Fargo, North Dakota Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Fargo fell 0.1 percentage points in March 2012 to 3.5%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 0.5 percentage points higher than the North Dakota rate. The unemployment rate in Fargo peaked in April 2009 at 4.6% and is now 1.1 percentage points lower. You can also compare Fargo unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 |
| North Dakota | 3.0% | -0.1 | -0.4 |
| Fargo | 3.5% | -0.1 | -0.4 |
Unemployment Rate: Fargo, North Dakota, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Fargo, North Dakota Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Fargo peaked in May 2009 at 5,594. There are now 1,279 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Fargo employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Fargo, North Dakota) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fargo | 4,315 | -60 | -376 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Fargo, North Dakota Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
North Dakota Unemployment Rate |
Fargo Unemployment Rate |
Fargo Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
April 2012 |
8.1% | 3.0% | — | — |
|
March 2012 |
8.2% | 3.0% | 3.5% | 4,315 |
|
February 2012 |
8.3% | 3.1% | 3.6% | 4,375 |
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | 3.2% | 3.6% | 4,360 |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 3.3% | 3.7% | 4,482 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 3.4% | 3.8% | 4,569 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 3.5% | 3.9% | 4,704 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 3.6% | 3.9% | 4,695 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 3.6% | 3.9% | 4,616 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 3.6% | 3.8% | 4,454 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 3.6% | 3.7% | 4,362 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 3.5% | 3.7% | 4,338 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 3.4% | 3.7% | 4,444 |
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. ↩
