Today (3-28-22), the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported State Employment and Unemployment rates for February 2022. According to the BLS, nonfarm payroll employment in February 2022 increased in 27 states and was essentially unchanged in 23 states and the District of Columbia. In February, the largest job gains occurred in California (+138,100), Texas (+77,800), and Florida (+51,000). The largest percentage increase occurred in Nebraska (+1.2 percent), followed by Washington and Wyoming (+0.9 percent each).
Over the year, nonfarm payroll employment increased in 48 states and the District of Columbia and was essentially unchanged in 2 states. The largest job increases occurred in California (+1,106,300), Texas (+832,200), and Florida (+530,200). The largest percentage increases occurred in Nevada (+9.7%), Hawaii (+7.5%), and California (+6.8%).
Unemployment rates were lower in February in 31 states and the District of Columbia and stable in 19 states. All 50 states and the District of Columbia had jobless rate decreases from a year earlier. The national unemployment rate, 3.8%, edged down by -0.2 percentage point over the month and was -2.4 points lower than in February 2021.
In February, 31 states and the District of Columbia had over-the-month unemployment rate decreases, the largest of which was in New Jersey (-0.5 percentage point). Connecticut, Maryland, and New York had the next largest rate decreases (-0.4 percentage point each). Nineteen states had jobless rates that were not notably different from those of a month earlier, though some had changes that were at least as large numerically as the significant changes. The largest unemployment rate decreases from February 2021 occurred in Nevada (-4.7 percentage points). Another three states experienced decreases of -3.0 percentage points or more. The smallest over the-year jobless rate decline occurred in Kentucky (-0.5 percentage point).
FEA compiles the Wood Markets News from various 3rd party sources to provide readers with the latest news impacting forest product markets. Opinions or views expressed in these articles do not necessarily represent those of FEA.