In the world of economic reporting, few metrics carry as much weight as monthly employment figures from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). These numbers guide policymakers, influence markets, and shape public perceptions of the economy. Yet under the leadership of Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, the BLS has stumbled repeatedly, producing initial job growth estimates that were wildly overstated only to be slashed later through massive revisions. This pattern of errors peaked in the summer of 2025, culminating in her abrupt dismissal by President Donald Trump on August 1.
While the firing drew widespread criticism for its political overtones, the underlying issues with McEntarfer’s oversight point to deeper problems in data handling at the agency.
This article examines how these inaccuracies occurred, focusing on methodological flaws and leadership lapses that eroded trust in one of America’s key statistical institutions.
Background on Erika McEntarfer and the BLS Employment Process
Erika McEntarfer, a labor economist with a PhD from Virginia Tech, took the helm at the BLS in January 2024 after a Senate confirmation vote of 86-8. Her prior roles included stints at the U.S. Census Bureau’s Center for Economic Studies and the Treasury Department, where she worked on labor market research. In theory, this background equipped her to oversee the BLS’s flagship product: the monthly Employment Situation report.
The report draws from two main surveys. The establishment survey polls about 119,000 businesses and government agencies to estimate nonfarm payrolls, hours worked, and earnings. The household survey, conducted via the Census Bureau, interviews around 60,000 households to gauge unemployment rates and labor force participation. Initial estimates are released early each month, but they are preliminary—based on partial responses and seasonal adjustments. Revisions follow as more complete data rolls in, typically adjusting the prior two months’ figures. Upward or downward shifts are common, but under McEntarfer, the downward ones were unusually large and frequent, suggesting systemic issues in data collection or estimation.
Well well well…
— C3 (@C_3C_3) September 9, 2025
Biden appointed Erika McEntarfer lied about the jobs numbers by 2 million jobs created during the Biden presidency.
The economic damage these false numbers did to America is incalculable.
This is criminal. pic.twitter.com/NQWgvwrkaT
The Pattern of Overstated Job Numbers
McEntarfer’s tenure was marked by a series of high-profile blunders that inflated perceptions of economic strength, only for reality to catch up later. One of the most glaring examples came in early 2024. In February, the BLS initially reported robust job gains, but by April, those figures were revised downward significantly. December 2023’s estimate dropped by 43,000 jobs, and January 2024’s by 124,000. These weren’t isolated tweaks; they formed part of a broader trend where monthly reports painted an overly rosy picture.
The errors escalated in the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election. August and September reports showed strong payroll growth, contributing to narratives of economic recovery under the prior administration. But post-election scrutiny revealed the numbers were off by a combined 112,000 jobs for those months. Worse still, a comprehensive review in November 2024 uncovered an overstatement of about 818,000 jobs across the year— the largest correction since 2009 and roughly five times the BLS’s average margin of error. Critics pointed to discrepancies between the establishment survey and the BLS’s Business Employment Dynamics (BED) report, which tracks quarterly job flows. For July through September 2024, the initial payroll data suggested gains, but the BED report later indicated a net loss of 192,000 private sector jobs—a gap of over 832,000.Fast-forward to 2025, and the problems persisted. Bloomberg analysis in June highlighted that 2024’s average monthly payroll growth was likely 60,000 lower than the reported 250,000 run-rate. Technical glitches compounded the mess: In August 2024, a “technical issue” delayed the release of sensitive jobs data, raising questions about internal controls. Leaks of preliminary figures also occurred, further undermining confidence.
How the Errors Happened: Methodological and Oversight Failures
So, how did McEntarfer get these numbers so wrong? At the core were flaws in the BLS’s estimation processes, which her leadership failed to address adequately. The establishment survey relies on imputing data for non-responding businesses—essentially guessing based on trends from responders. Under budget constraints during her term, McEntarfer approved a reduction in the household survey’s sample size by 5,000 households, which likely amplified sampling errors and made initial estimates less reliable. This change, aimed at cost savings, backfired by increasing volatility in the data.Moreover, the BLS’s seasonal adjustment models, used to smooth out predictable fluctuations like holiday hiring, appeared miscalibrated.
Reports from the Heritage Foundation in May 2024 noted that the agency’s survey of over 600,000 businesses was producing estimates that diverged sharply from alternative measures, such as state-level data or private payroll processors.
Senate Republicans criticized these “continued failures” in producing crucial economic data, pointing to repeated overestimations that only surfaced after revisions.McEntarfer’s decentralized data collection process, designed to prevent tampering, ironically may have contributed to the inaccuracies. With responses coming from thousands of sources, incomplete or delayed inputs led to overly optimistic preliminary figures. For instance, in the July 2025 report, initial May and June estimates of 144,000 and 147,000 jobs added were revised to just 19,000 and 14,000, respectively—a combined downward shift of 258,000. July itself added only 73,000 jobs, well below the forecasted 109,000. These revisions weren’t “mistakes” in the sense of fabrication but stemmed from poor initial forecasting and inadequate quality checks under her watch.
External factors, like the integration of Census Bureau data into the household survey, added another layer of vulnerability. McEntarfer’s prior experience at the Census Bureau should have prepared her for these challenges, yet coordination issues persisted, leading to inconsistencies. The White House later documented a “lengthy history of inaccuracies and incompetence” during her tenure, including technical errors that delayed reports with major election implications.
The July 2025 Report: The Breaking Point
The July 2025 Employment Situation report was the final straw. Released on August 1, it revealed a labor market cooling sharply, with total nonfarm payroll growth revised to just 33,000 for May and June combined—far weaker than the earlier 291,000. This slowdown was attributed in part to broader economic pressures, but the magnitude of the revisions highlighted ongoing deficiencies. Two key Senate Republicans had already excoriated the BLS for “large-scale revisions to initial figures,” signaling that McEntarfer’s team was struggling to deliver reliable first drafts.
In private sector terms, such repeated errors would be unacceptable. As one analysis noted, overstatements of this scale—equivalent to hundreds of thousands of jobs—could bankrupt a company if mirrored in inventory or sales forecasting. McEntarfer’s failure to tighten imputation methods, expand sample sizes where possible, or refine adjustment models left the BLS vulnerable to these blowups.
Implications and the Firing
McEntarfer’s errors didn’t just misinform; they eroded public trust in federal statistics. Businesses delayed hiring based on inflated data, while policymakers grappled with retroactive truths. Her dismissal, while controversial, spotlighted the need for accountability in statistical agencies. Deputy Commissioner William Wiatrowski stepped in as acting head, but the incident raises questions about safeguards against future lapses.
In the end, Erika McEntarfer’s mishandling of employment numbers stemmed from a combination of budget-driven shortcuts, flawed estimation techniques, and insufficient oversight. These weren’t one-off slips but a pattern that distorted economic reality. As the BLS moves forward, restoring accuracy will require more than a leadership change—it demands a hard look at the processes that allowed such widespread inaccuracies to persist.
References:
This analysis draws on reports from CNN Business, The Guardian, NBC News, The White House, Newsweek, Fox Business, The Hill, CNBC, POLITICO, BBC, Inc.com, and Wikipedia, among others, covering events through August 2025.
