Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, Washington Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Kennewick rose 0.3 percentage points in December 2011 to 8.6%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 0.1 percentage points higher than the Washington rate. The unemployment rate for Kennewick in December 2011 is at a new high. You can also compare Kennewick unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
| Unemployment Rate | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | 8.5% | -0.2 | -0.9 |
| Washington | 8.5% | -0.2 | -0.8 |
| Kennewick | 8.6% | +0.3 | +1.3 |
Unemployment Rate: Kennewick, Washington, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Kennewick, Washington Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Kennewick in December 2011 is at a new high of 11,295. Kennewick employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Kennewick, Washington) is also available.
| Unemployed Persons | December 2011 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kennewick | 11,295 | +288 | +1,350 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Kennewick, Washington Unemployment History
| Date |
National Unemployment Rate |
Washington Unemployment Rate |
Kennewick Unemployment Rate |
Kennewick Unemployed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
January 2012 |
8.3% | — | — | — |
|
December 2011 |
8.5% | 8.5% | 8.6% | 11,295 |
|
November 2011 |
8.7% | 8.7% | 8.3% | 11,007 |
|
October 2011 |
8.9% | 9.1% | 8.3% | 10,911 |
|
September 2011 |
9.0% | 9.2% | 7.8% | 10,350 |
|
August 2011 |
9.1% | 9.3% | 7.8% | 10,290 |
|
July 2011 |
9.1% | 9.3% | 7.7% | 10,253 |
|
June 2011 |
9.1% | 9.3% | 7.7% | 10,197 |
|
May 2011 |
9.0% | 9.1% | 7.4% | 9,900 |
|
April 2011 |
9.0% | 9.2% | 7.2% | 9,642 |
|
March 2011 |
8.9% | 9.2% | 7.0% | 9,474 |
|
February 2011 |
9.0% | 9.1% | 7.0% | 9,411 |
|
January 2011 |
9.1% | 9.2% | 7.1% | 9,647 |
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. ↩
