Cedar Rapids, Iowa Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Cedar Rapids fell 0.1 percentage points in March 2012 to 5.6%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 0.4 percentage points higher than the Iowa rate. The unemployment rate in Cedar Rapids peaked in December 2010 at 6.2% and is now 0.6 percentage points lower. You can also compare Cedar Rapids unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 |
| Iowa | 5.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 |
| Cedar Rapids | 5.6% | -0.1 | -0.6 |
Unemployment Rate: Cedar Rapids, Iowa, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Cedar Rapids peaked in April 2011 at 9,189. There are now 1,240 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Cedar Rapids employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Cedar Rapids, Iowa) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cedar Rapids | 7,949 | -194 | -1,233 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Cedar Rapids, Iowa Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
Iowa Unemployment Rate |
Cedar Rapids Unemployment Rate |
Cedar Rapids Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
April 2012 |
8.1% | 5.1% | — | — |
|
March 2012 |
8.2% | 5.2% | 5.6% | 7,949 |
|
February 2012 |
8.3% | 5.3% | 5.7% | 8,143 |
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | 5.4% | 5.8% | 8,381 |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 5.6% | 6.0% | 8,635 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 5.6% | 6.0% | 8,716 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 5.8% | 6.0% | 8,883 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 5.9% | 6.0% | 8,878 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 6.0% | 6.0% | 8,974 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 6.0% | 6.0% | 8,969 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 6.0% | 6.0% | 9,054 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 6.0% | 6.1% | 9,095 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 5.9% | 6.2% | 9,189 |
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. ↩
