Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, Illinois Unemployment
The BLS reported that the unemployment rate for Chicago fell 1.0 percentage points in November 2020 to 7.7%. For the same month, the metro unemployment rate was 0.8 percentage points higher than the Illinois rate. The unemployment rate in Chicago peaked in April 2020 at 17.6% and is now 9.9 percentage points lower. You can also compare Chicago unemployment with unemployment in other cities.
Unemployment Rate | November 2020 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
---|---|---|---|
National | 6.7% | -0.2 | +3.1 |
Illinois | 6.9% | -0.5 | +3.2 |
Chicago | 7.7% | -1.0 | +4.2 |
Unemployment Rate: Chicago, Illinois, National
Note: Recessions shown in gray.
Chicago, Illinois Unemployed
The number of people unemployed in Chicago peaked in April 2020 at 828,355. There are now 467,091 fewer people unemployed in the metropolitan area. Chicago employment and jobs data (including jobs lost/gained in Chicago, Illinois) is also available.
Unemployed Persons | November 2020 | Month/Month | Year/Year |
---|---|---|---|
Chicago | 361,264 | -51,758 | +190,687 |
Number of Unemployed Persons
Chicago, Illinois Unemployment History
Date | National Unemployment Rate |
Illinois Unemployment Rate |
Chicago Unemployment Rate |
Chicago Unemployed |
---|---|---|---|---|
December 2020 |
6.7% | 7.6% | — | — |
November 2020 |
6.7% | 6.9% | 7.7% | 361,264 |
October 2020 |
6.9% | 7.4% | 8.7% | 413,022 |
September 2020 |
7.8% | 10.4% | 11.5% | 556,226 |
August 2020 |
8.4% | 11.0% | 11.8% | 561,097 |
July 2020 |
10.2% | 11.5% | 11.9% | 563,933 |
June 2020 |
11.1% | 14.5% | 15.2% | 750,718 |
May 2020 |
13.3% | 15.3% | 15.6% | 751,055 |
April 2020 |
14.8% | 17.2% | 17.6% | 828,355 |
March 2020 |
4.4% | 4.2% | 4.6% | 223,572 |
February 2020 |
3.5% | 3.4% | 3.4% | 163,140 |
January 2020 |
3.5% | 3.5% | 3.5% | 168,600 |
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. ↩