An unemployment rate of 10.2% means that serious jobseekers are using every tool they can find. So, it's not at all shocking that social networking tools top the list, with LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter leading the charge. Openings are being tweeted, hints of a new position are being monitored and hot candidates are being hit up directly, even if they aren't saying they're on the prowl for a new gig. Social media is a tool to use in a job hunt but not necessarily the only one, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. Instead, it makes sense to balance a search with many tools.

John Challenger, CEO, says, "The job search has changed radically over the last two decades with the advent of electronic mail, the internet, social networking, smart phones, etc. However, it is important to remember that all of these technologies simply enhance the job search; they will never replace the face-to-face connections that are critical to a successful search." But, he continues that "we feel that these new networking tools are essential and now advise all of the job seekers going through our program to open LinkedIn accounts and to consider other services such as Facebook and Twitter.

Retail hiring for the holiday shopping season was expected to be slow, and now we have the data to confirm it. According to data from Bureau of Labor Statistics (supplied to BloggingStocks by Challenger, Gray & Christmas), the retail sector added only 63,500 jobs in October -- in data that appropriately was not seasonally adjusted.

This is only slightly better than the 59,100 retail jobs added in October 2008. In the fourth quarter of last year, retail employment increased by a mere 384,300 jobs, with the retail industry turning in its worst holiday shopping season employment stats since 1989 (when it added 380,500 workers).

By any historical standard, it's been a horrible recession. Just surviving has been a big accomplishment.

However, this "survivor mentality" can be a problem. If anything, it can prevent your business from eventually growing.

Growing? Yes, that's right. Taking a look at the recent economic indicators, it does look like the economy is on the mend.

According to a report today from the Labor Department, 15 states now have unemployment rates above 10%.

The most recent states to see unemployment above 10% are the southern states of Georgia and Alabama. The worst hit state remains Michigan, where the collapse of America's auto industry is having its biggest impact on jobs. Unemployment in Michigan is now sitting at 15.2%.

There is more conflicting data on the unemployment front. The good news is that new jobless claims fell by 52,000 to 565,000 in the past week. The four-week average fell to 608,000, down 10,000.

Now the bad news. The number of Americans claiming unemployment benefits rose to 6.88 million, a new high.

These numbers are confusing to say the least, leaving open speculation on both sides that the recession has ended. Economist John Ryding at RDQ Economics says that the recession may have ended in the second quarter.

This post was written by Minyanville contributor Tom Fant.

The employment number was better than expected. No question about it. Looking behind the number, I see all industries still contracting albeit less so except education/health.

Leisure was up but only 3k. Federal government hiring was negative for the first time this year. I'm still watching the hiring of temp workers, which is still negative but just barely at -7k which is much better than previous reports and could be a sign of good things to come.

Automatic Data Processing (NYSE: ADP) is a play that's for the daring only. ADP, the largest provider of payroll outsourcing services in the world, is likely to register flat to slightly declining revenue in FY 2009.

Further, price pressure stemming from new alternate payroll/tax filing options, and incremental additions to payrolls -- mass hirings will be the exception, not the rule -- will likely lead to less-robust growth than during the previous two economic expansions.

The market has been trading lower today, despite news that new jobless claims dropped much more than analysts had been predicting.

The Department of labor announced today that there were 601,000 first time applicants for unemployment last week. While it is tough to find the bright side of this many people losing their jobs, the silver lining is that analysts had been expecting to see the report to show 635,000 new applicants.

U.S. Initial jobless claims fell for a forth consecutive week. Claims dropped by 1,000 to 301,000 for the week ended January 19 -- the lowest weekly total since late September -- and markedly below the 321,000 consensus estimate, the U.S. Labor Department announced Thursday. Claims for the previous week were revised up 1,000 to 302,000.

Also, the four-week moving average dropped 14,000 to 314,750. Economists view the four-week average as a better indicator of unemployment conditions, as it smooths-out anomalies for strikes, holidays and other idiosyncratic events.

Regarding states, the largest increases in initial claims for the week ending Jan. 12 were in California, +27,194; Florida, +8,496; Tennessee, +6,143; Puerto Rico +4,138; and Texas, +3,793. The largest decreases were in New York, -25,349; North Carolina,-4,911; Georgia,-4,858; Wisconsin,-3,364; and Massachusetts,-2,970.

