-September 2022). Volumes are updated periodically, so users are advised to check the latest documents on the ONS Labour Force Survey - User Guidance pages before commencing analysis. This is especially important for users of older QLFS studies, where information and guidance in the user guide documents may have changed over time.
LFS response to COVID-19
From April 2020 to May 2022, additional non-calendar quarter LFS microdata were made available to cover the pandemic period. The first additional microdata to be released covered February to April 2020 and the final non-calendar dataset covered March-May 2022. Publication then returned to calendar quarters only. Within the additional non-calendar COVID-19 quarters, pseudonymised variables Casenop and Hserialp may contain a significant number of missing cases (set as -9). These variables may not be available in full for the additional COVID-19 datasets until the next standard calendar quarter is produced. The income weight variable, PIWT, is not available in the non-calendar quarters, although the person weight (PWT) is included. Please consult the documentation for full details.
Occupation data for 2021 and 2022 data files
The ONS has identified an issue with the collection of some occupational data in 2021 and 2022 data files in a number of their surveys. While they estimate any impacts will be small overall, this will affect the accuracy of the breakdowns of some detailed (four-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC)) occupations, and data derived from them. Further information can be found in the ONS article published on 11 July 2023: Revision of miscoded occupational data in the ONS Labour Force Survey, UK: January 2021 to September 2022.
2024 Reweighting
In February 2024, reweighted person-level data from July-September 2022 onwards were released. Up to July-September 2023, only the person weight was updated (PWT23); the income weight remains at 2022 (PIWT22). The 2023 income weight (PIWT23) was included from the October-December 2023 quarter. Users are encouraged to read the ONS methodological note of 5 February, Impact of reweighting on Labour Force Survey key indicators: 2024, which includes important information on the 2024 reweighting exercise.
End User Licence and Secure Access QLFS data
Two versions of the QLFS are available from UKDS. One is available under the standard End User Licence (EUL) agreement, and the other is a Secure Access version. The EUL version includes country and Government Office Region geography, 3-digit Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) and 3-digit industry group for main, second and last job (from July-September 2015, 4-digit industry class is available for main job only).
The Secure Access version contains more detailed variables relating to:
The Secure Access datasets (SNs 6727 and 7674) have more restrictive access conditions than those made available under the standard EUL. Prospective users will need to gain ONS Accredited Researcher status, complete an extra application form and demonstrate to the data owners exactly why they need access to the additional variables. Users are strongly advised to first obtain the standard EUL version of the data to see if they are sufficient for their research requirements.
Latest edition information
For the second edition (January 2025), the 2018 person weight (PWT18) was replaced with the 2024 person weight (PWT24). Only the person weight has been replaced with a 2024 version; the 2018 income weight (PIWT18) remains.
ODC Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL) v1.0http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
A. SUMMARY Case information on COVID-19 Laboratory testing. This data includes a daily count of test results reported, and how many of those were positive, negative, and indeterminate. Reported tests include tests with a positive, negative or indeterminate result. Indeterminate results, which could not conclusively determine whether COVID-19 virus was present, are not included in the calculation of percent positive. Testing for the novel coronavirus is available through commercial, clinical, and hospital laboratories, as well as the SFDPH Public Health Laboratory.
Tests are de-duplicated by an individual and date. This means that if a person gets tested multiple times on different dates in the last 30 days, all of those individual tests will be included in this data as individual tests (on each specimen collection date).
Total positive test results is not equal to the total number of COVID-19 cases in San Francisco.
B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Laboratory test volume and positivity for COVID-19 is based on electronic laboratory test reports. Deduplication, quality assurance measures and other data verification processes maximize accuracy of laboratory test information.
C. UPDATE PROCESS Updates automatically at 05:00 Pacific Time each day. A redundant run is scheduled at 09:00 in case of pipeline failure.
D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Due to the high degree of variation in the time needed to complete tests by different labs there is a delay in this reporting. On March 24 the Health Officer ordered all labs in the City to report complete COVID-19 testing information to the local and state health departments. In order to track trends over time, a data user can analyze this data by "result_date" and see how the count of reported results and positivity rate have changed over time.
E. CHANGE LOG
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
BackgroundEarly stages of catastrophes like COVID-19 are often led by chaos and panic. To characterize the initial chaos phase of clinical research in such situations, we analyzed the first surge of more than 1000 clinical trials about the new disease at baseline and after two years follow-up. Our 3 main objectives were: (1) Assessment of spatial and temporal evolution of clinical research of COVID-19 across the globe, (2) Assessment of transparency and quality—trial registration, (3) Assessment of research waste and redundancies.MethodsBy entering the keyword “COVID-19” we screened the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the WHO and downloaded the search output when our goal of 1000 trials was reached on the 1st of April 2020. Additionally, we verified the integrity of the downloaded data from the meta registry by comparing the data with each individual registration record on their source register. Also, we conducted a follow-up after two years to track their progress.Results(1) The spatial evolution followed the geographical spread of the disease as expected, however, the temporal development suggested that panic was the main driver for clinical research activities. (2) Trial registrations and registers showed a huge lack of transparency by allowing retrospective registrations and not keeping their registration records up to date. Quality of trial registration seems to have improved over the last decade, yet crucial information still was missing. (3) Research waste and redundancies were present as suggested by discontinuation of trials, preventable flaws in study design, and similar but uncoordinated research topics operationally fragmented in isolated silo-structures.ConclusionThe scientific response mechanism across the globe was intact during the chaos phase. However, supervision, leadership, and accountability are urgently needed to prevent research waste, to ensure effective structure, quality, and validity to ultimately break the “panic-then-forget” cycle in future catastrophes.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
The survey charted Finnish opinions on various policy measures during the coronavirus epidemic. The respondents were with statements on the COVID-19 pandemic, social security, climate policy and possible ways to stimulate the economy and raise employment rates. The data were collected as part of the 'Tackling Biases and Bubbles in Participation' (BIBU) research project, which explores how structural changes in the economy impact policy-making. The BIBU project examines how economic restructuring changes citizens' and decision-makers' political capacities, interests and emotions. The research project is a collaboration between six universities and research institutes, led by Professor Anu Kantola from the University of Helsinki. First, the respondents' views on various economic policy measures were surveyed with a series of statements. These policy measures included, for example, changes to unemployment benefits, working hours, job alternation leave, terms of employment, and working life in general. In addition to policies related to employment, the survey included statements on education, social security, the COVID-19 pandemic and investment in the future. Views on climate policy were also investigated with a series of statements (e.g. Finland should take a leading role internationally in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Finland's economic competitiveness is more important than addressing climate change). The respondents' political opinions were surveyed with questions on where they would place themselves on the left-right political scale and which party they would vote for if parliamentary elections were held now. Additionally, the respondents were asked how they would rate their social status in relation to other people, how they felt that their social status had changed during the past five years, how they anticipated their social status would change in the next five years, and what they considered the risk of being made redundant (e.g. due to automation, relocation of production, or financial difficulties of the company) to be in their current job. Background variables included, among others, the respondent's age, gender, municipality and region of residence, level of education, occupational status, economic activity, and gross personal monthly income.