Which of the following statements is true regarding the trend of unemployment rate in India between July-September, 2019 and July-September, 2022 ? 1. It remained the same. 2. It declined. Select the correct answer from the codes given below :
- (a)2 is true and 1 is false.
- (b)Both 1 and 2 are false.
- (c)1 is true and 2 is false.
- (d)Both 1 and 2 are true.
Correct — A, statement 2 is true and statement 1 is false: the unemployment rate declined. The two quarters named in the question are the standard comparison pair in the National Statistical Office's Periodic Labour Force Survey quarterly bulletins, which report the unemployment rate for urban areas on the Current Weekly Status for persons aged 15 years and above. In the July–September 2019 quarter that rate stood at about 8.3 to 8.4 per cent; by the July–September 2022 quarter it had come down to 7.2 per cent. The path in between is not a straight line and is worth remembering, because it is where examiners set their traps: the rate spiked through the COVID quarters — it was around 13.3 per cent in July–September 2020 — and was still elevated at 9.8 per cent in July–September 2021 before falling to 7.2 per cent in 2022. So the three-year comparison the question asks for shows a decline, and a decline that takes the rate below its own pre-pandemic level, not merely back to it. Statement 1 fails on the same evidence: a movement from roughly 8.3 per cent to 7.2 per cent is not 'remained the same'. Note finally that statements 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive, so option (d) was logically unavailable from the start and the real choice lay between (a), (b) and (c).
- (b)Both 1 and 2 are false. — This would require the rate to have risen over the period — the only remaining possibility once 'same' and 'declined' are both rejected. It did not. The comparable PLFS quarterly figure fell from about 8.3 per cent in July–September 2019 to 7.2 per cent in July–September 2022. Candidates pick this option by anchoring on the pandemic surge of 2020 and assuming the labour market had not recovered by 2022; the data show it had.
- (c)1 is true and 2 is false. — The exact inversion of the evidence. A fall of more than one percentage point across the two comparable quarters is a decline, not stability. Unemployment rates in India also move too much from quarter to quarter — 13.3 per cent in July–September 2020, 9.8 per cent in July–September 2021 — for 'remained the same' ever to be a safe description of a three-year window.
- (d)Both 1 and 2 are true. — Logically impossible before any data are consulted. A rate cannot simultaneously have remained the same and declined. Whenever two statements in a UPPSC item are direct contradictories, an option accepting both can be struck out at sight — a free elimination that leaves only three choices to weigh.
India's employment data come from the Periodic Labour Force Survey, launched by the National Statistical Office in 2017-18 to replace the old quinquennial NSSO employment-unemployment rounds. PLFS publishes annual reports and, separately, quarterly bulletins; the quarterly series is an urban series, built on the Current Weekly Status. The unemployment rate itself is the share of the labour force — not of the total population — that is seeking or available for work but not employed, so it moves with participation as well as with job creation.
The examiner is testing whether you know the direction of a well-publicised series, not whether you can recall a decimal. The reasoning route is short: the pandemic quarters of 2020 were the abnormal ones; by 2022 the urban labour market had not merely recovered to its 2019 position but had gone slightly past it. Two cautions make this question easier to handle than it looks. First, the mutually exclusive statements kill option (d) instantly. Second, the phrase 'unemployment rate in India' is looser than the data behind it — the quarterly bulletins that give July–September estimates cover urban India, while rural estimates in that period came from the annual reports; the annual PLFS series, measured on usual status, moves in the same downward direction over these years, so the answer does not depend on which of the two series the examiner had in mind. When you meet a question of this kind, fix the direction first and treat the exact percentages as supporting detail.
- PLFS quarterly bulletin, urban areas, Current Weekly Status, persons aged 15 and above: unemployment rate about 8.3–8.4 per cent in July–September 2019 and 7.2 per cent in July–September 2022 — a decline of more than a percentage point.
- The intervening quarters show the COVID shock: about 13.3 per cent in July–September 2020 and still 9.8 per cent in July–September 2021, before the fall to 7.2 per cent in 2022.
- The Periodic Labour Force Survey was launched by the NSO in 2017-18 and replaced the quinquennial NSSO employment-unemployment surveys; its quarterly bulletins are an urban series.
