Trump’s BLS Firing Undermines Trust, But Huge Job Data Errors Are Also A Puzzle

I strongly oppose President Donald Trump’s decision to fire Erika McEntarfer, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), on August 1, 2025, after a jobs report revealed a shocking 258,000-job downward revision for May and June 2025. This move undermines the trust that global markets have placed in the U.S. financial system, widely respected for its transparency over the past 50 years. Firing a commissioner over unfavorable data risks politicizing economic statistics, a concern echoed by economists like Michael Strain, who warn it could erode confidence in U.S. data integrity.

However, I also find the BLS’s massive data revisions puzzling and believe McEntarfer and her IT team share responsibility. The July 2025 jobs report showed only 73,000 jobs added, below the expected 109,000, with May’s job growth revised from 144,000 to 19,000 (-125,000) and June’s from 147,000 to 14,000 (-133,000). A 258,000-job error in 2025, when advanced technology should ensure accurate data collection, raises serious questions. Media excuses like low response rates and economic volatility don’t fully convince me, and here’s why.

Why Such a Huge Data Discrepancy?

The media reports that only 60-70% of businesses respond to the BLS’s Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey by the deadline, with small firms often delayed. If this is a recurring issue, as it seems to be, why hasn’t the BLS adjusted its methods to better predict these gaps?

Even with basic math/stats knowledge, I’d expect consistent patterns like low response rates to be factored into their models. A 258,000-job revision suggests something’s off, especially when technology today is far ahead of what we had decades ago.

The media points to economic volatility, like Trump’s 2025 tariff policies, as a cause for the revisions. But tariffs were announced months ago—shouldn’t the BLS have accounted for their impact? If small businesses are consistently slow to respond, why keep using the same excuse instead of fixing the process? In an age of instant data transfer, it’s hard to believe collecting payroll data is still so difficult.

Technology Should Have Solved This

With modern IT—computers, cloud systems, and online reporting available for over a decade—data collection should be much smoother. The BLS’s $680 million budget funds electronic systems, with over 70% of CES responses submitted online, a big leap from the paper surveys of the 1980s. So why are revisions this large still happening? If the system can’t get businesses to respond on time, what’s the point of spending millions on upgrades?

As BLS Commissioner since January 2022, McEntarfer should have pushed for better IT solutions or ways to reach small businesses. If she tried and the system still failed, the IT team responsible for building it should answer for why it’s not delivering.

The media calls revisions “routine,” citing examples like 824,000 jobs in 2009 or 818,000 in 2024. But in 2025, with technology light-years ahead of even 10 years ago, these excuses feel outdated. If the BLS spent millions and still blames small businesses or “unknown factors,” it makes you wonder if the upgrades were worth it.

Challenging Media Excuses

The media claims revisions are "NORMAL" due to the economy’s complexity and small business delays. They say the BLS’s process, run by career staff, is independent and globally respected.

If response rates are consistently low, the BLS should have better models to predict missing data. Advanced algorithms can handle patterns like late responses—why aren’t they working better? Tariffs aren’t a surprise; they’re public policies that should be modeled. The excuse that small businesses can’t report on time doesn’t hold up when online portals and automated payroll systems exist. If the IT system can’t improve response rates, it’s either poorly designed or not being used effectively.

Accountability Without Politicization

Trump’s firing of McEntarfer was a mistake that risks damaging trust in US economic data, as former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers has noted. But the BLS also needs to do better. A 258,000-job revision is too big for today’s tech landscape. McEntarfer should have championed solutions—better IT, outreach to small businesses, or alternative data sources like ADP.

If the IT system, after millions in funding, can’t deliver timely data, those managing it need scrutiny. The answer isn’t political firings but holding the BLS accountable to use modern technology for accurate, timely reports.

If the BLS and the media are still using the outdated excuse that late business responses and economic uncertainties are unavoidable—even with the latest IT systems—then why spend hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade those systems?

It’s like installing the most advanced lock on your front door and claiming your house is secure and impenetrable. But one day, a stranger walks by and says, “Wow, your house looks amazing! Those floor-to-ceiling glass walls around your living room are stunning?” That’s exactly how the BLS’s situation feels. The tech looks impressive, but if the same vulnerabilities persist, the system still feels fragile. In 2025, we should expect more than cosmetic upgrades—we need solutions that actually fix the problems they’re meant to solve.

My job? Connecting them with the talent that turns vision into reality

_________________________________________________________

At Pacific Banks Search & Selection, we specialize in connecting you with top-tier AI talent. Whether you're looking to integrate AI into your operations, enhance your product offerings, or streamline your backend process, our recruitment experts are ready to help you find the perfect AI expert for your team.

Contact us and let us know your company's AI staffing requirement. Together, we can improve how we recruit for AI roles to benefit everyone involved.

Learn more about our AI recruitment services - www.careerbanks.com/ai-professional

Read More - www.careerbanks.com/blog009