San Angelo, Texas Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for San Angelo fell 0.2 percentage points in March 2012 to 5.4%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 1.6 percentage points lower than the Texas rate. The unemployment rate in San Angelo peaked in September 2011 at 6.8% and is now 1.4 percentage points lower. You can also compare San Angelo unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 |
| Texas | 7.0% | -0.1 | -1.0 |
| San Angelo | 5.4% | -0.2 | -1.0 |
Unemployment Rate: San Angelo, Texas, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
San Angelo, Texas Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in San Angelo peaked in September 2011 at 3,727. There are now 654 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. San Angelo employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in San Angelo, Texas) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | March 2012 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| San Angelo | 3,073 | -75 | -448 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
San Angelo, Texas Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
Texas Unemployment Rate |
San Angelo Unemployment Rate |
San Angelo Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
April 2012 |
8.1% | 6.9% | — | — |
|
March 2012 |
8.2% | 7.0% | 5.4% | 3,073 |
|
February 2012 |
8.3% | 7.1% | 5.6% | 3,148 |
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | 7.3% | 5.8% | 3,245 |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 7.4% | 6.0% | 3,340 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 7.6% | 6.3% | 3,486 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 7.8% | 6.7% | 3,674 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 7.9% | 6.8% | 3,727 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 8.1% | 6.7% | 3,666 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 8.1% | 6.7% | 3,612 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 8.1% | 6.4% | 3,501 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 8.1% | 6.3% | 3,437 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 8.0% | 6.3% | 3,445 |
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. ↩
