Tuscaloosa, Alabama Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Tuscaloosa fell 0.2 percentage points in March 2012 to 7.2%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 0.2 percentage points lower than the Alabama rate. The unemployment rate in Tuscaloosa peaked in August 2009 at 9.8% and is now 2.6 percentage points lower. You can also compare Tuscaloosa unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 |
| Alabama | 7.4% | -0.1 | -1.9 |
| Tuscaloosa | 7.2% | -0.2 | -1.2 |
Unemployment Rate: Tuscaloosa, Alabama, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Tuscaloosa, Alabama Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Tuscaloosa peaked in September 2009 at 9,739. There are now 2,574 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Tuscaloosa employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Tuscaloosa, Alabama) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tuscaloosa | 7,165 | -150 | -1,142 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Tuscaloosa, Alabama Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
Alabama Unemployment Rate |
Tuscaloosa Unemployment Rate |
Tuscaloosa Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
April 2012 |
8.1% | 7.2% | — | — |
|
March 2012 |
8.2% | 7.4% | 7.2% | 7,165 |
|
February 2012 |
8.3% | 7.5% | 7.4% | 7,315 |
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | 7.8% | 7.7% | 7,611 |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 8.0% | 8.2% | 8,125 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 8.3% | 8.7% | 8,572 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 8.5% | 9.0% | 8,936 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 8.8% | 9.3% | 9,167 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 9.1% | 9.2% | 9,128 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 9.2% | 9.2% | 9,143 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 9.3% | 8.9% | 8,821 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 9.3% | 9.0% | 9,037 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 9.2% | 8.6% | 8,596 |
1. Metro area unemployment rates are now seasonally adjusted. The BLS has started publishing smoothed seasonally adjusted metropolitan area data which makes comparisons to state and national data more relevant than the unadjusted numbers. ↩