The number of continuing claims decreased by 75,000 to 2.672 million from a revised 2.747 million for the week ended January 12, the latest period for which figures were available.

Economic Analysis: Overall, another surprisingly low weekly jobless claims statistic: companies are not hiring, but they are not, so far, laying-off employees in large numbers either -- a cautious stance that perhaps reflects the uncertain future direction of the U.S. economy. Still, it's important to remember that the weekly average is volatile -- a major reason why economists follow the more-indicative four-week moving average. Also, the four-week moving average, while it declined this week to 314,750, is still at elevated levels and is a 'data point of concern' for the U.S. economy. The U.S. Federal Reserve will keep an eye on the four-week average: if it drifts above 350,000 and remains there, that would suggest a substantial softening of labor market conditions.

According to a piece in today's Wall Street Journal, companies are increasingly looking within in their search for new chief executives: "In 2005, 40% of the CEOs hired by companies in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index were outsiders, according to executive-recruiting firm Spencer Stuart. Last year, that figure fell to 15%. In the first quarter of this year, there were eight CEO transitions among the S&P 500; only one went to an outsider."

Gone are the days of companies bringing in icons like (the now-disgraced) "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap. More and more, companies are deciding that someone familiar with the company's operations and culture will be better equipped than a high-profile (and high price tag) outsider.

But there may be another compelling reason for the shift: With the growth in private equity (Firms which can, away from the glare of shareholders, often pay top executives more money), high-profile leaders have more alternatives to public companies now. And with the hassles of Sarbanes-Oxley and increasing scrutiny of pay packages, being a CEO of a public company may have gotten dramatically less fun in recent years.

According to a January piece in the New York Times's DealBook, "Some of those who have seen the cash benefits from the move from public to private include David Calhoun, a 50-year-old vice chairman at General Electric, who left G.E. last year to become chairman and chief executive of a privately-held media firm VNU; Mark P. Frissora, the former chairman and chief executive of the auto parts manufacturer Tenneco, who took the chief executive's job at Hertz, the rental car chain owned by a group of big private equity firms; and Millard S. Drexler, who ran the Gap retail chain and was recruited by the Texas Pacific Group, a private equity firm, to turn around J. Crew."

But the shift may be good news for shareholders, as promoted-from-within executives tend to get paid less. But will the higher pay offered by some private equity firms result in a "brain drain" of top managerial talent away from the public markets?

Wal-Mart is working hard to crack down on unscrupulous employees. According to the New York Times:

Over the last five years, Wal-Mart has assembled a team of former officials from the C.I.A., F.B.I. and Justice Department whose elaborate, at times globetrotting, investigations have led to the ouster of a high-profile board member who used company funds to buy hunting equipment, two senior advertising executives who took expensive gifts from a potential supplier and a computer technician who taped a reporter's telephone calls.

Wal-Mart's efforts to keep an eye on its employees -- as evidenced in the Julie Roehm scandal -- go far beyond what most employers do. And the company's efforts to keep out unions are legendary. While there's certainly nothing wrong with working hard to monitor the performance and integrity of employees, it's hard to jive the company's hardline stance on these issues with their inability to keep their parking lots safe, issues involving managers denying employees overtime and forcing them to work off the clock, labor issues at factories in third world countries, and the company's use of illegal immigrants to clean its stores at night (granted, Wal-Mart did not hire those people themselves, they had hired a contractor).

Perhaps if Wal-Mart officials attack these scandals which are bringing the company so much negative publicity with the same vigor they used to investigate Julie Roehm's love-life, they can do a lot to better the retailer's image?

Will Google out-staff Yahoo! by the end of the year? Wall Street analysts from UBS have crunched the numbers and say that Google is hiring more than Yahoo!:

• Google had 1,800 open positions, up 125% year-over-year.
• Yahoo! had 800 open positions, down 14.4% YoY.
• Current headcounts for Google and Yahoo! are 6,790 and 10,098, respectively.
• Last year's hiring numbers for Google and Yahoo! were 800 and 935 respectively.

I'm not sure I agree. Without more data points, it isn't reasonable to forecast out based on growth rate in open positions since Yahoo! is exhibiting negative growth. 

Assuming a 100% fill rate (confidence interval will be fairly high in that Google placed 2nd in Fortune's MBA wish list), then the implied growth rate for Google will be 26% vs Yahoo!'s 8%.