- Three reference periods are used. Usual Status takes a 365-day period and the 'major time criterion', capturing chronic open unemployment and giving the lowest rate; Current Weekly Status uses seven days, with one hour of work on any day counting as employment; Current Daily Status counts each half-day and captures underemployment, normally giving the highest rate. Rates run CDS > CWS > Usual Status.
- The unemployment rate is computed as unemployed persons as a percentage of the labour force, where the labour force is the sum of the employed and those seeking or available for work — not as a percentage of the population.
Comparing like with like — the same July–September quarter in each year — the rate falls from roughly 8.3 per cent to 7.2 per cent. The two highlighted rows are the endpoints the question asks about; the middle rows show why the trend feels counter-intuitive.
- Assuming the PLFS quarterly bulletin covers all of India. Through this period the quarterly series was an urban series; rural estimates came from the annual reports.
- Comparing quarters across different reference periods. Usual Status, Current Weekly Status and Current Daily Status give systematically different rates, so a 2019 CWS figure must be set against a 2022 CWS figure.
- Confusing the unemployment rate with the labour force participation rate. A falling unemployment rate can coexist with a falling participation rate, which is a very different economic story.
- Reading the pandemic spike as the trend. Any comparison that starts before 2020 and ends after 2021 must be checked against the endpoints, not against the peak in between.
UPPSC asks employment questions as direction-of-trend or definition items — did a rate rise, fall or hold steady between two named periods, or what is a given status called — while UPSC prefers the conceptual definition (disguised unemployment, marginal productivity of labour) or a multi-statement item on structural change in the workforce.
Disguised unemployment generally means
- (a) large number of people remain unemployed
- (b) alternative employment is not available
- (c) marginal productivity of labour is zero
- (d) productivity of workers is low
Answer(c) marginal productivity of labour is zero
The conceptual companion to a headline unemployment rate — much of India's joblessness never enters the measured rate at all because it takes the form of surplus workers on farms whose marginal product is zero.
With reference to the Indian economy after the 1991 economic liberalization, consider the following statements: 1. Worker productivity (per worker at 2004-05 prices) increased in urban areas while it decreased in rural areas. 2. The percentage share of rural areas in the workforce steadily increased. 3. In rural areas, the growth in non-farm economy increased. 4. The growth rate in rural employment decreased. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- (a) 1 and 2 only
- (b) 3 and 4 only
- (c) 3 only
- (d) 1, 2 and 4 only
Answer(b) 3 and 4 only
The same skill of reading the direction of a labour-market series over time — here across the post-1991 decades rather than across three years — and the same requirement to check each trend statement against the data rather than against intuition.
The number of persons who remained unemployed for a major part of the year is called
- (a) Usual status unemployment
- (b) Daily status unemployment
- (c) Weekly status unemployment
- (d) None of the above
Answer(a) Usual status unemployment
Fixes the measurement vocabulary behind this question — the quarterly figures compared here are Current Weekly Status estimates, and knowing that Usual Status uses the major-time-of-the-year criterion is what keeps the two series from being mixed up.
Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R). Assertion (A) : The labour force participation rate falling sharply in the recent years for females in India. Reason (R) : The decline in labour force participation rate is due to the improved family income and increase in education. Select the correct answer from codes given below : Codes :
- (a) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)
- (b) Both (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
- (c) (A) is true, but (R) is false
- (d) (A) is false, but (R) is true
Answer(b) Both (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
The other headline indicator from the same survey — the participation rate — and a reminder that an unemployment rate is a ratio to the labour force, so it must always be read alongside how many people are in that labour force.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The unemployment rate published in India's Periodic Labour Force Survey is calculated as the number of unemployed persons expressed as a percentage of
- (a)the total population
- (b)the population aged 15 years and above
- (c)the labour force
- (d)the number of employed persons
Answer(c) the labour force — the labour force is the sum of the employed and those seeking or available for work, so the unemployment rate can fall either because more people find work or because fewer people look for it.
- practice — not a real PYQ
Under which reference period does a person who worked for even one hour on any day of the preceding seven days count as employed?
- (a)Usual Principal Status
- (b)Usual Subsidiary Status
- (c)Current Weekly Status
- (d)Current Daily Status
Answer(c) Current Weekly Status — it uses a seven-day reference period and one hour of work on any of those days is enough to classify a person as employed; Usual Status uses 365 days and the major time criterion, while Current Daily Status works in half-day units.