My organization, New Jobs for Massachusetts, encouraged Chmura Economics to develop and publish its statistics comparing all the states on one type of under-employment, the mismatch between an employed person’s education and the educational demands of their work. We also encourage the legislature, the media, and candidates of any party to use these facts.

Chmura’s analysis of US BLS and US Census public statistics showed that 8.9% of the Mass employed workforce was working below their educational level. Massachusetts’ 8.9% figure is the highest of the 50 states. New Jersey is second, at 6.7%. Our Mass number is 33% higher than New Jersey’s number, a big difference. This says people are having trouble finding work that suits their training. Chmura’s number is new, it’s never been calculated before.

We could find no statistics on the proportion of people working 30% or more below their former pay level, nor on people supervising half or fewer of the people they used to supervise.

One of many policy issues with under-employment is Mass’ pride in its educated labor force. Everyone feels it: Mass has more than 100 colleges and universities that graduate nearly 90,000 degreed students every year.

Do we want Mass to be in the position of producing 90,000 well-educated individuals, then telling these new “customers” that they should take their new degrees elsewhere? Do we want our Harvard dorm-room inventions like Facebook growing and going public in California, as a matter of policy? Wouldn’t relaxing our legal barriers to job growth benefit everyone? Have you read about California’s tax windfall from Facebook’s IPO?

Mass’ 8.9% under-employed represent roughly 290,000 people who—with their families — have invested in their education but are currently in jobs that do not reward the extra investment. Very few people purposely ignore their own job potential, certainly not in large numbers like these.

Mass is a very hard-working state, and the work force here expects to work, not goof off. These 290,000 under-employed individuals are frustrated by their inability to find work that rewards them. Lack of job growth means their current income is lower, their prospects are dimmer, and their attachment to living here is looser.

The various measures of under-employment you mentioned become public policy issues when more than four Gillette stadiums full of people cannot improve on their current job.

Massachusetts just lost a Congressional seat because people chose to live somewhere rather else than here. That widespread preference is a public policy issue. Mass could resume being a job-creation dynamo, a good subject for public debate.

Thanks for your interesting write-up.

(Note: Mr. Hruby is president of New Jobs for Massachusetts Inc.)