Redding, California Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Redding fell 0.5 percentage points in December 2011 to 13.9%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 2.8 percentage points higher than the California rate. The unemployment rate in Redding peaked in December 2010 at 16.7% and is now 2.8 percentage points lower. You can also compare Redding unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.5% | -0.2 | -0.9 |
| California | 11.1% | -0.2 | -1.4 |
| Redding | 13.9% | -0.5 | -2.8 |
Unemployment Rate: Redding, California, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Redding, California Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Redding peaked in December 2010 at 13,877. There are now 2,124 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Redding employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Redding, California) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Redding | 11,753 | -407 | -2,124 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Redding, California Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
California Unemployment Rate |
Redding Unemployment Rate |
Redding Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | — | — | — |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 11.1% | 13.9% | 11,753 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 11.3% | 14.4% | 12,160 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 11.7% | 15.0% | 12,551 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 11.9% | 15.2% | 12,675 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 12.1% | 15.5% | 12,790 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 12.0% | 15.5% | 12,798 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 11.8% | 15.4% | 12,671 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 11.7% | 15.1% | 12,415 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 11.8% | 15.0% | 12,334 |
|
March 2011 |
8.9% | 12.0% | 15.0% | 12,347 |
|
February 2011 |
9.0% | 12.1% | 15.3% | 12,627 |
|
January 2011 |
9.1% | 12.4% | 16.0% | 13,226 |
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. ↩
