Kalamazoo-Portage, Michigan Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Kalamazoo fell 0.2 percentage points in December 2011 to 7.8%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 1.5 percentage points lower than the Michigan rate. The unemployment rate in Kalamazoo peaked in January 2010 at 11.5% and is now 3.7 percentage points lower. You can also compare Kalamazoo unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.5% | -0.2 | -0.9 |
| Michigan | 9.3% | -0.5 | -1.8 |
| Kalamazoo | 7.8% | -0.2 | -1.9 |
Unemployment Rate: Kalamazoo, Michigan, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Kalamazoo, Michigan Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Kalamazoo peaked in January 2010 at 19,315. There are now 6,481 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Kalamazoo employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Kalamazoo, Michigan) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kalamazoo | 12,834 | -511 | -3,476 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Kalamazoo, Michigan Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
Michigan Unemployment Rate |
Kalamazoo Unemployment Rate |
Kalamazoo Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | — | — | — |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 9.3% | 7.8% | 12,834 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 9.8% | 8.0% | 13,345 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 10.6% | 8.6% | 14,287 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 11.1% | 8.8% | 14,797 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 11.2% | 8.9% | 14,989 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 10.9% | 8.7% | 14,733 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 10.5% | 8.7% | 14,782 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 10.3% | 8.7% | 14,737 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 10.2% | 8.9% | 14,933 |
|
March 2011 |
8.9% | 10.3% | 9.0% | 15,208 |
|
February 2011 |
9.0% | 10.4% | 9.2% | 15,477 |
|
January 2011 |
9.1% | 10.7% | 9.5% | 15,965 |
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. ↩
