IBJNews

Indiana unemployment rate drops to 8.4 percent

 IBJ Staff
March 30, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana’s unemployment rate took a sizable dip in February, falling to 8.4 percent, as new jobless claims dropped to a seven-year low.

The Indiana Department of Workforce Development said Friday morning that initial claims for unemployment insurance dropped to just below 5,000 for the second week in a row.

“The drop in the unemployment rate is good news, as is the decline in initial claims in unemployment insurance to levels not seen since 2005,” Mark W. Everson, commissioner of the Department of Workforce Development, said in a prepared statement. “We also continue to see Hoosiers return to the work force."

February’s jobless rate decreased from 8.7 percent in January and a revised 8.9 percent in December. The rate was 8.9 percent in February 2011.

Statewide non-farm employment totaled 2.9 million on a seasonally adjusted basis. A total of 280,960 Hoosiers remained out of work, down from 291,823 in January.

Private-sector job growth remained unchanged in February after a sizable gain of 13,000 jobs in January, the largest monthly increase in more than a year.

Sectors showing significant employment gains in February included private education and health services (5,300 jobs), manufacturing (2,400 jobs), and leisure and hospitality (2,400 jobs). The trade transportation and utilities sector lost 6,100 jobs and construction jobs fell by 3,200.

In the Indianapolis metropolitan area, the non-seasonally adjusted jobless rate was 8.2 percent in February, down from 8.7 percent in February 2011. In all, 73,291 people were out of work in the Indianapolis area.

Comparisons of metro areas are more accurately made using the same months in prior years because the government does not adjust the figures for factory furloughs and other seasonal fluctuations.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • drop?
    I dont know anyone who lost there jobs back in 2010 who are eligible anymore. Theres the drop in unemployment claims.
  • My own opinion
    I think their should be A more accurate figure on unemployment. They need to take off the ones that retired and the ones that lost their unemployment, or the ones that cant get it because it ran out, and the ones that dont qualify for it. That would give them a better look at the real numbers.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  2. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  3. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  4. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

  5. I live downtown Indy and had to be in downtown Chicago for a meeting. In other words, I am the target demographic for this train. It leaves at 6:00-- early but doable. Then I saw it takes 5+ hours. No way. I drove. I'm sure I paid 3 to 5 times as much once you factor in gas, parking, and tolls, but it was reimbursed so not a factor for me. Any business traveler is going to take the option that gets there quickly and reliably... and leisure travelers are going to take the option that has a good schedule and promotional prices (i.e., Megabus). Indy to Chicago is the right distance (too short to fly but takes several hours to drive) that this train could be extremely successful even without subsidies, if they could figure out how to have several frequencies (at least 3x/day) and make the trip in a reasonable amount of time. For those who have never lived on the east coast-- Amtrak is the #1 choice for NY-DC and NY-Boston. They have the Acela service, it runs almost every hour, and it takes you from downtown to downtown. It beats driving and flying hands down. It is too bad that we cannot build something like this in the midwest, at least to connect the bigger cities.

ADVERTISEMENT